Big Management Company - Need advice

[Downtowner]

Thanks Mr. Gray.

I doubt seriously a judge will rule in the LL's favor on that one. Just because it's in the lease doesn't mean it's enforcable under every possible circumstance.

[Downtowner]

FairSpectator

Maybe you need to go back and look through the cases. I've done my research, and I know I'm correct. The clock starts ticking on the pet law the minute any of the LL's employees know of the pet. As I said they knew I had the dog at least from the moment I moved in, and I have proof of it. Case law supports my assertions.

Relevant cases:

Musialowski v. Perez (6/2002)
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Datta (1/2002)
Seward Park Housing Corp. v. Cohen

At any rate, the way they've handled it is unlawful, as they cannot demand fees not agreed upon in the lease. We have no such agreement. Therefore their only recourse is to initiate a holdover proceeding in housing court, which they have not done. Even if they were to do so, all the court would do is tell me to pay their $500 fee, get rid of the pet or move. The pet is no longer here, and therefore it is a non-issue.

You are making several incorrect assumptions:

1. That my landlord bears no responsibility for their own clerical errors, sloppy record keeping, and odd business practices. I've never had a LL who told me to wait for a rent bill to find out where to send the rent payments. Up until this LL, every LL I've had made it clear at lease signing where to send the check. Irregardless, that issue has been cured and has no bearing on the current problem.

2. I am not being truthful when I say that I've been honest about the fact I had the pet. I have proof I have been honest, starting with the application I submitted to the broker who got me into this apartment, which clearly indicates I had the pet. You have no basis upon which to make your assumption of dishonesty on my part, which brings into question whether or not you are truly a "FairSpectator."

3. That I'm going to pay my attorney to represent me in court. There is no need. Housing court is not rocket science. The law and the lease are clearly on my side. It would be a waste of her time and my money to retain her when she has other more complex cases warranting her attention (the judge may not rule that the LL has to pay my legal fees if I prevail). I'll probably go back one more time for another coaching session if the LL doesn't back down just to make sure I am completely prepared.

4. That I've been combative and antagonistic from the start. I have not. I readily admitted my error, apologized for it, agreed to pay the arrears and in fact paid in full as promised including late fees. It didn't get nasty until the LL decided to resort to intimidation tactics. I am not afraid of my LL and I refuse to be intimidated.

5. That all I'm trying to do is to get out of paying a $500 fee. It's not about the fee, it's about how the LL does business and engages in unfair practices such as not notifying potential tenants of things like "Oh, by the way, if you want/ have a pet, it's going to cost you $500 for our permission." before signing the lease, their apparent disregard for the terms of the lease as well as city and state law.

At the end of the day FS, you've actually helped me a great deal here as you have brought up likely arguments my LL will use. If all I have to pay is their $50 fee for the returned check even though it was at their direction that a stop payment order was issued on it, I can live with that, however I don't think a judge will rule in their favor even for that fee, since it is in excess of their actual costs.

And yeah, you do have too much time on your hands. Maybe you should spend it learning how to not to think the worst of people.

[Downtowner]

FS

I'm not going to argue with you or engage in a flame war.

I've sought the advice of a highly experienced legal professional on this subject, and it is her expert opinion based on the years of experience she has in litigating housing cases, legal precedent and the law are on my side. Her feedback to me was that I have handled the situation in an appropriate manner, with her advice being that I should not allow the LL to abuse or intimidate me. She indicated in very unambiguous terms that if they do not back out the charges that I would be well served to make them take me to housing court becuase there is no doubt the judge will rule in my favor. Her exact words were "They will be stupid to let this end up in court." I'll take her advice over yours any day.

FS, this is the last I will respond to you as it is clear your nom de plume is a misnomer.

My recommendation to others who are having problems with their LL is not to depend on advice posted on an Internet bulletin board, as you will likely get wrong info. Seek competent and experienced legal advice from a professional attorney.

I'll continue to update as events progress.

[TenantNet]

Two comments. To Downtown Guy, on your last post, well many landlords are stupid, or they prefer to intimidate. To Fair Spectator. We're not going to get into the substance of this thread. But it is very annoying that you substitute "u" for you and "ur" for your/you're. Stop it.

[Downtowner]

To Downtown Guy, on your last post, well many landlords are stupid, or they prefer to intimidate.

Exactly. What I don't understand is why some LLs' default response to any problem is to resort to threats and intimidation instead of negotiating a fair and reasonable solution. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and everyone loses in the end.

As far as stupidity goes, Forest Gump said it best: "Stupid is as stupid does."

[Downtowner]

Please be quiet. Adults are talking.