Department of fair employment told about anti-semitism at Hi Point Apts

June 17, 2018

(Editor: Still no response from the DFEH on the complaint received by them on April 18, 2018. So much for getting the government to stop racial discrimination and retaliation; so much for thinking the government will enforce the fair housing laws.]

Subject: Re Hi Point Apts at 1522 Hi Point St 90035 and Request for Parking Assignment List

From: (tenant name and email redacted)
To: contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov;

CC: tenantrelationsatyourapt@gmail.com; info@smchamber.com; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org; karen.baggio@lacity.org; robert.galardi@lacity.org; angelo.shannon@lacity.org; steve.ongele@lacity.org; richard.horn@lacity.org; mark.salazar@lacity.org; crystal.otero@lacity.org; corey.hupp@lacity.org; paula.hudak@lacity.org; terry.herr@lacity.org; michael.hughes@lacity.org; jonathan.hom@lacity.org; councilmember.wesson@lacity.org; info@da.lacounty.gov; emily.hu@lacity.org; maria.a.hernandez@lacity.org; scott.matsunaga@lacity.org; hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org; robert.hughes@lacity.org; charles.v.garcia@lacity.org; councilmember.wesson@lacity.org; councilmember.buscaino@lacity.org; councilmember.huizar@lacity.org; councilmember.ofarrell@lacity.org; councilmember.englander@lacity.org; councilmember.bonin@lacity.org; councilmember.price@lacity.org; councilmember.harris-dawson@lacity.org; councilmember.rodriguez@lacity.org; councilmember.martinez@lacity.org; paul.koretz@lacity.org; david.ryu@lacity.org; councilmember.blumenfield@lacity.org; councilmember.Krekorian@lacity.org; councilmember.cedillo@lacity.org; controller.galperin@lacity.org; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org; thefirstjew@yahoo.com; karen.baggio@lacity.org; robert.galardi@lacity.org; angelo.shannon@lacity.org; steve.ongele@lacity.org; richard.horn@lacity.org; crystal.otero@lacity.org; corey.hupp@lacity.org; paula.hudak@lacity.org; emily.hu@lacity.org; terry.herr@lacity.org; michael.hughes@lacity.org; jonathan.hom@lacity.org; maria.a.hernandez@lacity.org; scott.matsunaga@lacity.org; info@smchamber.com; robert.hughes@lacity.org; diana@aagla.org;

Date: Monday, June 11, 2018 9:39 PM

 

Dear DFEH:

The owner of this property has claimed tenants are parking all over the place. I have witnessed that tenants unit one park in numerous parking stalls even though they are technically only assigned one parking stall out of 20 parking stalls for 18 units.

Please supply me with a list of the parking assignments by parking space number, tenant apartment number, tenant name, tenant race, tenant age, tenant sex. There is no public posting on the property indicating this information even though the owner has told tenants to report other tenants who are not parking in their assigned parking stall. This property is regulated by the city rent control department that has jurisdiction over housing services like parking.

All rights reserved.

(Editor: Tenant 9 name, address, phone, redacted)

cc: HUD, AAGLA, Jade Beck at Hi Point Apts at tenantrelationsatyourapt@gmail.com, Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce

GC 12955. It shall be unlawful: (a) For the owner of any housing accommodation to discriminate against or harass any person because of the race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, or genetic information of that person.

 

Racism at Hi Point Apts

May 27, 2018

(Editor: This complaint was received by the DFEH on April 18, 2018 at 11:57 am and again received by the DFEH on May 24, 2018 at 11:54 am, signed for by L. Lopez. The complaint below is redacted. Note that the DFEH and online only allows you (other than the employment right to sue) to submit a Pre-Intake Inquiry. NEVER NEVER EVER FILL OUT THIS FORM. The DFEH uses this form to discourage the public from filing complaints. You want to skip to the Complaint stage and the DFEH does not allow for this. So you just draft up your own Complaint, based on the info on the pre-intake form, and entitle your document “Complaint of Discrimination” and ask that the DFEH investigate. Your Complaint must be signed under penalty of perjury. You can imitate the format I have used below. The main thing is that you must establish a “prima facie” complaint; you do not have to prove or give evidence at the Complaint stage. There are numerous copies of actual lawsuits and housing complaints online so you can use those as a guide. But mainly look up the requirements for “prima facie”. Mail your complaint by messenger, fed ex, USPS priority, and get a signature. The DFEH routinely ignores or rejects most complaints so don’t be surprised if they don’t help. To file a housing discrimination lawsuit, however, in California, you are not required to first use the DFEH nor do you need a right to sue letter from the DFEH. The DFEH enforces various statutes including the Unruh Act which supposedly protects your rights as an individual, as opposed to disparate impact and disparate treatment theories. After receiving your “prima facie” complaint, the DFEH may assign it a case number.)

State of California Department of Fair Employment and Housing

Complaint of Discrimination Under the Provisions of the

California Fair Employment and Housing Act

DFEH NUMBER ______________________  HUD NUMBER _____________________

PROPERTY TYPE NO. OF UNITS  – Apartments :  18

I ALLEGE THAT I EXPERIENCED DISCRIMINATION ON OR BEFORE APRIL 14, 2015

BECAUSE OF MY ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED AGE, RACE, RETALIATION BECAUSE I COMPLAINED

AS A RESULT, I WAS DENIED FULL AND EQUAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS; DENIED FAIR HOUSING

  1. Since on or around April 14, 2015, I have been discriminated against in my current place of residence located at 1522 Hi Point Street, #9, Los Angeles, CA   90035.
  2. I believe the discriminatory practice is denial of full and equal terms and conditions due to my Race/Color and Age. This is a violation of Government Code section 12955(a) and Housing Act which incorporates the Unruh Civil Rights Act and Civil Code section 51.2 My beliefs are based on the following:

a. On or around April 14, 2015, and continuing to the date of this complaint, the Respondents each and every one denied me full and equal terms and conditions to maintenance of the intercom system, which would include repair, replacement, or removal; and denial of the assignment to a tandem parking stall. The owner has renovated and repaired 15 of 18 units. All the newly repaired units have working intercoms majority of which are occupied by White/Caucasian tenants, under the age of 55.

b. On or around April 14, 2015, I contacted the WREA (Williams Real Estate Advisors, Inc.), City of Los Angeles, City LADBS, City HDICLA/RSD, property owner, Ali Mozannar at Mozannar Construction, resident manager Cynthia Ogan and eventually Jade Beck. Despite my multiple requests and complaints to all Respondents, to date I have not been assigned a tandem parking stall and the intercom for two Black tenants unit 9, has not been repaired, replaced, or removed.

c. As a result, the Respondents have denied me full and equal terms and conditions to have rent reductions/reimbursements, denied me maintenance to the intercom, and denied me assignment to a tandem parking stall, due to my Race, Color, Age, and because I have complained about discrimination, from April 14 2015 to current.

d. At all times Respondents were duly notified of my complaints to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing.

e. I believe I am in class of one because I am the only tenant who has complained about rent reductions/reimbursements, maintenance to the intercom, and assignment to tandem parking stalls, for the length of time stated herein.

f. At all times mentioned herein, I was in a protected class due to my age over 55, Race/Color Black, and because I complained of discrimination.

g.  At all times mentioned herein, I —-as well as my roommate another Black tenant —- qualified for intercom maintenance, rent reductions/reimbursements, tandem parking, because I was a tenant, because my rent was current, and due to the provisions of the rental agreement.

h. I was denied maintenance to the intercom and I was denied tandem parking, rent reductions/reimbursements during the time period stated herein.

i. Other tenants, who had not engaged in complaining about discrimination, and who were White, and under the age of 64, received working intercoms and tandem parking stalls.

j. I am in a class of one, individual,  because no other tenant has complained  about denial of intercom repair due to Race, Age, to tenants in unit 9 and no other tenant has complained about denial of tandem parking to tenants unit 9, and denial of rent reductions/reimbursements.

California Constitution Article 1 Declaration of Rights

“Sec. 7(b) A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens.”

GC 12927.  As used in this part in connection with housing

accommodations, unless a different meaning clearly appears from the

context:

   

   (c) (1) “Discrimination” includes:

refusal to sell, rent, or lease housing accommodations;  includes refusal to negotiate for the sale, rental, or lease of housing accommodations; includes representation that a housing accommodation is not available for inspection, sale, or rental when that housing accommodation is in fact so available; includes any other denial or withholding of housing accommodationsincludes provision of inferior terms, conditions, privileges, facilities, or services in connection with those housing accommodations; includes harassment in connection with those housing accommodations; includes the provision of segregated or separated housing accommodations;

Attached: (1)  Attachment – six pages

(2) Email March 27, 2018 at 12:31 pm

(3) Email April 13, 2018 at 2:00 pm

(4) Email January 2, 2018 at 5:18 pm

(5) City code enforcement complaint March 21 2018 city number 667856. Nine pages.

All rights reserved.

SIGNED UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY

By submitting this Complaint, I am declaring under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct of my own knowledge, except as to matters stated on my information and belief, and to those matters I believe them to be true.

SIGNATURE OF COMPLAINAINT: DATE: APRIL 14, 2018

_______________________________

(tenant 9 name redacted)

2018-4-14

Attachment to DFEH Complaint

Department of Fair Employment and Housing

2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100 Elk Grove, CA 95758

Name of who this complaint is filed against:

HI POINT APTS LLC Walter Barratt 226 Carroll Canal Venice CA  90291 Phone 310-895-6693

JADE BECK HI POINT APTS LLC Walter Barratt 226 Carroll Canal Venice CA  90291 Phone 310-895-6693

Williams Real Estate Advisors [“WREA”]  2701 Ocean Park Blvd. Suite 140  Santa Monica CA 90405 310-987-7978

CITY OF LOS ANGELES CITY CLERK 200 NORTH SPRING STREET ROOM 395 CITY HALL LOS ANGELES  CA   90012

RSD/HCIDLA CITY OF LOS ANGELES CITY CLERK 200 NORTH SPRING STREET ROOM 395 CITY HALL LOS ANGELES  CA   90012

MOZANNAR CONSTRUCTION C/O HI POINT APTS LLC Walter Barratt 226 Carroll Canal Venice CA  90291 Phone 310-895-6693

CYNTHIA OGAN C/O HI POINT APTS LLC Walter Barratt 226 Carroll Canal Venice CA  90291 Phone 310-895-6693

Because of: Age Race Retaliation because I opposed practices made unlawful by the Unruh Act et al. and Government Code 12900 FEHA.

That the property owner by statements alluded to by the DFEH in a letter dated May 18 2016, has admitted to illegal discrimination against myself due to my race, Black, and age over 60.

The reasons given by the Hi Point Apts, in conspiracy with the city, county, DFEH, and HUD, for denial of housing services intercom and tandem parking stall are pretextual; I believe the real reasons are due to my race, Black, age over 60, and because I complained about and opposed discrimination made unlawful as defined under Government code 12927. The owner reasons — I have not received any verified statement by the owner written to me so I consider the DFEH statements as self-serving hearsay — nevertheless, do not meet the HUD requirements of substantial, legitimate, non-discriminatory interest. These are the statements from the May 18, 2016 DFEH letter which I believe constitute unlawful discrimination:

“The Respondents asserted none of the intercoms in the building were working when they took over management, but they began installing working intercoms as tenants vacated the premises and they had a chance to renovate the empty units.”

“They [Respondents] stated the four units with non-working intercoms, including your apartment, are occupied by long term tenants, which is why those units continue to have intercoms that do not work.”

HUD regulations state “a facially-neutral policy or practice that has a discriminatory effect violates the Act if it is not supported by a legally sufficient justification”.

The statements above attributed to the owner which he has not denied, are not supported by a legally sufficient justification are discrimination as defined under these sections of GC 12927, as they apply to the owner’s et al. denial of apartment with working intercom and denial of apartment with tandem parking stall:

(GC) 12927.  As used in this part in connection with housing

accommodations, unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context:

  (c) (1) “Discrimination” includes:

refusal to sell, rent, or lease housing accommodations; includes refusal to negotiate for the sale, rental, or lease of housing accommodations;  includes representation that a housing accommodation is not available for inspection, sale, or rental when that housing accommodation is in fact so available; includes any other denial or withholding of housing accommodations; includes provision of inferior terms, conditions, privileges, facilities, or services in connection with those housing accommodations;  includes harassment in connection with those housing accommodations; includes the provision of segregated or separated housing accommodations;

   (d) “Housing accommodation” means any building, structure, or portion thereof that is occupied as, or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more families and any vacant land that is offered for sale or lease for the construction thereon of any building, structure, or portion thereof intended to be so occupied.

   (e) “Owner” includes the lessee, sublessee, assignee, managing agent, real estate broker or salesperson, or any person having any legal or equitable right of ownership or possession or the right to rent or lease housing accommodations, and includes the state and any of its political subdivisions and any agency thereof.

California Civil Code

51. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

(b) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.

California Civil Code 52.1. (a) If a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes by threat, intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by threat, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney may bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. An action brought by the Attorney General, any district attorney, or any city attorney may also seek a civil penalty of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). If this civil penalty is requested, it shall be assessed individually against each person who is determined to have violated this section and the penalty shall be awarded to each individual whose rights under this section are determined to have been violated.

(b) Any individual whose exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, has been interfered with, or attempted to be interfered with, as described in subdivision (a), may institute and prosecute in his or her own name and on his or her own behalf a civil action for damages, including, but not limited to, damages under Section 52, injunctive relief, and other appropriate equitable relief to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured, including appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate a pattern or practice of conduct as described in subdivision (a).
“52. (a) Whoever denies, aids or incites a denial, or makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to Section 51, 51.5, or 51.6,
is liable for each and every offense for the actual damages, and any amount that may be determined by a jury, or a court sitting without a jury, up to a maximum of three times the amount of actual damage but in no case less than four thousand dollars ($4,000), and any attorney’s fees that may be determined by the court in addition thereto, suffered by any person denied the rights provided in Section 51, 51.5, or 51.6.

(b) Whoever denies the right provided by Section 51.7 or 51.9, or aids, incites, or conspires in that denial, is liable for each and every offense for the actual damages suffered by any person denied that right and, in addition, the following:

(1) An amount to be determined by a jury, or a court sitting without a jury, for exemplary damages.

(2) A civil penalty of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) to be awarded to the person denied the right provided by Section 51.7 in any action brought by the person denied the right, or by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city attorney. An action for that penalty brought pursuant to Section 51.7 shall be commenced within three years of the alleged practice. “

The retaliation and denial of rights by the property owner, aiding and abetting with the city government, state government, and HUD employees, has violated the law as enumerated under California Civil Code section 52 above and under civil code section 51(b) I have been denied as a Black tenant over the age of 60, and because of my race and age,   full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever”. 

“Federal law

Sec. 804. [42 U.S.C. 3604] Discrimination in sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices As made applicable by section 803 of this title and except as exempted by sections 803(b) and 807 of this title, it shall be unlawful–

(b) To discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin. “

LAMC. Housing Services

Services connected with the use or occupancy of a rental unit including, but not limited to, utilities (including light, heat, water and telephone), ordinary repairs or replacement, and maintenance, including painting. This term shall also include the provision of elevator service, laundry facilities and privileges, common recreational facilities, janitor service, resident manager, refuse removal, furnishings, food service, parking and any other benefits privileges or facilities. (Amended by Ord. No. 154,808, Eff. 2/13/81.)

The DFEH is aware that numerous Black tenants vacated the premises without receiving the required THP agreement. With the participation of city employees, the owner made tenants sign agreement induced by the fraud that such agreements violated their due process rights as Black Americans and such agreements to waive any civil rights and constitutional claims were not authorized by the city or state fair housing laws and rent control regulations. The City and the owner participated together in denying Black tenants a working intercom and the due process THP applications and double damages for not complying with the city rent control regulations, a violation of those tenants rights under fair housing laws.

The names of former or current tenants at the 1522 Hi Point St property include Hiede Cravens, Karen Byers, Sharon L. Duda, Rachel Connell, Andrew Connell, Lorrie Sakauchi, Trisha Dobbs, Cynthia Ogan, Danni Johnson, David Johnson, Hayley Bojorquez, Michael Walker, Nary Riveral, Mathew Estrada, Daniel Dirgo, Tyler Ruggeri, Marquis Anderson, Darren Davis.

DATE OF INJURY: MAY 18 2017 AND CONTINUING.

Damages (amount redacted)   Punitive damages (amount redacted)

I look forward to your response. All rights reserved.

(Tenant #9)

APRIL 14, 2018

(Editor: attachments 2,3,4 appear elsewhere on this website)

March 30, 2018

Links to this site appear in the March 29 2018 issue on page S12 of the                         USC Daily Trojan Housing Guide 2018

NEWSPAPER ARTICLE DETAILS CITY LOS ANGELES SUED OVER HOUSING DISCRIMINATION “Will this Court order all Ham-Jew-DNA-Kushite/Blacks across America to be lynched because this Court feels Ham-Jew-DNA-Kushite/Blacks are not entitled to protection under the United States Constitution and all laws?”  Court document 120, filed 10-11-17, page ID 2747-2748.

See the online issue of Random Lengths news [of San Pedro], Feb . 22 issue and page 17.

http://www.randomlengthsnews.com

To see additional discussions about what is fair housing and to see copies of posted Videos, click   Youtube channel “Davey GJuanvalldez”

February 20, 2018

 

Subject:   Voicemail Call to Jerry Brown’s DFEH – DFEH case Number 201712-0053412 to Lindsay Anderson 

From:      [tenant name and email redacted]

To:            contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov; lindsey.anderson@dfeh.ca.gov; lindsay.anderson@dfeh.ca.gov;
Cc:            mayor.garcetti@lacity.org; councilmember.wesson@lacity.org;

Date:       Tuesday, February 20, 2018 10:43 PM

DFEH:

“Hello, you have reached the department of Fair Employment and Housing, If you know the name of the person you are trying to reach, please press “1”, to file a complaint, press “2”, to reach the enforcement division, press “3”; [a number is pressed]. Using the keys on your touchtone phone, please enter the name of the party you wish to reach, last name first. Press star at any time to return to the main menu. The party you have called—Lindsey Anderson—is not available, You may leave a message after the tone. [Beep]”

TENANT:

“Hi, this call is for Lindsay Anderson, today is February 19, 2018, at 10:47 p.m. This is [TENANT NAME AND PHONE REDACTED].  Your case number is 201712-0053412…in reference to Hi Point Apts, LLC and others. This response is to two recent phone calls received from you. I was told this complaint would proceed to investigation with you sending me any questions, if any at all, by email, which I would respond to you by email, so please forward me any questions you have in this investigation and I will respond to you by email. You have my email already….again, today is February 19, 2018, and this call is to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, State of California. Thank you.”

1522 Hi Point St 9
Los Angeles CA 90035

 

[Editor: Continuous complaints have been filed with the DFEH the last three years but none of the complaints have resulted in Black tenants at Hi Point Apts receiving “full and equal housing services and privileges”,  intercom repair and parking stall, as required under state law. This email references a current complain that names the city government of Los Angeles, property owner Walter Barratt aka Hi Point Apts LLC, and Williams Real Estate Advisors, Inc.]

 

January 6,  2018

 

Subject: Attention Susia Parra – Complaint Nov 7 2017 pre-complaint inquiry DFEH- Revised received by you December 14 2017

From:  [Tenant name and email redacted]

To:       contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov; matt@williamsrea.com; 

Date:  Saturday, January 6, 2018 10:31 PM 

Dear DFEH:

1. Please include email of today’s date into the above mentioned complaint against Hi Point Apts LLC et al. The email chain is attached.

2. As regards the lack of repair or replacement to the intercom, I believe part of the racism and retaliation by respondents is that the repair/replacement is taking an unreasonable and inordinate amount of time to occur. All of the other fifteen intercoms were installed in apartments in less than two months time each. The intercom of tenants unit 9 has not been repaired or replaced in over two years.

3. The owner cannot claim that the intercom repair has not occurred because I am a long term tenant or because he only gives new parts to vacant units; neither of these alleged excuses of the owner are in the rental agreement therefore they are not valid. As regards he only puts new parts into vacant units, this is not true either; in June 2017 after a series of my complaints, the owner installed new bathroom faucet and copper pipes and installed a new kitchen garbage disposal.

4. Finally the owner and his agents, and any others, cannot claim that unit 9 tenants are not entitled to intercom repair or replacement simply because it is the owner and the city of Los Angeles government who approved the THP application which includes complete plumbing and electrical redo and new intercom, as has been the custom with the other 15 units. This written document is proof positive that the City and Owner intend unit 9 to have a new intercom, and this proof invalidates any claims by any agents or government entitles who may claim I am not entitled to intercom service and maintenance.

5. I have already forwarded you a copy of the THP approved by the owner and city; I now attach for purposes of this complaint a copy of the decision after appeal of the THP, dated 11-13-2015, further authorizing the intercom repair or replacement; this 2015 eleven page city document is undisputed.

6. As far as I know, the THP appeal decision has not changed and the THP is still valid, nor has any court or otherwise ruling invalidated the THP. Failure to follow thru with the THP by the owner I believe would entitle me to in the least double damages of $34,000.

All rights reserved.

[Tenant #9; address and phone redacted]

c: Williams Real Estate Advisors, Inc. agent for Hi Point Apts LLC

Attachments

2018-1-6 Email Chain w WREA.pdf (236.27KB) 2015-11-13 THP Appeal Decision 1522 Apt 9.pdf (4.28MB)

Dec 11 2017

Fair Housing Complaint Names City government of Los Angeles, Hi Point Apts LLC, Walter Barratt, Williams Real Estate Advisors, Inc, Cynthia Ogan- 36 pages

Department of Fair Employment and Housing

Attention Susie Parra

2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100

Elk Grove, CA 95758

Via Priority Mail

9505 5000 1177 7345 0003 71

See enclosed Pre-complaint inquiry dated November 7, 2017 that was received by DFEH totaling 36 pages with proof of service.

Your November 30 2017 letter [enclosed] and return of Nov 7 complaint was postmarked December 7, 2017.

I am returning the 36 page complaint and have made corrections to page 2 as requested in your November 30 letter. This is a housing discrimination complaint under Unruh CC 51,52 et seq and  Housing Discrimination [ GC12955-12957]  against City government of Los Angeles, Hi Point Apts LLC, Walter Barratt, Williams Real Estate Advisors, Inc, Cynthia Ogan, etc as enumerated in the complaint, for deprivation of “full and equal housing services” , deprivation of personal rights as enumerated under the Unruh act, i.e. intercom service, intercom maintenance, tandem parking stalls, and rent reductions due to reduction/removal of services[ “terms and conditions”].

1. What are the qualifications for a tenant to be assigned an intercom/tandem parking stall?

2. Which tenants by apartment number do not qualify for an intercom/tandem parking stall?

3. Which tenants by apartment number had their rent reduced because their intercom is not working or parking reduced?

4. How much was the rent reduced for tenants who did not receive a working intercom or tandem parking stall?

5. Specify the fee for intercom/tandem parking at the 1522 Hi Point and detail by corresponding apartment number,     i.e apartment unit and fee for intercom service.

6. Are there any other qualifications for having an intercom/tandem parking stall at 1522, i.e race, color, sex, source of income, etc.?

7. What is Cliff Renfrew’s employment title?

8. What employee is responsible for the assignment of intercoms/tandem stalls?

9. List any tenant(s) whose apartments do not have working intercoms/tandem stalls.

10. How is first come first served applied to the assignment of intercoms/tandem stalls?

11. What state government training/certification/license have you received to be hired as a resident manager?

12. Have you received sensitivity training on the civil rights laws that govern the rights of tenants?

Enclosed as additions to the complaint are:

  • Email to DFEH dated November 25, 2017 at 4:49 p.m. subject “Obstruction of Civil Rights by Edmund G. Brown’s Racist Department of Fair Employment and Housing re Hi Point Apts LLC and City of Los Angeles Government et al.” [signed]
  • Email to DFEH dated December 3, 2017 at 10:02 p.m. subject “Docs for the November 7 2017 Pre Complaint Inquiry Housing re Hi Point Apts LLC “ with photos of the parking stalls [signed]

All rights reserved.

[Tenant name redacted] 1522 Hi Point St, Los Angeles CA   90035

[Editor Note: The DFEH rather than take “complaints” has this nasty little most likely illegal habit of making the Public submit pre-intake questionnaires; if the DFEH likes your questionnaire, then they will turn it into a Complaint. NO-NO–NO! The “qualification” process should be separate from the Complaint process. The DFEH,  a law enforcement agency, should not be allowed to reject someone’s complaint because it does not comply with the questionnaire; this is how the DFEH illegally discourages people from filing complaints. A complaint is a complaint regardless of the DFEH format. DFEH takes from you a pre-intake questionnaire, they reject your questionnaire, and they close your case; in this instance you were denied opportunity to file a complaint. Second scenario, they turn your questionnaire into a complaint and ask you to sign it; be careful because only your name is on the complaint and they may have worded it in a way you have given up your rights. Giving you a questionnaire and rejecting your questionnaire is probably illegal and denial of due process rights to file a complaint.]

The DFEH needs to be shut down. They do more harm than good.

 

November 25, 2017

Subject:

Obstruction of Civil Rights by Edmund G. Brown’s Racist Department of Fair Employment and Housing re Hi Point Apts LLC and City of Los Angeles Government et al.

From: [Tenant name redacted]

To: james.cortes@dfeh.ca.gov; contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov; manuel.a.alvarado@hud.gov; complaints_office_00@hud.gov;

Date: Saturday, November 25, 2017 4:49 PM

        

Action

Resolution

Enforcement

Do you do any of this or are you just sitting on your ass?

 

DEPARTMENT FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING [“DFEH”]

2218 KAUSEN DRIVE SUITE 100 ELK GROVE CA 95758

Dear DFEH:

I have received the letter of DFEH employee James Cortes dated November 17, 2017. The DFEH letter is not acceptable as a resolution to the issues herein.Edmund G. Brown is the Governor of California; Kevin Kish is the Director of the DFEH.

Below is a partial list of the numerous amount of contacts I have had with the DFEH since 2015, and the voluminous amount of documentation, almost three years ago, regarding the denial of housing services intercom, maintenance, and parking at this herein plantation address 1522 Hi Point St 90035 [“Hi Point Apartments LLC”]. I am still damaged, as a Kushite-DNA-Jew-Black, and denied a working intercom, denied maintenance to the intercom, and denied tandem parking stall, and denied terms and conditions to get a working intercom and parking stall, and denied “full and equal housing services and privileges” Unruh CC 51,52, Government code 12955 et al.

“…My objective here is to obtain the housing rights I am entitled to under law; your objective is to shuffle the paperwork…”

Interestingly, but indicative, the DFEH letter of November 17, 2017, doesn’t mention any of the laws the DFEH is supposed to enforce.

“We order your intercom to be repaired or replaced today; we order the owner to assign you a tandem parking stall today. We award damages to you of XXX,XXX dollars”; It takes about fifteen seconds to say/write that sentence. But I do not see those words in the DFEH November 17, 2017 letter. My objective here is to obtain the housing rights I am entitled to under law; your objective is to shuffle the paperwork.

YOUR LETTER [attached]

Your letter states, paragraph 1, “this correspondence is in response to your appeal of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing recommendation for closure that was submitted to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development as well as our department. Director Kevin Kish, has asked me to respond to your concerns.”

My response:

Other than the intent and practice of racial discrimination and retaliation by the DFEH, as evidenced in your letter, your letter is unresponsive to my concerns. As for an appeal to the DFEH, HUD, I don’t recall mounting an “appeal” document. Obviously you don’t have one because you don’t mention the date of one; if you have one that is dated and signed by me to you or HUD, allow me to examine it, and I will stand corrected; otherwise I consider your statement of “appeal” as abuse of process and abuse of discretion. Your letter is unresponsive to my concerns.

“…the DFEH has taken a previous stance on the intercom [and parking] that is not in compliance with the dictates of my rent agreement, thus such stance violates my contracts rights under applicable federal law and state law”

Your second paragraph, recall of the September 6, 2017, and your fourth paragraph, interview is inaccurate and self serving. You fail to mention in that paragraph that the interviewer heard me ask about the two different case numbers and that she at no time told me that they were in reference to the same issues or that they referred to a paper complaint and an online complaint; none of this was told to me prior to the interview either; therefore I was denied fair opportunity to adequately prepare for the interview. On September 6 —you fail to mention—that I was prepared for a 30 minute interview yet when I got on the phone the interviewer said the interview would last one hour, which I was unprepared to do because of my 30 minute lunch. Even now, while you have mentioned the two case numbers , I do not have a date as to what paper intake complaint you are referring to. You state that after I asked the interviewer about the department knowledge of what an intercom is —-in your Nov 17 letter you still don’t reveal if the department knows what an intercom is, and this is crucial to understanding the complaint—that I was “unsatisfied by this response, you concluded the interview”; my response is that I was “satisfied” with her response that she did not have knowledge, as a state employee, as to does the DFEH know what an intercom is. Contrary to your recall of the September 6, at about 1:00 pm I emailed the DFEH : “DFEH: This shall verify that I was available today at 12 noon.I spoke with Camilla on the phone from 12:10 pm to 12:20 pm which I believed was adequate interview time for the two inquiry numbers which the DFEH claimed were the subject of the interview, and pursuant to the exhibits already provided to the DFEH. I asked Camilla if she knew what an intercom system is, her answer to be on behalf of the DFEH. Camilla replied that she generally knew what an intercom system was but that she was not speaking on behalf of the DFEH. The interview concluded at about 12:20 p.m. [Tenant name and phone redacted].” As is clearly shown, I felt the interview time was adequate considering the voluminous amount of documents already provided to the DFEH prior to the interview [see list of emails below that occurred on Sept 2 prior to the interview]. I only used the 890665-298276 number because that was the number given to me in emails setting up the interview; I would not realize to right before the interview that I did not have any record of that numbered complaint; it seems prudent that rather than an “appeal” that the interview should be rescheduled with the proper notice of which complaint will be heard and advance notice of written questions from the DFEH, which I am sure the DFEH and its resources are capable of providing. Under the circumstances, it was prejudicial and retaliatory for the DFEH to close the inquiry.

“…Anti-Semitism practiced by the California DFEH…”

A new intake has been forwarded to the DFEH.

One exhibit supplied to you on September 2 was an email “Anti-Semitism practiced by the California DFEH Personal rights under the state Unruh Act Last date of harm: Continuing” ; there were at least another more than 42 pages of docs supplied to you. Presumably most complainants do not supply such large amount of documents with a pre-intake inquiry, but it does not appear your interviewer considered any of those documents before the interview, because if she did, she would not have to ask me an hour’s worth of questions.

“…institutionalized, intractable, and systemic racism practiced by the DFEH…”

I remind you that the DFEH has taken a previous stance on the intercom [and parking] that is not in compliance with the dictates of my rent agreement, thus such stance violates my contracts rights under applicable federal law and state law.

As regards the rest of your letter, yes, I do have a hearing disability and learning disability which precludes me from understanding the procedures for the institutionalized, intractable, and systemic racism practiced by the DFEH … [This] requires me to have the written questions a week in advance of any interview so I can determine the relevance of such questions and if they have already been answered by documentation already supplied to the DFEH.

Under the circumstances, the matter should not have been processed for closure. It was processed for closure not because of any action of mine or inaction, it was processed for closure due to your own unfair, capricious, and unjust favor to apartment owners and their agents. I appear to have no recourse to remedy my housing entitlements thru the law enforcement agency DFEH.

“We order your intercom to be repaired or replaced today; we order the owner to assign you a tandem parking stall today. We award damages to you of XXX,XXX dollars”; It takes about fifteen seconds to say/write that sentence. But I do not see those words in the DFEH November 17, 2017 letter.

What is the magic number of intakes I have to file before I get relief? What is the magic number of interviews I have to go thru before I get relief?

Again, your letter is not acceptable as a resolution to the continuing damages claim 9-10-2017 against the DFEH, nor is it a resolution to the DFEH intake dated November 7, 2017 [36 pages], nor is it acceptable as a resolution to any other issues herein.

[Tenant name, address, phone redacted]

Kushite-DNA-Jew-Black

Summarized from the California Fair Employment and Housing Act website.

“…the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating … for these reasons foments domestic strife and unrest.”

[Editor: An Inglewood Small Claims Court Judge in September 2017 ruled in favor of white defendants who twice never even appeared in Court. The Judge was shown by other white defendants pictures of Blacks protesting racism. If those who are white can get relief without even “showing up”, what do we need Judges for?]

November 7,  2017

City employees and Tenants Named in Housing Complaint

Los Angeles- A 36 page complaint has been filed with the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing [“DFEH”] against the City government of Los Angeles, code enforcement, Hi Point Apts LLC and Cynthia Ogan resident manager. City employees and apartment tenants are named in the November 7 2017 complaint. City code enforcement complaint 646723 is an exhibit in the Complaint.

The current DFEH complaint is being handled by racist KKK State employee James Cortes.

Below are pictures of the parking lot provided to the DFEH, to prove discriminatory assignment of parking stalls where two white tenants have parking for four cars while two Black tenants have consistently been provided only one parking stall. The city government has determined parking stalls in this area, if denied, are worth $200 per month rent reimbursement to tenants.

 

 

[Editor note: Do Not Use the DFEH unless it is your last resort. They are known to be racist, corrupt, intractable, institutionalized, systemic racism, that favors property owners, does not enforce Black tenants legal rights as individuals, and a host of other transgressions under color of law. They have known about racism at Hi Point Apts 90035 since 2015 and turned a blind eye in favor of racism.  They should be shut down.]

September 4, 2017

Los Angeles- The property owner Walter Barratt [Hi Point Apts LLC] and Williams Real Estate Management Inc. have released to the department of fair employment the names of numerous tenants in the inquiry into housing discrimination at Hi Point Apts 90035.

Tenant names released to the public include:

Darren Navis, Cynthia Ogan, Mathew Estrada, Hayley Bojorquez, Zachary Burch, Munehito and Naho Hiramatsu, William T. Barnhart, Mary Joe Evans, Daniel Dirgo, Joseph Perez, Hiede Cravens, Tyler Ruggeri, Jacqueline Tilak, John Stiner, Ellie Tsutsumi, Sarah Cohen, Oneximo Gonzalez, Trisha Dobbs, Morgan Tyler Coleman, Sean Sinclair, Derek Martin, David Johnson, Danni Pietz, Tanya Seamon Johnson.

For DFEH case 890665-298276 re  CITY OF LOS ANGELES HCID AND CODE ENFORCEMENT re upcoming September 6 Interview

TO:       contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov; julia.araneta@dfeh.ca.gov

CC:        thefirstjew@yahoo.com
DATE:  Thursday, August 31, 2017, 10:42:34 PM PDT – SEPTEMBER 4, 2017

Anti-Semitism practiced by the California DFEH

Personal rights under the state Unruh Act

Last date of harm: Continuing

[The “Tuskegee” Experiment on Blacks at Hi Point Apartments]

Dear DFEH, Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown, Kevin Kish, Julia Araneta, State of California:

DFEH: do you know what an intercom is?

DFEH: prepare a brief chronology of events that detail how the State of California Department of Fair Employment and Housing subjects Blacks/Jews to discrimination, harassment, and/ or retaliation based on their protected status. Include the names of all state government employee witnesses as well as the names and phone numbers of any tenants at 1522 Hi Point Street, Los Angeles, California and a brief summary of the state DFEH’s intractable, institutionalized racism against Blacks.

WITNESSES: Alan Yochelson Ali Mozannar * Angelo Shannon Arthur Belis Bryan Kirkness Byron Fuentes Charles Garcia Christine Ritsky Cynthia Ogan * Daniel Williams David Burkhead David V. Gomez David Whitehurst Denton Lorenzo Derrick Spencer Donald Matt Williams * Edward Zavala  Frank Bush Gail Owsley Gary Eshay Gregory Pomish Ian Yeom Ifa Kashefi Jade Beck * James Blythe Jeffrey Fulton Jennifer Montana John Weight Karen Baggio Ken Gill LADBS Lee Smith Manuel Hernandez Martin Hurtado Mayor Eric Garcetti Michael Alvarez Michael Kuhn Michael Soto Noel Ramirez [gave final approval to intercom replacement for select tenants and excluding Black tenants] Presiliano Sandoval Raymond Chan Richard Garcia Richard Schindler Robert Aldape Robert Galardi Rushmore Cervantes Steve Davey Steve Ongle Walter Barratt * [* Agents of city rent control building owner Hi Point Apts LLC, not city employees]. Jack Upchurch, Marshall Rumpf, Rick Horn, Jesse Barboza.

[Personal rights] “All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever. Unruh Civil Rights Act 

HOW THE GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATES IN UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION

THE DFEH under Governor Jerry Brown, and Secretary of State Alex Padillo acts in contradiction to the requirements of the state Unruh act and the federal housing discrimination laws. The DFEH has decided that the Black Americans in unit 9 are denied working intercom because they are long term tenants and new parts are only provided to tenants whose units are vacant; these actions by the DFEH are interference with equal protection of the law, interference with the rental agreement. The rental agreement does not state that tenants #9 are to be denied repair, replacement, or maintenance to the intercom system; none of what the DFEH states, about denial of repairs, is in the rental agreement.

 The actions of the DFEH, as stated herein and attached damage claim, violate the California Constitution.

All rights reserved.

[TENANT NAME ADDRESS PHONE REDACTED]

[EDITOR: This email has been redacted from a series of emails to the DFEH]

 

Subject: MANAGER AS TENANT – Please remove Cynthia Ogan as resident manager- to Williams Real Estate Advisors Inc. et al

From: [tenant name and email redacted]

To: matt@williamsrea.com; welcomehome@williamsrea.com; maintenance@williamsrea.com; amozannar@gmail.com; hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org;

Cc: robert.galardi@lacity.org; lee.smith@lacity.org; presiliano.sandoval@lacity.org; thefirstjew@yahoo.com; daniel.williams@lacity.org; bryan.kirkness@lacity.org; james.blythe@lacity.org; angelo.shannon@lacity.org; karen.baggio@lacity.org; info@da.lacounty.gov; walter.barratt@gmail.com; washingtonbureau@naacpnet.org; actso@naacpnet.org;

Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 11:06 PM

Anti-Semitism at Hi Point Apts

To whom it may concern:

The intercom at this apartment remains unusable and not maintained. The resident manager is Cynthia Ogan. I have also not received a rent reduction for the non-working intercom housing service, thus you have illegally demanded an illegal rent.

“The resident-manager is a manager, custodian, housekeeper, or other responsible person who resides on the premises and acts as the owner’s agent in maintaining the premises.” RAC section 920.

“WHEN IS A RESIDENT MANAGER ALSO A TENANT AND SUBJECT TO THE RSO? “A resident manager has tenant status when he/she receives free rent and no additional compensation, partially free rent, or partial rent and paid compensation. Resident managers are subject to the RSO and the RAC Rules and Regulations.” Redacted from city Rent Stabilization bulletin. RAC Guidelines section 920.

On this basis, please remove Cynthia Ogan from the position of resident manager for failure to maintain the premises. This may be posted to the worldwide web.

All rights reserved.

[Tenant name and address redacted]

Ham-Jew-DNA-Kushite/Black

1522 Hi Point St Los Angeles  CA   90035

**********************************************

*Darren Navis, Cynthia Ogan, Mathew Estrada, Hayley Bojorquez, Zachary Burch, Munehito and Naho Hiamatsu, William T. Barnhart, Mary Joe Evans, Daniel Dirgo, Joseph Perez, Hiede Cravens, Tyler Ruggeri, Jacqueline Tilak, John Stiner, Ellie Tsutsumi, Sarah Cohen, Oneximo Gonzalez, Trisha Dobbs, Morgan Tyler Coleman, Sean Sinclair, Derek Martin, David Johnson, Danni Pietz, Tanya Seamon Johnson.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s