Racism at 1522 Hi Point St 90035

Updated April 29, 2017

“…Deprivation of Housing Services at Hi Point Apts…”

Subject: Deprivation of Housing Services at Hi Point Apts LLC by agents of Hi Point Apts LLC

From: [tenant name and email redacted]

To: walter.barratt@gmail.com; welcomehome@williamsrea.com; hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org; 

cc: thefirstjew@yahoo.com; lee.smith@lacity.org; daniel.williams@lacity.org; robert.galardi@lacity.org; info@da.lacounty.gov;

Date: Saturday, April 29, 2017 6:47 PM 

White Privilege.

This is a rent controlled building

Dear Hi Point Apts LLC/Williams Real Estate Advisors via email to Walter Barratt

and email to Williams Real Estate Advisors at

welcomehome@williamsrea.com

walter.barratt@gmail.com

I am attaching the letter I received today at my apartment door explaining that Williams Real Estate Advisors, Inc. [WREA] will assume increased duties as the management company for Hi Point Apts LLC. A copy of your letter is attached. Your letter doesn’t state the name of your company or the name and address of the building.

Your letter also mentions that repair requests should go directly to Ali Mozannar at his email or phone.

As a point of reference, Williams Real Estate Advisors is located at 2701 Ocean Park Blvd, Suite 140, Santa Monica CA 90405. Phone 310-987-7978, owner Matt Williams and email Welcomehome@williamsREA.com. 

“…I find it strange that Ali is in charge of maintenance you say but he has not repaired my intercom in over two years…”

Ali Mozannar is also Phoenician Construction in Los Angeles, CA holds a General Building Contractor license (695817) according to the California license board. Ali  Mozannar is one of the persons who conspired to have me evicted because I complained that my intercom needed to be repaired. I find it strange that Ali is in charge of maintenance you say but he has not repaired my intercom in over two years. Do you have a separate person for the maintenance needs of Blacks like myself?

I remind you that there are 13 single parking stalls at this property and seven tandem stalls for a total of 27 parking spaces, and 18 one bedroom apartments. I continue to be denied the privilege and advantage of a tandem parking stall, as well as the required rent reduction/reimbursement. I remind you that after over 1000 [one thousand] days of complaining, I continue to be denied the full and equal advantages/facilities/ privileges/services of a working intercom and/or repair or replacement. The intercom remains unusable and I have not received the required rent reduction/reimbursement which means I have been paying an illegal rent, and you have demanded an illegal rent, for over 1000 days.

“…you have demanded an illegal rent,

for over 1000 days….”

How long would it take Williams Real Estate Advisors’ Matt Williams or California state licensed contractor Ali Mozannar to repair my intercom and/or provide me the required rent reductions?

I understand you say WREA manages other properties. Is WREA then in charge of deprivation of housing services to myself as a Black American and in charge
of further criminal fraud at this property?

I attach an email that was sent yesterday to LBPM et al re “illegal rent” and an email sent today to LBPM re “illegal activity re dogs” . I expect that WREA will take full responsibility under the rental agreement for these areas, pursuant to their mandatory training on federal and state fair housing laws.

“…How long would it take Williams Real Estate Advisors’ Matt Williams or California state licensed contractor Ali Mozannar to repair my intercom and/or provide me the required rent reductions?…”

White Privilege.

This is a rent controlled building

Attachments 

2017-4-29 Recd Change 1522 Management.pdf (219.90KB)

2017-4-29 Email re Illegal Dogs.pdf (109.26KB)
2017-4-28 Email to LBPM re Illegal Rent.pdf (81.58KB)

[ Tenant name redacted and address redacted]

The African American in the United States of America 

[This email is subject to a California Public Records Act Request]

c: Ali Mozannar via email above; California Real Estate License Board

Updated April 29, 2017

Subject: Illegal Activity re Dogs at 1522 Hi Point St Apartments – My Complaint 

From: [Tenant name and email redacted]

To: jcross@LBPM.com; hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org;

cc: lee.smith@lacity.org; daniel.williams@lacity.org; robert.galardi@lacity.org; thefirstjew@yahoo.com; info@da.lacounty.gov;

Date: Saturday, April 29, 2017 3:07 PM

White Privilege.

This is a rent controlled building

 

LB Property Management Inc.

4730 Woodman Avenue, Suite 200

Sherman Oaks, California 91423

TO: LB Property Management/designated agent/agent for Hi Point Apts LLC,

HCIDLA, Julie Cross, Robert Lopata, Gregg Bernstein, Brandon Stein, Brian

“…Los Angeles Animal Control Facility (sic) or Department of Animal Services …”

Theobald, Ccam, Salle Yerumyan, Greg De Rubeis, Mayor Eric Garcetti, Gilbert Cedillo, Paul Krekorian, Bob Blumenfield, David E. Ryu, Paul Koretz, Nury Martinez, Felipe Fuentes, Marqueece Harris-Dawson, Curren D. Price, Jr., Herb J. Wesson, Jr., Mike Bonin, Mitchell Englander, Mitch O’Farrell, Jose Huizar, Joe Buscaino.Barbara Brascia, Charles Garcia, Javier Nunez Raymond D. Chan, Frank Bush Jeffery J. Daar, Chairperson Tai Glenn, Vice Chairperson Jose Oliva, Carole Brogdon, Leonora Gershman PittsPaula Leftwich Jane Paul, Armida Olguin-Flores, Investigator, Araceli Sophia Gonzalez, Supervisor, Police Chief City of Los Angeles, Sherman Oaks Police Department,

1. This email is based on continuing communications with city Los Angeles employees David Whitehurst, Kristine Ritzke, and others at the Los Angeles Animal Control Facility (sic) or Department of Animal Services and/or city Los Angeles code enforcement.

“…My quiet enjoyment is disturbed at various times during the day because the dogs … are knocking up against my unit door…”

2. There are dogs on this property who are essentially not owned by any tenant, but rather owned by customers who do not reside at this property.

3. My quiet enjoyment of the premises is being disturbed by dogs who are owned by people who are not tenants.

4. My quiet enjoyment is disturbed at various times during the day because the dogs controlled by tenant unit #1 [Ogan] are knocking up against my unit door. If I am in the middle of eating, TV, computer, phone call, etc. the dogs bang up against my door. I feel that this occurs because the dogs are not on a leash [this is not a new complaint], that they should be on leash because the hallway and parking lot are not the sole “premises” of tenant unit 1 but they are the “common areas” shared by all tenants, and the dogs should be on a leash to keep from banging up against my door and disturbing my quiet enjoyment. I have to constantly be interrupted to distinguish is someone legitimately mopping the hallway floor, is a neighbor or quest knocking on my door, or is a series of dogs unnecessarily bumping up against the door. I ask that you order the owners of the dog boarding service at unit one—advertised on Yelp as “Doggone Cindy’s Dog Walking Service”—to keep their dogs on a leash at all times and curb the dogs so they do not bump up against my door. I also constantly hear the dogs running full speed up and down the hallway and then into my door like the hallway is some type of playground for the dogs. If they want the dogs to exercise, then they should not be allowed to do it in the hallways or parking lot. Further it is unfair and unreasonable that non-resident owners of the dogs and/or their dogs get to use the parking lot and intercom, while myself as a resident tenant is prohibited from using the intercom and prohibited from a tandem parking stall. There are 18 one bedroom units and parking for 27 cars.

“…city employees suggested I hire a private investigator to conduct surveillance of the property to ascertain how many dogs are on the property…”

5. The dogs on the property are authorized by the property owner, resident manager, and management company LB Property Management, Inc.

6. The city employees suggested I hire a private investigator to conduct surveillance of the property to ascertain how many dogs are on the property at any given time. I was hoping this would not be necessary but an adequate response from LB Property Management has not been received nor has the matter of the dogs bumping up against my door been resolved.

7. I have previously supplied pictures to city employees and link to the website that show a dog boarding kennel is being operated from this address.

8. I have been informed by city employees that any pet or dog boarding, kennel, or animal facility operated out of this building is illegal activity.

“…I was informed by city employees that any more than three dogs on the property at any given time is illegal activity…”

9. I was informed by city employees that any more than three dogs on the property at any given time is illegal activity.

10. I told city employees that I have witnessed sometimes over six dogs on the property at any given time being controlled by tenants unit one (Ogan).

11. I asked city employees to verify with the owner how many dogs are on the property because the owner should have a list since I believe the owner charges a pet deposit.

12. Counting all dogs I have seen on the property at any given time, which would include dogs of numerous tenants, I would estimate around eleven or more dogs.

13. I have personally witnessed tenant #1 (Ogan) with at times six dogs and at times four (4) dogs on the property. Just the other day I heard two dogs in her apartment barking, and then she entered the building with two more dogs; that totals FOUR.

14. Please respond in writing that these matters will be addressed rather than ignored.

White Privilege.

This is a rent controlled building

[Tenant name, address, phone redacted]

[This email and matter is subject to a California Public Records Act request.]  

 

Updated April 28, 2017

Payment Under Protest and Illegal Rent

 

Subject: Payment Under Protest and Illegal Rent at 1522 Hi Point St Apartments 

From: [tenant name and email redacted]

To: jcross@LBPM.com; hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org;

cc: lee.smith@lacity.org; daniel.williams@lacity.org; robert.galardi@lacity.org; thefirstjew@yahoo.com; info@da.lacounty.gov;

Date: Friday, April 28, 2017 3:48 PM

White Privilege
This is a rent controlled building

 

LB Property Management Inc.

4730 Woodman Avenue, Suite 200

Sherman Oaks, California 91423

LB Property Management/designated agent/agent for Hi Point Apts LLC, HCIDLA, Julie Cross, Robert Lopata, Gregg Bernstein, Brandon Stein, Brian Theobald, Ccam, Salle Yerumyan, Greg De Rubeis,  Mayor Eric Garcetti, Gilbert Cedillo, Paul Krekorian, Bob Blumenfield, David E. Ryu, Paul Koretz, Nury Martinez, Felipe Fuentes, Marqueece Harris-Dawson, Curren D. Price, Jr., Herb J. Wesson, Jr., Mike Bonin, Mitchell Englander, Mitch O’Farrell, Jose Huizar, Joe Buscaino.Barbara Brascia, Charles Garcia,Javier Nunez Raymond D. Chan, Frank Bush Jeffery J. Daar, Chairperson, Tai Glenn, Vice Chairperson Jose Oliva, Carole Brogdon, Leonora Gershman PittsPaula Leftwich Jane Paul, Armida Olguin-Flores, Investigator, Araceli Sophia Gonzalez, Supervisor

RAC Adjustment regulations 

“REDUCTION IN HOUSING SERVICES AUTHORITY OF COMMISSION TO REGULATE 

410.02 The Rent Adjustment Commission (the Commission) promulgates these regulations on reduction in housing services so that a corresponding reduction in rent can be determined to avoid an increase in rent in violation of the Rent Stabilization Ordinance (LAMC Sec. 151.02, Definition of Rent Increase).

410.03 A tenant rents an apartment with the appurtenant housing services available at the time of renting the apartment. Landlords who reduce housing services without a corresponding reduction in rent effectuate an increase in rent. The purpose of these regulations is to guide the Los Angeles Housing Department in its evaluation of a corresponding reasonable reduction in rent.

410.04 Housing services are services that are 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. The term also includes 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. (LAMC Sec. 151.02, Definition of Housing Services).”

“…you are also engaged in criminal fraud

by taking rent money for illegal purposes…”

  1. You continue to illegally demand rent from me.
  2. The intercom unit 9 remains unusable.

3. You reduced my parking from a two car stall to a one car stall and have not provided a reduction/reimbursement in rent, nor provided opportunity for/tandem parking stall.

4. You have not repaired, replaced, or removed my intercom, nor provided a rent reduction/reimbursement.

5. As such you are also engaged in criminal fraud by taking rent money for illegal purposes.

6. I am cc to LA District Attorney office to bring criminal charges against you.

7. I also cc the city prosecutor’s office who I believe is as much an asshole as David Whitehurst, city employee.

8. You have reduced housing services to me that were available to me at the time I rented the unit in 2010.

9. I anticipate filing a RSO complaint against you and subsequent action in a court of competent jurisdiction.

10. Damages include, but are not limited to, $200 per month for loss of parking tandem stall, $57.00 per month for loss of intercom, $2060 for related advertising research, treble damages, punitive damages, from the time period that LB Property Management assumed responsibility for:requirements for the good faith and reasonable conduct spelled out in the rental agreement, the city RAC regulations, and the state and federal civil rights laws.

11. My rental agreement says: “18.Designation of parties. The term “owner” includes a “manager”, “agent of the owner” , and “management company”.”

HEADNOTES CALIFORNIA OFFICIAL REPORTS HEADNOTES

(1a) (1b) Landlord and Tenant–Eviction–Landlord’s Failure to Repair. — –In a lessee’s action to recover a security deposit paid defendants, as lessor, at the inception of a lease, and for damages for breach of the lessor’s covenant to maintain the leased premises in useful condition, the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of constructive eviction…. KARL R. GROH et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. KOVER’S BULL PEN, INC., 221 Cal. App. 2d 611; 34 Cal. Rptr. 637; 1963 Cal. App. LEXIS 2194.

All rights reserved. I reserve the right to modify, revoke, or amend this email at any time. It is not intended as a remedy or resolution of any claims against any of the persons named herein or agents of employees of.

[Tenant name, address, phone redacted]

c: Code enforcement employees, Rushmore Cervantes thru HCIDLA email, LADBS

White Privilege
This is a rent controlled building

[Editor note: As of April 29, 2017, LB Property Management has been replaced.]

 

Updated March 27 2017

Mayor Garcetti’s City Employees Robert Galardi and David Whitehurst Admit City’s Racist and Corrupt THP Scam

Subject: Initial Response to HCIDLA March 6, 2017 Letter from city employee Robert Galardi under Mayor Eric Garcetti- The Illegal Acts of City Employees

From: [tenant name and email redacted]

To: robert.galardi@lacity.org; hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org; mayor.garcetti@lacity.org; jcross@LBPM.com;

Cc: david.whitehurst@lacity.org; thefirstjew@yahoo.com; hector.gallegos@lacity.org; info@da.lacounty.gov;

Date: Thursday, March 23, 2017 9:17 AM

HCIDLA
Regulatory and Compliance & Code Bureau                                                                                      3550 Wilshire Blvd Suite 1500
Los Angeles California 90010
Eric Garcetti, Mayor
Rushmore D. Cervantes, General Manager

City employee Robert Galardi Admits City Discrimination , Corruption and Criminal Conspiracy Against Tenant Rights 

Mayor Caught Lyin’ and Cheatin and Stealing 

The Illegal Acts of City Employees 

“Every tenant in Los Angeles should understand their rights, especially in a tight housing market, and landlords should know their responsibilities,” said Mayor Garcetti. “The RSO is the most powerful tool we have to keep families and neighborhoods together, and this ordinance will help protect vulnerable populations — like senior citizens and immigrants — from displacement. As we work to build new affordable housing, we also must make sure that residents know about protections that are already in place.” December 15 2016 —From internet article “Mayor Garcetti Signs Tenant Buyout Ordinance | Office of Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti” 

Dear HCIDLA:

I am responding to a letter I received from Robert Galardi dated March 6, 2017 in which he says: “Re: Alleged THP Violations at 1522 Hi Point Street, Unit 15”. Being that Galardi is responding in part to a damage claim against his department that is ten pages long, the letter is not acceptable as a resolution to the damages that have occurred and damages that are continuing, and the letter is not acceptable as a resolution to the code enforcement claims filed. I reserve all rights to serve a more thorough response to your letter. Your letter and my responses are added to the claim for damages against the HCIDLA that was dated February 13, 2017. 

As the THP violations are clearly proven at 1522 Hi Point St, I disagree with Galardi’s classification of the violations as “alleged”.

Your letter as stated indicates that the city government is aware that property owner(s) continue to fail to comply with city THP/LAMC regulations, that the city employees, under GC 815.6, fail to enforce the THP regulations, and that city employees such as yourself act without authority.

Other than five initially vacant units, and unit 9, none of the remaining tenants that experienced renovations [not including units 9, 8, 5] received the THP application before vacating their units. In particular, I witnessed that tenants unit 6, 1, 18, 10, 11, 15 did not receive the THP application. If they did not receive the THP application, then they did not receive the required permanent relocation monies. A careful view of the permits for the primary renovations reveals that in order for primary renovations to proceed, the owner would need to file the THP, then the rent stabilization department would need to clear the permits before the renovations proceeded. Again, the city government record shows that no THP’s were filed therefore no clearance of any permits were issued for the primary renovations to proceed. Is Gilardi et al disagreeing with the THP procedures stated herein?

The illegality of the renovations, and proof of the city’s corruption, is shown when the city inspector itself issued two Order to Stop Work, each time ordering the owner to file the required THP and each time, as city employee Charles Garcia would verify, no THP’s were ever filed yet the city inspectors based on the permits IGNORED the lack of THP health and safety applications, and issued finals of the inspections and subsequent CFO. This was all done by city employees acting illegally and ignoring their duties under the THP regulations.

Now Mayor Eric Garcetti has recently claimed the city has strengthened (sic) the THP regulations, but these are the same regulations the city did not enforce for units 6, 1, 18, 10, 11, 15 etc at this location, which the city employees named herein have admitted.

Both Orders to Stop work required the owner to comply with the hours of primary renovations, “applies to all units in the building”, requires primary renovation checklist, and states, “no additional work shall be done…until a THP is submitted and approved by the Los Angeles Housing Department.” The city allowed the work to continue without the THP’s.

Under the authority of Mayor Eric Garcetti, Rushmore D. Cervantes, Roberto Aldape, Daniel Gomez, David Whitehurst, Robert Galardi, the city never enforced the THP regulations. Tenants 6, 1, 18, 10, 11, 15 never received the THP application while they were tenants in the building. 

It was by email that Catherine Gaba, Assistant to the Executive Officer, Oct 4 2015 email indicated that workers at the site, as well as the owner and manager, were not complying with THP regulations re hours of primary renovation work. The documentation from the city including the Orders to Stop Work prove that the city government knew the THP regulations were not being followed by the owner, and that the city employees participated in the deprivation of rights to tenants entitled to under the THP program.

“Your letter appears to be explaining some type of secret Klan society regulations that are not privy to public scrutiny….

It appears that the position of the city is that hundreds of tenants in the last ten years were cheated out of THP relocation monies because the city determined that their units were vacant. The city has failed to explain why those tenants were not given the THP application which is by city regulation supposed to be given to the tenant before within 60 days before the unit is vacated. Are you admitting that for the last ten years you told the landlords to ignore the THP applications, move the tenants out, and the city would not question where is the THP?

The city’s own Notice to Comply dated 2014 that specified no permits for units 1 and 10, ruled that the ENTIRE BUILDING was “determined to be substandard”. So that inspector was not talking about just units 1 and 10 being substandard due to lack of permits, he was talking about the ENTIRE BUILDING because of just those two units. As Chief Inspector, do you deny that the building was declared substandard? Do you deny that because there is no THP for unit 15, that the ENTIRE building is substandard? In other words, hazardous conditions present in one unit do effect the tenant habitability of the rest of the building and tenants.

Your letter appears to be explaining some type of secret Klan society regulations that are not privy to public scrutiny, as in they do not coincide with the THP regulations stated in the LAMC or the city website, and that according to you the tenants were never qualified to receive the THP and the owner was never obligated to give them the THP. That is not what the THP regulations say nor is it what the Mayor has represented is in the Public Interest.

Your letter indicates city employees entered into oral agreements with property owners to not comply with THP regulations; such oral agreements are “void” under LAMC 152.07.F.

Who is the contractor responsible for the hazardous material abatement in unit 15 and the building that is supposed to be listed on the THP application for unit 15? The lead and asbestos dust could be seen tracked into the hallways and the parking lot and pictures of the apartment door show there was no posting of construction hours and the door was not sealed to keep lead and asbestos dust out of the hallways, effecting my health and safety, and constituting unsafe work practices that the city has ignored.

“Now Mayor Eric Garcetti has recently claimed the city has strengthened (sic) the THP regulations, but these are the same regulations the city did not enforce for units 6, 1, 18, 10, 11, 15 etc at this location, which the city employees named herein have admitted.” 

Please supply me with a list of all apartments for the last ten years across the city where the city knew units were subject to primary renovations, where primary renovation occurred within 60 days of the unit being occupied, and which tenants did NOT receive the THP application.

These are the city employees who have admitted their $100,000 plus job is to make sure tenants DO NOT receive the THP application and do not receive the permanent relocation monies while they are tenants. Your employees have breached their duty and are guilty of a misdemeanor and liable for treble damages. “Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under the provisions of this chapter shall be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months or both. Each violation of any provision of this chapter and each day during which such violation is committed, or continues, shall constitute a separate offense.” LAMC section 152.07.

Due to my communications to the city since 2014, and the city’s own documentation, the city had actual and constructive knowledge of primary renovations occurring to numerous units in the building. The city HCIDLA had actual and constructive knowledge of its mandatory duty to not clear any permit for primary renovations unless a THP application had been submitted and approved. LAMC 152.03.A.2.a. The letter of Galardi indicates this has been a long standing and current practice of the city Los Angeles HCIDLA not to enforce the THP regulations, to the continuing detriment of Los Angeles rent control tenants.

The intercoms in unit 9, 8, 5 are unusable; the building is thus substandard. The owner cannot collect rents in a substandard building. The city cannot collect an SCEP fee for a building that is substandard.

Your papers admit knowledge that unit 15 was occupied by tenant within the 60 days prior to the start of primary renovations yet the owner did not serve the notice of primary renovations nor did the owner file the required THP. The THP must be served on the tenant whether the tenant takes the temporary or permanent relocation option. The THP was never served on tenant unit 15.

City employee Robert Galardi Admits City Discrimination , Corruption and Criminal Conspiracy Against Tenant Rights 

The LAMC does not give you the authority to disregard the THP procedures. Your letter does not comply with the requirements of the city THP program. Your letter is not acceptable as a resolution to the issues herein or the claim for damages against your department.

All rights reserved.

[Tenant name and phone redacted]

c: Los Angeles Police Department; Los Angeles County District Attorney; Rushmore Cervantes thru HCIDLA; LB Property Management thru Julie Cross; Roberto Aldabe, Daniel V. Gomez, Director; David Whitehurst

LAMC SEC. 152.07. REMEDIES. 

(Added by Ord. No. 176,544, Eff. 5/2/05.)
A.
A landlord who fails to abide by the terms of an accepted Tenant Habitability Plan shall be denied individual rent adjustments under Section 151.07 A.1.(d) of this Code, absent extenuating circumstances.

C. Any person who willfully or knowingly with the intent to deceive, makes a false statement or representation, or knowingly fails to disclose a material fact in any plan or notice required under this article, or in any declaration, application, hearing or appeal permitted under this article, including oral or written evidence presented in support thereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under the provisions of this chapter shall be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months or both. Each violation of any provision of this chapter and each day during which such violation is committed, or continues, shall constitute a separate offense.

E. Any person who breaches any duty or obligation set forth in Section 152.06 of this Code shall be liable in a civil action by any person, organization or entity, for all actual damages, special damages in an amount not to exceed the greater of twice the amount of actual damages or $5,000, and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs as determined by the court. Damages of three times the amount of the actual damages may be awarded in a civil action for willful failure to comply with the payment obligations, to provide safe, decent and sanitary temporary replacement housing, or to allow a tenant to reoccupy a rental unit once the primary work is completed.

F. Any agreement, whether written or oral, waiving any of the provisions contained in this article shall be void as contrary to public policy.

SEC. 152.02. DEFINITIONS. (Added by Ord. No. 176,544, Eff. 5/2/05.) 

The following words and phrases, whenever used in this article, shall be construed as defined in this section. Words and phrases not defined here shall be construed as defined in Sections 12.03, 151.02 and 162.02 of this Code, if defined in those sections.

Notice of Primary Renovation Work. Written notice, served by the landlord upon a tenant or tenant household at least 60 days, or as otherwise modified pursuant to Section 152.04, prior to the commencement of any Primary Renovation Work or Related Work and using a form established by the Department, advising the tenant of forthcoming Primary Renovation Work and Related Work, the impact of such work on the tenant, and measures the landlord will take to mitigate the impact on the tenant. (Amended by Ord. No. 183,893, Eff. 11/22/15.) 

SEC. 152.03. PROCEDURE FOR UNDERTAKING PRIMARY RENOVATION WORK. (Added by Ord. No. 176,544, Eff. 5/2/05.) 

A. Building Permits. 

1. No landlord shall undertake Primary Renovation Work without first obtaining a permit, pursuant to Sections 91.106, 92.0129, 92.0132, 93.0201, 94.103, or 95.112.2 of this Code. This requirement applies to all Primary Renovation Work, regardless of whether such work is eligible for a rent adjustment under any of the provisions of Section 151.07 A.1. of this Code and regardless of which provision of that subdivision, if any, is intended to be used as a ground for seeking a rent adjustment following the completion of the work.

2. The Department shall clear a landlord’s application for a permit for Primary Renovation Work if both of the following conditions have been met:

a. The landlord has submitted a Tenant Habitability Plan which, in accordance with Subsection C. of this section, the Department finds to adequately mitigate the impact of Primary Renovation Work and any Related Work upon affected tenants; and

b. The landlord has submitted a declaration documenting service to affected tenants of both a Notice of Primary Renovation Work and a copy of the non-confidential portions of the Tenant Habitability Plan.

SEC. 152.04. NOTICE AND SERVICE REQUIREMENTS. (Added by Ord. No. 176,544, Eff. 5/2/05.) 

After the Department accepts the Tenant Habitability Plan, a landlord shall serve a copy of the Tenant Habitability Plan, Notice of Primary Renovation Work, a summary of the provisions of this article and, if applicable, a permanent relocation agreement form on any tenant affected by the Primary Renovation Work. Service of these items shall be provided in the manner prescribed by Section 1162 of the California Code of Civil Procedure and at least 60 days prior to the date on which the Primary Renovation Work and any Related Work is scheduled to begin.

SEC. 161.702. ORDERS. (Added by Ord. No. 173,011, Eff. 1/30/00.) 

Whenever the Department determines by inspection that any existing building or dwelling unit, subject to this article, or portion thereof, is in violation of this article, the Department shall order the violation corrected. If the Department determines that the building or dwelling unit is substandard pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3, then the order shall declare the building or dwelling unit to be substandard pursuant to that section.

The order shall be provided to the owner on a standard form which in plain language states the violations found and the sections of this Code with which the property is not in compliance. The order shall inform the owner that failure to correct the violation may result in additional inspection fees pursuant to Division 9 of this article or rent withholding as provided by Section 161.903.3 for failure to pay those fees, inclusion in REAP and/or rent reduction as specified in Section 162.04, inclusion in the Urgent Repair Program as specified in Section 50.00C or any successor program, relocation assistance as specified in Section 161.805(7), property management training as specified in Section 154.00 of this Code, inclusion in the Receivership Program, increased frequency of inspections as provided by 161.602.1, eviction protections as provided by Sections 151.09 and 161.806, prohibited rent increases as provided by Section 161.807, criminal prosecution or any other enforcement action. If the order declares the building or dwelling unit to be substandard, then it shall comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 17980(d). (Para. Amended by Ord. No. 173,810, Eff. 4/16/01.) 

The order shall be served on the owner by first class mail. A copy of the order shall be provided to each affected residential unit in the manner prescribed by Subdivision (a) of California Health and Safety Code Section 17980.6.

SEC. 161.703. VACANT UNITS. (Amended by Ord. No. 181,744, Eff. 7/15/11.) 

A vacant unit in a property subject to this Article need not comply with orders under this Section, provided that a notice is recorded against the property declaring that the unit is and shall remain vacant, and provided that the unit is secured against unauthorized entry. If a dwelling unit declared to be vacant is rented, no rent is due or owing for that dwelling unit. The tenant may assert this Section as an affirmative defense to any unlawful detainer action brought based on nonpayment of rent.

GC 815.6. Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the public entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable diligence to discharge the duty.

Attachments 

2017-3-6 Letter from HCID Galardi.pdf (911.87KB)

Mayor Garcetti’s City Employees Robert Galardi and David Whitehurst Admit City’s Racist and Corrupt THP Scam

[Editor Note: the federal HUD, the California Department Fair Employment and Housing, the County District Attorney Office, and the Los Angeles Police department, and the Los Angeles Apartment Owners Association have known about these racist corrupt conditions for years and did nothing but participate. This email has been redacted. The city has indicated that this email was received. It is subject to a Public Records Request. This email above is response to a March 6, 2017 letter from Los Angeles City’s Robert Galardi, Chief Inspector, and his cc to Rushmore D. Cervantes, Roberto Aldape, Daniel V. Gomez, David Whitehurst, on city letterhead HCIDLA Eric Garcetti, Mayor, Regulatory and Compliance Code Bureau, 213-275-3493. The letter states that the Principal Inspector is David Whitehurst at 213-252-2882. In part, the Galardi letter ignores the THP regulations that no primary renovation work can proceed without clearance from the rent stabilization department — of which there was no THP for numerous apartments that were occupied shortly before renovations began—- and Galardi also states unit #15 was “vacant” at the time of the Feb. 15 2017 inspection by code enforcement so he claims “no THP was required for work being or having been done inside unit #15 as there are no habitability issues associated with an unoccupied unit”. Galardi ignores the habitability effect of noise and hazardous dust on over 17 other tenants in the building and he ignores the city’s obligation to assure that the owner filed and served the THP 60 days before renovations started.  No THP means no permits means no work can be performed. Since the city was made aware that no THP was served on the tenant before she vacated,  a pattern and practice of the city, Galardi is admitting that the tenant was never advised of her rights to temporary or permanent relocation and the tenant was never given the required estimated $19,000 in relocation monies. Galardi does not mention any of this in his letter. Discrimination and corruption under Mayor Eric Garcetti.]

Updated March 7, 2017

“The housing department has determined this building to be substandard per
section and 24436.5 of the State Revenue and Taxation Code. When a building is
determined to be substandard as defined under Section 17920.3 of the Health and
Safety Code, a notice of non-compliance is recorded at the Los Angeles County
Recorders Office (Health and Safety Code section 17985).” September 22, 2014.
Issuing inspector Richard Brinson, city of Los Angeles. “Notice and Order to
Comply.”

[posted at 1522 Hi Point St Apartments 90035]

Updated December 24 2016

Certainly tenants who are white at the property, and the non-Blacks, have the use and benefit of intercom and parking stall, and certainly those tenants reasonably and justifiably place significant and substantial importance on such housing services since they signed the lease and pay over $1700 per month for such housing services. I can hear the voices of those now long dead Blacks in Alabama, ‘Oh, Mister Charlie, I just want me an Intercom boss, and some maintenance, and maybe a parking spot for my car, I am on my knees begging you boss.’ And the white plantation owner smiles down on the Darky and whips him for daring to ask a question. Well what year was that? 2015? The plantation owner continues, ‘And don’t even think of going to court, Boy, cause we gonna lynch you before you get there!’

Taken from “How does a Ham-Jew-DNA-Kushite Black American qualify for intercom?”  Click here to see page

Update October 14 2016

Los Angeles, California officials say Black tenant perceived as “Nigger” not entitled to full and equal housing privileges. Select tenants are named. United States Central District Court case CV16-03236 JLS. Filed May 11, 2016. Johnson v. City of Los Angeles, et al.

Defendants Vow Retaliation Against Black who claimed Racism and Terrorism

Attorneys Thomas Watters and Jared Barry claim they will seek court fines of over $25,000 against a Black Los Angeles tenant after the tenant complained about housing discrimination and retaliation at 1522 Hi Point St 90035. Those attorneys represent Hi Point Apts, LLC and Williams Real Estate Advisors.

The tenant had complained for years about a non working intercom and denial of tandem parking stall.

In a separate complaint the State Bar of California has been asked to revoke the certification [to practice law] of all attorneys involved with the case.

It appears the attorneys are saying claims of racism and terrorism are “frivolous”; it appears the attitude of attorneys is what caused some tenants to move out of the 18 unit Faircrest Heights building.

Attorneys for the defendants are ATTORNEY FOR COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AND ALAN CHEN Renee E Jensen     lduarte@fwhb.com, rjensen@fwhb.com; ATTORNEY FOR WILLIAMS REAL ESTATE ADVISORS, Inc. Thomas L Watters     twatters@hartwattersandcarter.com;  ATTORNEY FOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA Martin Ageson     martin.ageson@doj.ca.gov, marsha.petty@doj.ca.gov; ATTORNEY FOR CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CHARLES GARCIA, BARBARA BRASCIA, RICHARD BRINSON, ARMIDA-OLGUIN FLORES Robert P Moore     robert.p.moore@lacity.org, julie.martinez@lacity.org; ATTORNEY FOR HI POINT APTS, LLC, WALTER BARRATT, CLIFF RENFREW Jared A Barry     jared@barrylawgroup.com

Update May 18 2016

Jerry Brown’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing Charged with Racism 

Separate and Unequal Housing is illegal is my rebuttal re DFEH case 712769-195727 re Intercom 

from tenant apt 9

Wed 5/18/2016 9:55 PM Inbox

To:Ravi@DFEH Rangi ;

Cc: Debbie L. Harmon ; Ali Maintenance ; welcomehome@williamsrea.com ; Rep. Karen Bass ; Rep. Karen Bass ;

Dear DFEH:
1. This shall memorialize the events of today.

2. It is unfortunate we were not able to have our phone talk today due to the DFEH institutionalized racism that prevents it from engaging in a mutually arranged tape recorded conversation. What does the DFEH have to hide as a public entity?

3. This email is not intended as a resolution of any claims or court causes of action against the property owner, city and county of Los Angeles government entities, nor any HUD complaint against the DFEH, nor any other person or entity the subject of this complaint.

4. “No work order. No talk. ” This means that DFEH has the authority to order the property owner to create a work order that directs the property owner to repair, replace, or remove the intercom by date to be established. No government whether it is local, state, or federal, has the authority to direct the property owner to continue to engage in unlawful “denial of equal terms, conditions, advantages, and privileges” to the Black tenants of apt nine. No government entity has the authority to deny myself as a Black male the equal protection of the law.

unlawful “denial of equal terms, conditions, advantages, and privileges” to the Black tenants

5. My rebuttal, if it is not clear to you, is that I need to see a written copy of the response from the property owner and whoever else they are aligned with. My rebuttal is that I need to see a work order from the owner directing maintenance to repair or replace the intercom. “Work order”means that the owner will direct the intercom repair to be addressed.

6. Your email of May 17 2016 at 4:07 pm stated, “The Respondents are not denying that they have not installed an intercom in your unit. Thus there is no work order to provide you.” My rebuttal here is that for clarification, there is an existing intercom that was installed probably 1973. The owner inspected the intercoms circa 2014, and if they were working which I believe mine was, then it is he who disconnected it. Around May 2014, the owner intentionally decided to install a different intercom system and would do so from April 2014 to circa December 2016 into 14 units out of 18. He intentionally did not repair or replace intercom apt 9. His action to harm tenants apt 9 may not have been intentional to cause harm— I believe it was intentional —-but nevertheless it did injure apt 9 Black tenants in that we were left without a working intercom while those apts around us—to be filled by mostly white tenants—received working intercoms. Your statement therefore does not move the complaint forward, because getting the intercom working is one of the purposes of the Complaint. See HUD below: “Example: An Hispanic couple inquires about an apartment for rent. The building manager tells them that no “Latinos” will be accepted as tenants. In this case, showing that there were no available apartments in the subject building on the day in question would not invalidate the complainants’ claim of injury and would not affect the complainants’ standing to file a complaint because the effect of the discriminatory statement amounts to an injury under the Act.” * As I have inquired about the intercom and the tandem parking, such inquiries denied a good faith response by the owner, city, and county.

7. From the emails you have written me Ravi [ Ravinder Rangi ], you had plenty of time, without such blatant abuse of taxpayer’s monies, to fully copy or detail the owner’s position to the DFEH Complaint, but you have not done so. But isn’t that the way institutionalized racism by the government works—you cannot blame me for your incompetence. You have no excuse not to have given me me a fair and non- arbitrary opportunity to respond after seeing the owner answer.

8. Whether the owner acted intentionally, directly, or indirectly, or by circumstance, the result is still the same that as Black American I am denied the “equal terms and conditions, advantages, and privileges” of an intercom, and the resulting payments of damages according to local, state, and federal codes, laws, and statutes.

As I have inquired about the intercom and the tandem parking, such inquiries denied a good faith response by the owner, city, and county.

9. I have seen the owner and he is not blind. He must take responsibility, and he is responsible, for the maintenance of all fixtures, services, and appliances (sic) in the building that he put there or inherited. Therefore, his actions to deny intercoms to at least three African Americans, and one Asian, is clearly racist and intentional to cause harm, and he is aware of it whether I tell him or not.

10. He has no legitimate business reason for not fixing the intercom of apt 9 within 48 hours of the date of this email. He cannot use anything any Ku Klux Klan run government agency says as his reason for not repairing or replacing the intercom.

11. The owner does not need two years to repair or replace an intercom [he has proven that by the ones he has replaced], nor will it take $17,000 to replace an intercom unit that costs about $40.00.

12. I have heard no word from you on the similar situation tandem parking or the DFEH complaints against the city and county so I assume those complaints are ripe for court action, whether the DFEH proceeds or not.

13. The damages I have demanded from the city of Los Angeles and county of Los Angeles, accruing monthly, are …. joint and several, not including exemplary and punitive damages. If your decision does not address that, then the court action will.

14.

a. I am a member of a protected class
b. I was qualified for an apartment with an intercom

c. I was rejected from housing with an intercom
d. The housing service intercoms are still available

e. I have been injured.

15. I quote from the Ch 3 HUD Jurisdiction document, 8024.1: 

“To establish standing the complainant need only claim to have suffered an injury as a result of the alleged discriminator’s actions. It is not required that the complainant prove his or her injury as part of a showing of his or her right to file a complaint under the Act.” [Emphasis added.]

“Even in cases where the complainant should have been rejected for non-discriminatory reasons, the complainant’s perception that the denial was because of his or her race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, or handicap is sufficient injury to establish standing.”

“Example: An Hispanic couple inquires about an apartment for rent. The building manager tells them that no “Latinos” will be accepted as tenants. In this case, showing that there were no available apartments in the subject building on the day in question would not invalidate the complainants’ claim of injury and would not affect the complainants’ standing to file a complaint because the effect of the discriminatory statement amounts to an injury under the Act.” *

“To establish standing a complainant may claim a tangible or an intangible injury. Moving expenses, or the cost of a home inspection or credit report, are examples of tangible damages a complainant may incur.”

“Standing in housing discrimination cases is an expansive concept and it is not atypical for one case to include multiple plaintiffs and defendants. Standing is available to any individual or group that can show  “injury in fact” from any discriminatory housing practice.  Whereas employment discrimination standing is limited to applicants and employees (also, in limited circumstances, independent contractors), standing for housing discrimination claims is not similarly limited to individuals applying for housing or already living in housing, but also may include groups such as fair housing organizations or testers. ”   “Prohibited acts of housing discrimination include: a refusal to sell, rent, or negotiate for housing; the provision of inferior terms, conditions, or privileges of housing; discrimination in lending; harassment; and refusal to provide reasonable accommodation for a person with a disability. Certain types of communications about housing are also illegal: falsely representing that housing is unavailable; inquiring about a person’s race or sexual orientation; or making any statement that indicates a preference, limitation, or discrimination for or against a protected group.”

“Housing discrimination can be proven by intent or by adverse impact. For a case of intentional discrimination, the FEHA specifies that a violation “may be established by direct or circumstantial evidence.” In cases where direct evidence of discriminatory intent is lacking, courts apply the burden- shifting analysis borrowed from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).”-2 [emphasis added]

From DFEH website: “What remedies are available to persons who file complaints of housing discrimination?” 

“Housing discrimination can be proven by intent or by adverse impact. For a case of intentional discrimination, the FEHA specifies that a violation “may be established by direct or circumstantial evidence.”

The remedies available for housing discrimination include: Sale or rental of the housing accommodation
Elimination of the discriminatory practice
Policy changes

Reasonable accommodation

Out-of-pocket expenses
Actual damages, including damages for emotional distress

Punitive damages Attorney fees and costs

* Regarding the intercom, the property owner and /or his agents (city and county et al.) have made discriminatory statements or actions about the intercom that amount to an injury to myself under the [HUD] Act.
The property owner by his actions has admitted to illegal separate and unequal housing. 

All rights reserved.

[Tenant name address and phone redacted]
c: Hi Point Apts LLC Ali Mozannar, Maintenance 

[Editor Note: The DFEH had requested Black man to make a rebuttal but refused to provide Black Man a copy of the property owner’s response to the complaint so the Black man could have fair opportunity. The DFEH closed the complaint without providing Black man the property owner response. Typical government KKK shit; nothing new.]

Ravinder Rangi: Racist.

[Excerpts]

Update April 13 2016

DFEH Discrimination Complaint Filed

On April 11, 2016 the California Department of Fair Employment filed formal charges of race, and age discrimination against Hi Point Apts LLC regarding the 1522 Hi Point St 90035 Faircrest Heights property. Also generally mentioned in the complaint is the Los Angeles city code enforcement and the Los Angeles County Public Health department. The charges are denial of equal terms and conditions after numerous Black tenants were denied a working intercom but whites had the free use of intercoms. LAHCID employees Barbara Brascia, Richard Brinson, and numerous other city and county employees have refused to answer questions about the property. The tandem parking stall practice at the property has also been complained by tenants as discriminatory.

1522 Hi Point Street Los Angeles, CA   90035- Hot Pads

1522 Hi Point Street Los Angeles, CA   90035- Trulia

1522 Hi Point Street Los Angeles, CA   90035- Zillow

1522 Hi Point Street Los Angeles, CA   90035- Zumper

1522 Hi Point Street Los Angeles, CA   90035- Redfin

DFEH Discrimination Complaint Filed

Update March 19 2016

Hi Point Apts is Unsanitary, Substandard, and Unsafe

LA county Public Health Feb 10 2016 have said they have no authority over the wiring in the 1522 Hi Point St 90035 building.

Health and Safety code 17920.3 sections(a)(13) and (d) and (i) give the city and county employees jurisdiction, but as of March 16 talk with city code enforcement, and after over two years of defective security system intercom wiring, government employees maintain they have no jurisdiction under H & S code 17920.3. City employee Richard Brinson, Le Taun J. Cotton, Veronica Bauchman, David Burkhead, Richard Jackson, and Udo O. Nwachuku all claim the city and county employees have no jurisdiction to enforce defective and improperly maintained wiring.

click here to read “Tenant News”

Since there is general dilapidation abandoned vehicle and improper maintenance of the wiring and construction materials, the Health and Safety code 17920.3 declares the building to be “unsanitary” and “substandard” and “unsafe”. Tenant security is at risk.

Click for Youtube Video on Hi Point Apts

Update August 2 2015

as emailed and posted to the internet:

My question to [Los Angeles] Mayor Eric Garcetti, Raymond Cervantes, Agassi Topchian* and Ian Yeom*, et al, is in these times of racial strife across this country of the United States, should any Black American be denied a housing service?”

…in these times of racial strife across this country of the United States, should any Black American be denied a housing service?”

Update July 29 2015

The actions of Mayor Eric Garcetti, Robert P. Moore, Mike Feuer, and LAHCID prove that they believe that Blacks in Los Angeles are not entitled to Fair Housing. Complaints filed with the State Bar of California ask that the license to practice law be revoked for attorneys Mike Feuer and Robert P. Moore.

Update July 28 2015

As told to Senator 

Lois Wolk and Los Angeles City Council President Herb Wesson.

From an email exchange between two tenants at 1522 Hi Point Street.

[Folks, you will really have to read between the lines on this one. Everything being said is based on a series of emails and responses to those emails. For purposes here I am only excerpting the “responses”, not the emails from which the responses arises. This is copied from the actual letter response and subsequent email that has been forwarded to Los Angeles city council president Herb Wesson and United States Senator Lois Wolk. Bold subheadings without quotes do not appear in the original response. The first of the two tenants used the “t” word but I have substituted the word “monsters. Otherwise, no words have been changed.]

Subjects: tenant rights, discrimination, civil rights, unrest, public, policy, which tenants are for discrimination and which tenants are against discrimination, monsters

[From the original response:]

“The Retaliatory Emails”

Thank you for your letter that evidences the unlawful discrimination practiced by the owner  Hi Point Apts LLC in this building.

The reason why I am cc others in this email is because I have reason to believe that you act on behalf of the owner and that I do not believe you wrote your emails without assistance.

I know that some in the building do not share my appreciation or determination as regards tenants’ rights and civil rights.  I work for tenants rights for all tenants but because I do so does not mean that I disregard the rights of the landlord.

Uncivilized animals

What kind of uncivilized animals do we exist with who cannot even respond to simple phone messages, emails, and letters over a twelve month period as [Hi Point Apts LLC] Walter, Cliff, and his clan do?

I don’t buy that tenants are moving out as their main reason is the rent amount; I think the unspoken code is they move out because of unfair treatment from Hi Point Apts LLC.

You say “we”; as in conspiracy, could you provide the full names of which tenants, city government employees and/officials, et al.,  you are speaking of when you say “we”. What evidence do you have that you feel being in “cahoots” is a negative thing? I provide you a list of other tenants I have talked to: tenant #5, tenant #15, tenant #1, tenant #4, tenant #16: are these tenants in “cahoots” also?

Threatening?

How do you specifically define an “active” threat and what specifically did tenant [name redacted]  say since you didn’t mention in both your emails to me his specific words you feel are threatening?

it is unfortunate that a government employee like yourself would describe the pursuit of civil rights as “immature” when it is probably an oath you take to uphold the US Constitution and all laws, no matter how “immature” you feel they are;

and all the people who fight against police brutality would probably not appreciate you calling their efforts “immature”; this is what the people of the state of California say about pursuit of rights you call “immature”[I don’t know if you know the difference but housing discrimination is not “immature”, it is unlawful]:

“It is recognized that the practice of …… discriminating … foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the state of the fullest utilization of its capacities for development and advancement, and substantially and adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general.  Further, the practice of discrimination because of 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 in housing accommodations is declared to be against public policy. This part shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state for the protection of the welfare, health, and peace of the people…” Government Code 12920.

….you are supposed to protect us civilians, not fight us!

If you want to tell everyone in the building your feelings about tenant [redacted] , [your word “monsters”] go right ahead, be my guest; and while you are at it, tell the neighbors on both sides of the building. I am sure they would appreciate you.

You may not threaten

“You may not intimidate or threaten any person because that person is engaging in activities designed to make other persons aware of, or encouraging such other persons to exercise, rights granted or protected by the Fair Housing laws.”  Summarized from the California Fair Employment and Housing Act website.

Discriminating foments domestic strife and unrest

It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating in the terms of employment for these reasons foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the state of the fullest utilization of its capacities for development and advancement, and substantially and adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general

This part shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state for the protection of the welfare, health, and peace of the people of this state. [Emphasis added. See Similar Housing Govt 12955-12956.2]

As told to Senator

Lois Wolk and Los Angeles City Council President Herb Wesson.

[This is excerpted and redacted. Only one word “monsters” is replacement for the actual “t” word used. I refrain from using the “t” word. Copies of the complete emails can be ordered from Los Angeles Council president Herb Wesson and United States Senator Lois Wolk under the open records act.]

Update July 25 

HOUSING SERVICES DENIED-

Los Angeles City Attorney Office Robert Moore and Mike Feuer under the direction of Mayor Eric Garcetti continue to reject damage claims seeking housing rights for Black tenants at 1522 Hi Point St 90035. The city government is by its conduct saying Black tenants are not entitled to housing civil rights in the city of Los Angeles. The claims arise after the illegal ‘plantation slum lord’ treatment of Blacks at 1522 Hi Point St by owner Hi Point Apts and city government who refuses to grant tenants rent reductions due to loss of intercom and loss of tandem parking stalls. Numerous discrimination claims have been filed against LAHCID, with state bar discipline complaints pending against Robert Moore and Mike Feuer, and a Department Fair Employment and Housing Complaint filed against Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department. [As seen on Facebook.]

City Council members are:  Gilbert Cedillo, Paul Krekorian , Bob Blumenfield, Tom LaBonge, Paul Koretz, Nury Martinez, Felipe Fuentes, Bernard Parks, Curren D. Price, Jr., Herb J. Wesson, Jr., Mike Bonin, Mitchell Englander, Mitch O’Farrell, Jose Huizar, Joe Buscaino.

Update July 10 2015

An Uphill Battle

As seen on Facebook:

Quoting Theologian Martin Niemoller”

OCTERBER 9, 2011:

“In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade-unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade-unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up.” 
—Attributed to Rev. Martin Niemoller Epitat Of A BMNW LET ME DIE WITH A JOB APPLICATION IN MY HAND!

If it’s God’s Will for me I will be filling out applications for employment until the moment of my departure from this cynical realm? https://vimeo.com/24078770

MLK powerful speech

SHALOM,

Ambassador Charles Linder Floyd >

Update July 5 2015

“Jerry Brown’s DFEH Says Blacks Not Entitled to Civil Rights Protection- ” 

Case 37638-156612- Supplement to the Complaint

From: [Tenant-Redacted]                                                                                                                    Sent: Tue 6/30/15 1:07 PM                                                                                                                  To: Noah DFEH (noah.frigault@dfeh.ca.gov)                                                                                  Cc: councilmember.wesson@lacity.org (councilmember.wesson@lacity.org); Debbie L. Harmon (debbie.l.harmon@hud.gov)

The Torture Chamber for Blacks at Hi Point Apts

Dear DFEH:

Your letter of June 23 2015 is not acceptable as a resolution of the discrimination claims, and derivative claims, I have presented.

* Select Black tenants at the property, including myself, after over 12 months, still are damaged by being denied a working intercom, continuing

* Select Black tenants at the property, including myself, after over 12 months, still have not

received a rent reduction because of the non-working intercom, continuing

* As a Ham-Jew-Dna Kushite/Black, I have been damaged by numerous illegal rent

increases, continuing

* As a Ham-Jew-Dna Kushite/Black, continuing, I am damaged by being denied a tandem

parking stall

* As a Ham-Jew-Dna Kushite/Black, continuing, I am damaged by being denied a rent

reduction due to the loss of a tandem parking stall

* The DFEH has failed to exercise reasonable diligence to protect Blacks like myself from the risk of injury at 1522 Hi Point Street 90035.

The articles below are illustrative that after as in this case a prima facie case has been established, the DFEH is then authorized not to ask for more details or proof, but obligated to seek a response from the Respondent(s). The DFEH has failed to seek a “burden shifting” response from the Respondents. This is the burden shifting rule under disparate impact claims.

“Standing in housing discrimination cases is an expansive concept and it is not atypical for one case to include multiple plaintiffs and defendants. Standing is available to any individual or group that can show “injury in fact” from any discriminatory housing practice. 19 Whereas employment discrimination standing is limited to applicants and employees (also, in limited circumstances, independent contractors), standing for housing discrimination claims is not similarly limited to individuals applying for housing oralready living in housing, but also may include groups such as fair housing organizations or testers. ”

“Prohibited acts of housing discrimination include: a refusal to sell, rent, or negotiate for housing; the provision of inferior terms, conditions, or privileges of housing; discrimination in lending; harassment; and refusal to provide reasonable accommodation for a person with a disability.

Certain types of communications about housing are also illegal: falsely representing that housing is unavailable; inquiring about a person’s race or sexual orientation; or making any statement that indicates a preference, limitation, or discrimination for or against a protected group.”

“Housing discrimination can be proven by intent or by adverse impact. For a case of intentional discrimination, the FEHA specifies that a violation “may be established by direct or circumstantial evidence.” In cases where direct evidence of discriminatory intent is lacking, courts apply the burden shifting analysis borrowed from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).”[emphasis added]

Making and Meeting the Prima Facie Housing Case

https://www.uakron.edu/dotAsset/f6c61603-59f7-4dbc-ac89-98c734081c5c.pdf

Anatomy of Fair Housing Case- State Bar thru DFEH

http://www.dfeh.ca.gov/res/docs/CivilRightsYear/Articles/AnatomyofAFairHousingCase.pdf

Please reverse your June 23 decision on the above grounds. All rights reserved.

[Tenant- Name and address redacted]

c: HUD; City Council Herb Wesson

Update July 5 2015

“Jerry Brown’s DFEH Says Blacks Not Entitled to Civil Rights Protection-

Case 37638-156612- Supplement to the Complaint”

From: [Tenant- name redacted]

Sent: Tue 6/30/15 7:01 AM

To: Noah DFEH (noah.frigault@dfeh.ca.gov)

Cc: councilmember.wesson@lacity.org (councilmember.wesson@lacity.org); Debbie L. Harmon (debbie.l.harmon@hud.gov); Charles Floyd (thefirstjew@yahoo.com); Ambassador Charles Linder Floyd (thekushite@gmail.com)

Re: [Redacted]/Hi Point Apts LLC

You state in your June 23 2015 letter in support of refusing to provide protection to me as a Black, “rejected Intake” complaint:

“Please provide evidence that the harm you’ve experienced was because of a protected class such as race color or national origin age disability sexual orientation religion or any other protected basis and under the Fair Employment and Housing Act and/or related laws.”

Without waiving the fact I have already done that, I quote from the Ch 3 HUD Jurisdiction document, 8024.1:

“To establish standing the complainant need only claim to have suffered an injury as a result of the alleged discriminator’s actions. It is not required that the complainant prove his or her injury as part of a showing of his or her right to file a complaint under the Act.” [Emphasis added.]

“Even in cases where the complainant should have been rejected for non-discriminatory reasons, the complainant’s perception that the denial was because of his or her race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, or handicap is sufficient injury to establish standing.”

“Example: An Hispanic couple inquires about an apartment for rent. The building manager tells them that no “Latinos” will be accepted as tenants. In this case, showing that there were no available apartments in the subject building on the day in question would not invalidate the complainants’ claim of injury and would not affect the complainants’standing to file a complaint because the effect of the discriminatory statement amounts to an injury under the Act.”

“To establish standing a complainant may claim a tangible or an intangible injury. Moving expenses, or the cost of a home inspection or credit report, are examples of tangible damages a complainant may incur.”

My documents to DFEH comply with the standard required under HUD above: I claim that I have suffered an injury (i.e. tangible loss of housing parking stall valued at $200 per month, loss of intercom service, loss of monies due to illegal rent increase, etc.), I perceived that the denials of parking, rent reduction, and intercom, are because of my race, Black, and age over 45, and because I complained of unlawful discrimination. I have also quoted the Fair Employment Act and Unruh and 42 USC 1983 and Equal Protection Clause.

I request that your June 23 decision be reversed and that you proceed with this standing Complaint without further prejudicial delay.

All rights reserved.

[Tenant-Name Redacted]

Attached copy of June 18 2015 at 10:49 pm email to DFEH re “Supplement…”

c: HUD;

    City council President Herb Wesson

Racism at

1522 Hi Point Apts 

Intercom Repairs Needed Today- April 30 2015

From: [redacted]

Sent: Thu 4/30/15 11:40 PM

To: marilynlondonmi@gmail.com (marilynlondonmi@gmail.com); Hi LLC (walter.barratt@gmail.com); Cliff Renfrew (cliffrenfrew@gmail.com)Cc: councilmember.wesson@lacity.org (councilmember.wesson@lacity.org); HRC Info(info@housingrightscenter.org); Teri@DFEH Houston (teri.houston@dfeh.ca.gov); amozannar@gmail.com (amozannar@gmail.com); LAHD RSO (hcidla.rso@lacity.org); RSO Contact (hcidla.rso.central@lacity.org)

Dear Manager, Owner, Renfrew, and Maintenance:

The Apt 9 door entry system intercom is still not repaired; it has been in the non-working condition since before April 2014. I will not bore you with the numerous dates, emails, and letters that I have previously reported this to the owner, but owner Walter Barratt had actual and constructive knowledge that he intentionally installed intercoms in certain apartments and did not fix ours in apt 9, as well as he/employees/agents intentionally did not fix intercoms in units 10, 15, 18, 8, 6, and 5. In fact it was just reported again to him and Cliff yesterday about 1:00 p.m. and he and Cliff ignored inquiries about the intercom. So I have no choice but to contact yourself and maintenance person Ali Mozannar directly, and I am sure both of you have been aware of the intercom situation for a long time.

This complaint to you is that our intercom needs to be fixed today.

I am aware that city government officials participate in this conspiracy to deny the tenants of apt 9 equal protection of the law. Our right to quiet enjoyment of our apartment has been violated by the substantial failure to repair our intercom, of which we pay for maintenance every month thru our rent check. California Codes 3304; 1942.5, 1940.2(a)(4)(b), 1942.6, 1940.4(b). The city government has also failed to exercise reasonable diligence to fulfill its duties in a resolve of this matter. I believe Walter and Cliff enjoy their discriminatory race based actions. 80% of the tenants who are white in this building have working intercoms; but 80% of the tenants that are Black/minority do not have working intercoms. I am also copying above the housing rights center and the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing. I ask that the councilperson Wesson contact the federal HUD on my behalf. I realize it is a long shot asking government agencies for help because such agencies themselves are at the forefront of institutionalized, pervasive, and intractable racial discrimination in this country.

A response by email or phone call is not acceptable as a resolution. If you need to contact me, use other means other than phone or email. All rights are reserved.

Tenant [name redacted]

1522 Hi point Street

Los Angeles, CA 90035

c: Mayor and Council thru email to council president Herb Wesson; DFEH; Housing Rights Center Contact info:

Hi Point Apts LLC

c/o Walter Barratt and Cliff Renfrew

226 Carroll Canal

Venice CA 90291-4578

Via Email Address and US Mail

Hi LLC ;

Cliff Renfrew ;

California Business Entity:

201406410177

Mayor Eric Garcetti and Council

c/o City Clerk

The Office of the City Attorney 800 City Hall East Claims section

200 N. Main Street Los Angeles, CA 90012

Via Email Address and US Mail

Los Angeles Housing Department

Rent Stabilization Division-Case Analysis

Rushmore D. Cervantes, General Manager

Javier Nunez

Raymond D. Chan

Frank Bush

Jeffery J. Daar, Chairperson

Tai Glenn, Vice Chairperson

Jose Oliva

Carole Brogdon

Leonora Gershman PittsPaula Leftwich

Jane Paul

Armida Olguin-Flores, Investigator

Araceli Sophia Gonzalez, Supervisor

HCIDLA

PO Box 57398

Los Angeles CA 90057-0398

Ali Mozannar, maintenance

amozzanar@gmail.com

818-335-8175

Marilyn London, Resident Manager

818-813-2204

marilynlondonml@gmail.com

Govt Code 815.6. Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the public entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable diligence to discharge the duty. [ref: Voting Registration and Voter Rights. Please vote in the next local election]

Intercom for

Whites only

April 30 2015

Update June 4 2015- Craiglist Ad for rent

“Just Beautifully Remodeled Modern 1 Bed Apt- HW Floors & Granite! 1522 HI Point St Apt 6, Los Angeles, CA   90035 – $1725/1 Br – RENOVATED- 1 Bed/1Bath – Hardwood Floors! New Kitchen! (Los Angeles)”

Here is a response that was sent to that advertisement.

“Your ad is false and deceptive in three areas. First, it is not a new property since it was built in 1973. Second, it is false and deceptive to say each apartment comes with one parking stall when in truth there are seven tandem parking stalls and some apartments have been assigned tandem parking stalls.

“Black tenants in particular have documented housing discrimination complaints to city officials over the past twelve months. At least one DFEH complaint is pending against the owner of this property as well as numerous code enforcement complaints. About 80% of the Black tenants in the building do not have working intercoms for over a year that the owner Hi Point Apts LLC refuses to address. About six tenants now out of 18 units do not have working intercoms for over 12 months and the owner also has refused to fix them or grant the required rent reduction. He even threatened tenants with a $50 parking fee that was an illegal rent increase. Currently he is also accused of illegally passing on a $17 rent increase after conspiring with city officials that the building was painted for $14,800 for 11,000 square feet when the building is only 7,500 square feet. The building contractor and property owner are under investigation for fraudulent business practices. Call the Mayor and Council for a list of the damage claims against this property. As the building is master metered, the civil code 1940.9 requires that the owner reach an agreement as to who will pay for utilities outside of the tenant’s unit. The owner has not offered anything in writing to advise tenants of their rights under 1940.9 or his obligations. It is false and deceptive for your ad to say “intercom system” when the system is dangerously not working for six tenants. There is also no front door peephole for the building. When this slum landlord was recently asked to provide receipts for materials and labor to fix the building, for which some tenants were required to pay a rent increase, the owner refused to provide receipts. He has been accused of making numerous illegal rent increases. His lack of communication disturbs tenant’s quiet enjoyment of the building. Being that the owner is from another country, he does not seem to have an appreciation for American law. I question the term you use “controlled entry” as if that is a safety feature. All tenants have a key to enter the front and rear of the building; the owner has added “keypad” entry that seems to be primarily for the benefit of non-residents like maintenance, visitors, delivery persons. Hardly sounds like controlled entry. The lack of front building door peephole shows what a slum landlord this owner is. He has also refused to grant tenants’ a rent reduction for when the building was without a resident manager last summer.”

LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL

City Council members are:  Gilbert Cedillo, Paul Krekorian , Bob Blumenfield, Tom LaBonge, Paul Koretz, Nury Martinez, Felipe Fuentes, Bernard Parks, Curren D. Price, Jr., Herb J. Wesson, Jr., Mike Bonin, Mitchell Englander, Mitch O’Farrell, Jose Huizar, Joe Buscaino.

Advertisements

9 Responses to Racism at 1522 Hi Point St 90035

  1. New video about Los Angeles Housing Discrimination. http://bit.ly/1rkKU9F

    Like

  2. Dude your fucking crazy. It’s idiots like you that take advantage of the system. Just move out. But no you are trying for some fucking lawsuit and trying to get some free money. Just move out and do society a favor by not wasting more time.

    Like

  3. Anonymous says:

    Fuck you you fucking idiot.
    Hope the owner sues yoh

    Like

  4. Pingback: What is a Home Worth? An Update on the Local Real Estate Market in Northeast Los Angeles - Real Estate Blog - Real Estate Blog

  5. Pingback: Racism at 1522 Hi Point St 90035 | LA Rent Control (RAC) and Permits (LADBS)

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s