1522 Hi Point Apartments is owned by Hi Point 1522 LLC, managed by Hi Point 1522 Managers LLC, managed by Hi Point 1522 Managers LLC, managed by Hi Point 1522 Managers Holdco LLC, managed by Todd Jacobs, associated with Hi Point 1522 TJ Entity LLC, managed by Anthony Jaffe. The property management company for this site is Power Property Management which is at 8885 Venice Blvd Ste 205 Los Angeles, CA 90034.
August 30, 2021
War with Newsom’s Department of
Fair Employment and Housing.
Why systemic racism thrives.
(CPRA (City of Los Angeles, California) #21-7569)
HCIDLA&Hi Point 1522 LLC Racism at 1522 Hi Point 90035. Dear City Clerk City of Los Angeles: WAR WITH GOVERNOR NEWSOM’S DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING. WHY SYSTEMIC RACISM THRIVES IN CALIFORNIA: RE DFEH case number 202009-11339723 JOHNSON V. HCIDLA:
In my attached original intake eight pages complaint to the DFEH dated 9/10/20, I mention the word “intercom” 25 times and the word “parking” 15 times. Yet in the attached 7/27/21 letter from Newsom’s Steve Lopez, the words “intercom” and “parking” are not mentioned at all. I believe those words are not mentioned because Newsom’s Steve Lopez is racist who is not able to act in an unbiased manner and he acts on behalf of the HCIDLA and the property owner Hi Point 1522 LLC and management Power Property Management Group.
Since Lopez left out the words parking and intercom, it appears he also cannot read or comprehend English, yet he maintains a high level position under the Governor’s staff.
My rebuttal email of August 25, 2021 clearly details the racial bias by Steve Lopez and the HCIDLA. See attached. (Aug 25 to DFEH and City Los Angeles government) “The biased Steve Lopez, state employee, gives little attention to the major issues of my complaint against the HCIDLA, and does not once in his “summary” mention the parking or intercom.
Due to bias under Governor Gavin Newsom.” Whether during an emergency like COVID, or not, parking is an important housing service in Los Angeles as well as intercom and maintenance as they are defined in the LAMC. The Mayor recently pointed out the importance of parking during the COVID emergency.
Parking is an important housing service that is used to entice applicants to apply for rentals. Hundreds of buildings across the city offer parking as included in the rent, or for an extra charge. Intercom service is equally important to tenants in multifamily dwellings as well as condos. Some intercoms are hooked to a fire alarm system, so the intercom has always been a health and safety device. Thousands of buildings across Los Angeles have intercom systems that link the front door to the tenants/owner’s unit.
Yet why does the state and city government tolerate the amount of racism that denies myself as a Black tenant the “full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services” of intercom, maintenance, and parking? The city clerk is requested to provide any and all documentations that indicates how many buildings in the city of Los Angeles include intercom systems; how many apartments/condos in the city of Los Angeles offer parking included in the rent or parking available for a fee. The owner has been unresponsive to my complaints. Malice, oppression, fraud. Sincerely, G. Juan Johnson.
2020-9-10 NEW DFEH RE HCIDLA.pdf
2021-7-27 Letter from DFEH Request for Rebuttal HCID.pdf 2021-8-25 Email Rebuttal to DFEH re HCIDLA.pdf
Received
August 30, 2021 via web Departments
City Clerk
August 25, 2021
Subject: Rebuttal to DFEH case number 202009-11339723. JOHNSON / HCIDLA Los Angeles
From: GJohnson
To: steve.lopez@dfeh.ca.gov
Cc: gavin@gavinnewsom.com; reply@calorganize.org; mayor.helpdesk@lacity.org; controller.galperin@lacity.org; gilbert.cedillo@lacity.org; councilmember.krekorian@lacity.org; councilmember.blumenfield@lacity.org; contactcd4@lacity.org; paul.koretz@lacity.org; councilmember.martinez@lacity.org; councilmember.rodriguez@lacity.org; councilmember.price@lacity.org; councilmember.ridley-thomas@lacity.org; councilmember.bonin@lacity.org; councilmember.lee@lacity.org; councilmember.ofarrell@lacity.org; councilmember.kevindeleon@lacity.org; councilmember.buscaino@lacity.org; lafdrequest@lacity.org; francisco.ortega@lacity.org; ethics.commission@lacity.org; secretary.weber@sos.ca.gov; councilmember.harris-dawson@lacity.org; contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov; info@housingrightscenter.org
Date: Wednesday, August 25, 2021, 09:27 PM PDT
The City HCIDLA REAP department has the authority to restore housing services where such services have been denied or not restored; the REAP department can order maintenance when repairs are needed. The REAP department has jurisdiction over multi-family dwellings. The REAP department cannot just rely on code enforcement to file a complaint; the REAP department is obligated to process a complaint from the tenant alone and to respond to the tenant directly. SEE REAP REGULATIONS attached.
A REAP complaint was emailed to the department on 8/9/21. See attachment. The previous REAP complaint was received by the REAP department in 2018. See attached pdf “2018-8-1 Revised Complaint Email to REAP”. There have been numerous code violation complaints since 2018 in which the REAP complaint is mentioned. See attached code violation complaint dated 7/10/21. I have been told by city employees that the REAP complaint is mentioned in 100-200 code violation complaints filed with HCIDLA code enforcement.
Various reference to the REAP complaint appear in emails to the city where the REAP department is copied. The REAP complaint is mentioned in an email 5/25/21 on page three and copied to code enforcement REAP employees. See attached PDF “2021-5-25 Email Council on Harass Ordinance”. The REAP department (hcidla.reap@lacity.org) is written directly by email on 4/15/19 (see attached); 10/13/19 by cc (see attached email); code violation complaint to REAP inspectors 11/5/20 code violation complaint 750967 (see attachment with receipt from the city); email cc to REAP dated 7/9/21 “the damages are continuing- see pdf attached “2021-7-9 Email city on new 1522 owner”.
I rebuttal from the July 27, 2021 summary by the DFEH of the racist position of the Los Angeles city HCIDLA:
1. DFEH says:
“You allege you were denied full and equal advantages, privileges, or services due to your race and sex/gender. On or about June 2020, you submitted a Rent Escrow Program Complaint (REAP) and you have not received a response.”
My rebuttal:
The DFEH has drafted complaint forms that do not address Unruh correctly, and it is these incorrect forms that the DFEH forces citizens like myself to sign, no matter that the law says differently. The Unruh law does not use the word “due” to, nor does it use the word “because”, but the DFEH insists on using in their form documents.
The DFEH alleges that the HCIDLA must have acted “because of your race and /or age”. I object to that because a careful reading of the Unruh act does not use the words “because of”. The words used are “no matter what” in Unruh. The words “no matter what “mean “regardless of”. “Because” is defined as”for the reason.” That is two different meanings, if the DFEH can comprehend English.
To that extent, using the correct wording under Unruh, I do allege that I was denied full and equal advantages, services, and privileges “no matter what (my) sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status”.
As for the date June 20, 2020, there have been numerous references to the 2018 REAP complaint and a renewal of the complaint filed 8/9/21 (attached). Prior to June 2020, there have been numerous references and emails concerning the REAP complaint, and there have been numerous REAP questions posed to the City HCIDLA/REAP after June 2020. See exhibits below dated 11/5/20 and into 2021. The code violation complaints (one is attached) 2019-2020-2021 clearly show receipts that the REAP inspectors (code enforcement) received my complaints where REAP is mentioned numerous times. The issue is not only that I have not received a response; the issue is that the concerns have not be addressed in accordance with the REAP duties: repairs have not been made, parking has not been restored. This is the authority that the REAP department has. See attachments list and the attachments.
2. DFEH says:
You state that HCIDLA received a complaint June 2, 2020 and you allege it was not a REAP complaint. You claim that I reported multiple security doors and a rear staircase. You claim the inspector talked with me and I acknowledged his conversation. You claim that I have not submitted a new complaint as of January 8, 2021.
My rebuttal:
1. I attach a copy of the June 2, 2020 complaint as it was received by HCIDLA. The REAP inspectors and code enforcement inspectors all work in the same department. See the attached HCIDLA roster. The duties of each “department” employees includes frequent back and forth communication. The code violation complaint mentions the REAP complaint nine times. It also appears to be addressed to numerous REAP department/code violations inspectors by name. Part of the attachment to the complaint reads: “PARKING AND INTERCOM SERVICE IS COVID RELATED. Addition to LA Code Complaint Los Angeles – June 2, 2020. Words 2323. Parking lot electric gate needs repair; rear building entry door not working correctly; rear steps interior not stable; intercom not working exterior and interior; tandem parking not provided to unit 9.” The word “intercom” is stated 24 times. The word “parking” is stated eleven times. “Illegal home sharing.” “THE CONDITIONS have been verified numerous times by code violation inspectors and the required diligent actions have not been taken. Code enforcement city employe Joseph has repeatedly harassed tenant unit 9 myself without having the code enforcement inspectors attempt to enter the unit, a lack of required diligence as required under code. “
2. I attach my 6/2/20 email recalling the conversation with city employee Grant. This was emailed to the Mayor and Herb Wesson. Certainly no one in their right mind would disagree with the importance of parking during the national emergency; the intercom system became even more important for many of those who were forced to “stay at home.” Hundreds of seniors and condominium hi-rise tenants across the city depend on intercom systems, and many systems are connected to a fire alarm system, making them even more important during the national emergency. Hundreds maybe thousands were forced to get their medicines delivered to their homes, making intercom systems even more important. I have no information or follow up that Grant made any calls to the owner of the property. In this building alone, emergency personnel may have been impeded from getting help to two tenants who died; the intercom was not fully functioning so it interfered or delayed rescue efforts. That culpability lies on the head of the Governor, the DFEH, owner, and the City HCIDLA who could not give a damn how many people died in this building due to lack of parking or lack of intercom service.
3. Whether the emergency was lifted or not, I did get a visits from code inspectors Luis Tolentino and M Nicolas (by phone) on May 18, 2021. See the pdf below “2021-5-18 Email Employees Refuse Inspection”.THE INSPECTION REQUESTED WAS REFUSED.
4. The DFEH drafted complaint against HCIDLA by me was signed 11/25/20.
5. There have been over four more code violation/REAP complaints since January 7, 2021.
6. The code enforcement inspectors and REAP inspectors work in the same city HCIDLA department. See the city employee roster.
The biased Steve Lopez, state employee, gives little attention to the major issues of my complaint against the HCIDLA, and does not once in his “summary” mention the parking or intercom. Due to bias under Governor Gavin Newsom.
Code violation complaints received by HCIDLA/REAP by city case number
(This list is meant to be indicative but not all inclusive)
2018 – 656619.656679.656620.656679.656980.657148.657264.657320.657379
2019 – 705572.715404.742716.747820.748473.724439
2020 – 750967.763827
2021– 773139 (January 7) 779874. (4/17/21) 783277 (5/19/21) 788044. (7/10/21) 791765. (8/17/21)
CIVIL CODE – CIV
DIVISION 1. PERSONS [38 – 86] ( Heading of Division 1 amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 160, Sec. 12. )
PART 2. PERSONAL RIGHTS [43 – 53.7] ( Part 2 enacted 1872. )
51.
(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the (California) 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.
(c) This section shall not be construed to confer any right or privilege on a person that is conditioned or limited by law or that is applicable alike to persons of every sex, color, race, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, or to persons regardless of their genetic information.
(6) “Sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status” includes a perception that the person has any particular characteristic or characteristics within the listed categories or that the person is associated with a person who has, or is perceived to have, any particular characteristic or characteristics within the listed categories.
I believe a tenant who was white female parked in stall #13. That stall was a single car stall. I believe she contacted the REAP department, City of Los Angeles, and as a result, her stall was lengthened to provide for two cars. Full and equal privileges was denied to me as Black American as the REAP department did not order my single car parking stall to be lengthened to accommodate two vehicles. Causation has been established.
See attached:
7/10/21 CODE VIOLATION Complaint- PDF “2021-7-10 Scanned Code Violation Complaint 788044” 5/19/21 Email amended re parking services (Parking)- PDF “2021-5-19 Email Amended re Parking Issues” 5/17/21 Email to city at 3:51 pm – PDF “2021-5-17 Email New Intake Filed” (Intercom)
City Los Angeles REAP duties- from website “Rent Escrow Account Program” (REAP)- PDF “City Reap Program”
2020 HCIDLA Employee roster
2021-8-5 Email REAP on refusal to inspect
2021-8-5 Email Question to REAP Dept
2021-8-9 Email REAP Complaint New
2021-5-18 Email Employees Refuse Inspection
Plus others below.
I attach the 9/10/20 complaint against the HCIDLA – eight pages which was attached to the DFEH intake. It states
Did respondent HCIDLA deny, aid, incite, discriminate, or make distinction that denied full and equal accommodations, advantages , facilities , privileges, or services to plaintiff?
Yes. The REAP HCIDLA ignored my complaints and did not restore or provide services requested.
Was the actions of the respondent HCIDLA intentional?
Yes. Without HCIDLA’s participation, the discrimination to claimant would not have occurred at that location.
Is it proven that a substantial motivating reason for the defendant’s conduct was the defendant’s perception of the plaintiff’s protected basis under the Unruh Act; or that the protected basis of a person whom the plaintiff was associated with was a substantial motivating reason for the defendant’s conduct ?
Yes. The numerous complaints received by the respondent indicated my protected basis and discrimination complaints.
Had claimant attempted to contract for services and afford himself of the full benefits and enjoyment of a public accommodation ?
Yes.
Were such services available to similarly situated persons outside his or her protected class who received full benefits or were treated better?
Yes. Other tenants in the building have working intercoms and tandem parking stalls.
Did respondent give any reason why a Black, medium color, aged 66, male, should be denied full benefits or enjoyment of a public accommodation?
No.
Has claimant proven the acts of the respondent were intentional (planned in advance, not accidental) to discriminate against claimant ?
Yes. The respondent intentionally ignored my numerous complaints.
Was the respondent practice of providing full and equal accommodations, of working intercom and tandem parking stall, applicable alike to all persons regardless of race, color, sex, or religion, etc?
No.
Complainant is a Black American , male, color medium, age 66, a member of a group(s) that Congress intended protection.
Complainant as tenant was entitled to housing services intercom maintenance and tandem parking, the same as similarly situated white female tenants
Complainant met all qualifications as a rental tenant to receive housing services intercom maintenance and tandem parking, the same as similarly situated white female tenants
Complainant was denied housing services intercom maintenance and tandem parking, by the Respondent and others participating on behalf of the Respondent
After the denial of housing services to Complainant, the RESPONDENT continued providing services intercom and tandem parking to those persons of the white race, and female, who reside at the 1522 Hi Point St 90035 address
Denied Full or Equal Accommodations, Advantages, Facilities, Privileges, or Services by a Business Establishment – Including both Private and Public Entities
Causation for the damages I have suffered from the actions of the HCIDLA has been established. This is a continuing damages complaint as the relationship with HCIDLA and myself is ongoing.
All rights reserved.
Geary J. Johnson
1522 Hi Point St 9
Los Angeles CA 90035
Phone
(Editor note: This email has been redacted. It does not include the attachments to the email. Attachments to the original email to the DFEH and City officials are: City (employee roster) REAP Program.pdf – 2020-9-25 EMPLOYEE Roster List Housing HCID.pdf- 2021-7-10 Scanned Code Violation Complaint 788044..pdf – 2021-5-19 Email Amended re Parking Issues.pdf – 2021-5-17 Email New Intake Filed.pdf – 2021-8-5 Email REAP on refusal to inspect.pdf – 2021-8-5 Email Question to REAP Dept.pdf- 2021-8-9 Email REAP Complaint New.pdf – 2018-8-1 Revised Complaint Email to REAP.pdf – 2021-5-25 Email Council on Harass Ordinance.pdf – 2020-1-5 Code Violation Complaint 750967.pdf – 2019-4-25 Email City ordinances regarding illegal rent increases.pdf – 2019-10-13 Email re Stall 17 Structure.pdf – 2021-7-9 Email city on new 1522 owner.pdf- 2020-6-2 Scanned LA Code Complaint 763827 .pdf – 2020-6-2 Email Wesson and Garcetti re Grant.pdf – 2021-5-18 Email Employees Refuse Inspection.pdf . The city clerk may publish this email under CPRA #21-7569 as of August 30, 2021.)
City Los Angeles HCIDLA Employee Roster
August 9, 2021
Subject: Racism at City Los Angeles REAP Department- HCIDLA
From: GJohnson
To: hcidla.reap@lacity.org; hcidla.rso@lacity.org
Cc: mayor.garcetti@lacity.org; councilmember.ridley-thomas@lacity.org; councilmember.harris-dawson@lacity.org; councilmember.rodriguez@lacity.org; councilmember.blumenfield@lacity.org; councilmember.martinez@lacity.org; paul.koretz@lacity.org; councilmember.price@lacity.org; councilmember.buscaino@lacity.org; councilmember.lee@lacity.org; councilmember.cedillo@lacity.org; councilmember.bonin@lacity.org; councilmember.kevindeleon@lacity.org; communications@lahsa.org; gavin@gavinnewsom.com; 09e41e7459a05677911c@powerpropertygroup.mailer.appfolio.us; brent@powerpropertygrp.com
Date: Monday, August 9, 2021,
05:25 PM PDT
Racist City HCIDLA Refuses to Enforce City Harassment Law; retaliates against tenant who complained.
Systemic Racism Admitted
“James Byrd Jr. (May e 7, 1998. Shawn Berry, Lawrence Brewer, and John King dragged him for three miles (five kilometers) behind a pickup truck along an asphalt road. Byrd, who remained conscious for much of his ordeal, was killed about halfway through the dragging when his body hit the edge of a culvert, severing his right arm and head. The murderers drove on for another 1+ 1⁄2 miles (2.5 kilometers) before dumping his torso in front of a black church.”
“(Re Emmett Till). Several nights after the incident in the store, Bryant’s husband Roy and his half-brother J.W. Milam were armed when they went to Till’s great-uncle’s house and abducted Emmett. They took him away and beat and mutilated him, before shooting him in the head and sinking his body in the Tallahatchie River. Three days later, Till’s body was discovered and retrieved from the river.”
“There was some kind of scuffle two hundred yards down the street, again strangely noiseless, and a huddled knot of men opened up to reveal two brawlers being separated and pulled away from their fight. What I saw next gave me a fright: in the farther distance, beyond the listless crowd, the body of a lynched man dangling from a tree. The body was slender, dressed from head to toe in black, reflecting no light. It soon resolved itself, however, into a less ominous thing: dark canvas sheeting on a construction scaffold, twirling in the wind.”
― Teju Cole, Open City
Dear REAP Program David Zaitz, Mathew Holen, et al.
I disagree with your stated August 6 2021 email at 2:52 pm that I need to go thru Code Enforcement to file a referral to REAP complaint. The RAC section 1200 entitles my complaint to go directly to you.
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST
WHAT DISCRIMINATION LOOKS LIKE
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits those engaged in the housing business – landlords, real estate agents, home sellers, builders, mortgage lenders, among others – from discriminating against tenants or homeowners listed in the section “Who is protected?”
Violations of the anti-discrimination law include the following: Representation that a housing accommodation is not available for inspection, sale, or rental when it is in fact available; Policies, practices, terms, or conditions that result in unequal access to housing or housing-related services; Offering inferior terms, conditions, privileges, facilities or services in connection with the housing accommodation; Retaliation against someone filing a complaint – (DFEH)
A. The HCIDLA has aligned themselves with and aided in the racist and discriminatory actions of the landlords(s) and agents. Even the current owner has refused to respond to my housing services requests.
B. The owner of this property is: Hi Point 1522 LLC. 8885 Venice Blvd Suite 205 Los Angeles CA 90034; Hi Point 1522 Managers Holdco LLC 8885 Venice Blvd Suite 205 Los Angeles CA 90034. Hi Point 1522 Managers LLC 8885 Venice Blvd Suite 205 Los Angeles CA 90034 Hi Point 1522 TJ Entity LLC 8885 Venice Blvd Suite 205 Los Angeles CA 90034 The property is managed by:
Power Property Management, Inc. a corporation dba Power Property Group Agent Brent Parsons 8885 Venice Blvd Ste 205
Los Angeles, CA 90034
Kassandra Harris AKA Kassy Harris 1522 Hi Point St No. 12 Los Angeles CA 90035
Phone numbers for the owner/manager are: 213-908-8008 or 310-593-3955.
C. “Full and equal” housing services is very simple. “Yes, Mr. Johnson, we will fix your intercom today.” “Yes, Mr. Johnson, we have assigned you an additional parking stall at no extra charge.” That is so simple it does not take five minutes to say it. But when I am forced to face racism as I have, things are not so simple.
D. Thousands of tenants across the city live in multi-family dwellings or condos where there is intercom systems and parking as housing services.
E. THE INTERCOM
I live in a rent controlled building where since 2014, the apartment to front door intercom is not working. (It was working prior to that.) In 2015, the LA County Health department ordered the owner to replace, repair, or remove the intercom. The owner refused. Numerous complaints were filed with city rent stabilization, REAP, and code enforcement. Around 2014 the owner applied for a city capital improvements increase; I recall mentioning the word “intercom” over 44 times but neither the owner or city responded. In the meantime, as part of the capital improvements application of the owner, the owner decided to replace the entire intercom system. But he only did so over time for fifteen units; three units including mine were not repaired. The intercom is a necessary housing service as hundreds maybe thousands of city multi-family dwellings as well as condominiums have intercom systems, some newer units have intercoms connected to fire alarm systems. Yet seven years after my initial complaints, the intercom for this unit remains not useable. Part of my rent amount with the capital improvements pays for an intercom system that I do not get to use. And my rent is current. The public attempts to access the outside intercom box: friends, relatives, deliveries, but there is no sign saying that mine does not work. The lack of maintenance to the intercom is a public as well as private nuisance.
F. The intercom was new in 2015, but also a replacement for the old system which the owner claimed was not working. As my rent agreement says, services are “including but not limited to”. Under maintenance in my rental agreement, the new intercom was covered under routine maintenance, and my unit number appears on the new outside intercom. Since the new intercom was a replacement for the old one, it is covered under my rental agreement. Add to that the capital improvements increase which show city validation of the intercom as a housing service to me. The door entry device and intercom are on the same electrical line. Pictures of the new intercom and door entry installed as one unit, were supplied to the city government by the owner and by myself.
G. THE PARKING STALL
This building according to the CFO, has 27 parking stalls. There are 18 units one bedrooms, so that means there are extra parking stalls. I have been trying to get assigned a second parking stall since 2014 when this new owner took over and removed one of our stalls and reduced us to a one car stall. Although there was no written agreement concerning the change in parking, the owner suggested we could get a tandem stall for $50 extra per month. I did not avail myself of that offer because (1) parking is included in the rent and (2) we are already paying the $50.00 in the rent. The six tandem stalls (12 single stalls) sat vacant for at least two months. As of today’s date, the owner still has some parking stalls that are vacant. Recently I received a parking ticket for $73.00 which could have been avoided if I had been allowed to park my car at this address parking lot. Recently the owner again offered that I could park the second car in the lot for $50 per month even though I protested this in the past because it unfairly singles me out (no other tenant who parks in a two car stall has to pay $50 extra) and it violates city law that the owner cannot charge additional for a housing service that was available at the beginning of our rent agreement, the CFO showing that extra tandem stalls were available at the time of the rent agreement. Nevertheless, I have asked the owner for the written application/process to be assigned a tandem parking stall. I have not been provided with the written application, which I have been asking for such application for years.
“Contrary to what city housing employees allege, tandem parking was available at the “inception”of the rental agreement: available is defined as ready immediately or ready at some future date. At the future date, we were assigned tandem parking by the previous manager. Barratt should have honored this agreement but he refused. The biased city employees refused to identify what tenant was assigned to stall #8 for four years, because during that time unit 9 was assigned to tandem stall #14. When the owner forced us in 2014 to vacate stall #14, there remained six tandem stalls that remained empty and unused for at least 2 months. “
H. “Including but not limited to” – Health and Safety Code, rental agreement, RAC defines “Housing Services”.
I. The HCIDLA does not have the authority (abuse of authority) to take away my entitlement to maintenance, as a tenant. The HCIDLA does not have the authority to take away my entitlement to parking; the HCIDLA does not have the authority to take away my right to fair housing and “full and equal” ; the HCIDLA does not have the authority to take away my right to housing services as defined under federal, state, local law, and the LAMC.
J. Racism is not so simple. It is shady, sneaky, devious, hating, causes civil unrest, is ugly and complex. I bet you REAP employees go home every night and tell your wife and kids how many Blacks you screwed out of fair housing. “Honey, I cheated so many Blacks out of housing services today. And I did not even have to say “Nigger”.”
K. Your decision violates the provisions of the state Unruh Act, and therefore is racist.
L. I will continue to protest the racist practices of the city Los Angeles government and Housing Department HCIDLA.
M. Since damages are continuing at this location, I will be preparing a new Referral to Reap Complaint.
N. The only thing standing in the way of me getting the entitled to full and equal housing services is your racism and retaliation, and that of the property owner/agents.
O. I am not giving up my rights to fair housing.
P. Your actions violate city Ethics code section XIV. Your actions or lack thereof and lack of diligence violate the spirit of the city Harassment ordinance number 187109 below.
City Ordinance 187109 (excerpts)-
Harassment by Landlord
C. It shall be a misdemeanor to attempt to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment, use, possession or occupancy of any premises by the lawful lessee or tenant of such premises either by threat, fraud, intimidation, coercion, duress, or by the maintenance or toleration of a public nuisance, or by cutting off heat, light, water, fuel or free communication by anyone by mail, telephone or otherwise, or by restricting trade or tradesmen from or to any such tenant. This subsection shall not apply to a duly authorized officer pursuant to the authority of legal process.
16. Other repeated acts or omissions of such significance as to substantially interfere with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of a tenant(s) and that cause, are likely to cause, or are committed with the objective to cause a tenant(s) to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such tenancy.
8. Threatening to or engaging in any act or omission which interferes with the tenant’s right to use and enjoy the rental unit or whereby the premises are rendered unfit for human habitation and occupancy.
Tenant Harassment shall be defined as a landlord’s knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific tenant or tenants that causes detriment and harm, and that serves no lawful purpose, including, but not limited to, the following actions:
1. Reducing or eliminating housing services required by a lease, contract or law, including the elimination of parking if provided in the tenant’s lease or contract except when necessary to comply with a court order or local or state law, or to create an accessory dwelling unit or additional housing.
2. Failing to perform and timely complete necessary repairs and maintenance required by Federal, State, County, or local housing, health, or safety laws; or failure to follow applicable industry standards to minimize exposure to noise, dust, lead paint, asbestos, or other building materials with potentially harmful health impacts.
Q. Under the CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS SECTION 1. “All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.”
R. SUCCESSIVE LIABILITY FOR NUISANCE
CIVIL CODE – CIV
Division 4 – General Provisions
PART 3. NUISANCE [3479 – 3508.2] ( Part 3 enacted 1872. )
TITLE 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES [3479-3486.5] (Title1 enacted1872.)
3483. Every successive owner of property who neglects to abate a continuing nuisance upon,or in the use of,such property, created by a former owner, is liable therefor in the same manner as the one who first created it.
(Enacted 1872.)
S. A person shall not keep, store, park, maintain, or otherwise permit an “inoperative vehicle”, as defined in Section 22.14.090 of Division 2 (Definitions), in any Residential or Agricultural Zone. Inoperative vehicles shall be removed within 30 days of June 7, 1991, the effective date of this Subsection C.
T. reference: Civil Code section 52 provides:
“(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. “
U. reference: jurisdiction of code violation inspectors from H & S code: “including but not limited to…any building or portion thereof…general dilapidation or improper maintenance… the welfare of the public…inadequate sanitation”. Code enforcement inspectors Marcel Nicolas and Luis Tolentino said they refuse to enforce the H & S code in this regard. I have talked with city fire department employees who told me the city inspectors do have authority to inspect multifamily dwelling intercom systems.
V. Disputing the HCIDLA position on the intercom, Walter Barratt said on May 14 2021 that he was planning to replace the intercom, thus disputing your claim that I am not entitled. In addition, the intercom box on the outside of the building lists my unit thus indicating my entitlement to one that is functioning.
W. Disputing the HCIDLA position on the parking, Walter Barratt on May 14, 2021 indicated he would assign me to an additional parking stall/tandem for $50 per month, thus indicating the entitlement, and disputing your position.
X. I am only asking you to enforce what the previous owner has already agreed to.
Y. This document may be the subject of a city CPRA. This document may be posted to the worldwide web as a matter of Public Interest.
Z. I will continue to seek redress from the REAP department until services are restored or until hell freezes over, whichever occurs first.
All rights reserved.
G. Juan Johnson
1522 Hi Point St 9
Los Angeles CA 90035
Phone ( )
cc:City contractor Housing Rights Center
2020-9-25 EMPLOYEE Roster List Housing HCID.pdf
174.6kB
Power Property Management Group Staff PPM staff includes: Brent Parsons, Thomas Khammar, Jackie Gallardo, Jeanette Conway, Alva Corodo, Fidel Medina, Joel Murrillo, Javier Guevarra, Liliano Morales, Edi Hernandez, Justice Walker
Racism Hi Point Apts
owned by Hi Point 1522 LLC
LA Rent Control (RAC) and Permits (LADBS) 