I just got off the phone with a lawyer who handles mostly civil rights
matters. I read to him the letter that the landlord wrote last year and I remember him chuckling a bit at it. "That sounded very egregious," he said. I read the conclusion of the Division On Civil Rights. He said that his feelings were that, since I was still here, that I "already won" and already scared them enough to back off. He told me that it absolutely was wrong of them to have written what they did and that "if you were on the streets" or had been in a different location, he "would have had me over there right away". His thinking was that appealing something is very costly and he thinks I would probably just get a couple thousand out of it which would end up being less than I would have paid in the end to have an attorney assist me. He felt that the court would not see me as sustaining many damages because I was still in the building. He believed that I could most-surely use my money for something else.
I understood and said that I was glad to hear from someone that I was
not thinking wrong in that the management was wrong in what they wrote. He said that "Of course, it was wrong of them." He said that if they happen to try anything else similar, he'd very-much would like to know. That, if they did, then this situation could be beneficial as proof that they already tried something once.
He and I also spoke about my thinking it would be best if I was on a
lower floor. I said that I had asked them in the past and they said "We don't do that." He felt that if I had a doctor to recommend it, it could be possible.
So, I'm a bit disappointed but I guess I understand. Mostly. I still
think that, since I requested, he should be willing to help me fill out the form for the appeal and then I'd represent myself. I could pay a couple hundred bucks. Yet he said that he doesn't think it would be
worthwhile.
I spoke to the South Jersey Regional, who helped me in the beginning and let the management know that I was still allowed to remain as a tenant. They told me that they couldn't help an appeal situation.
I hate just giving up. I don't feel like a winner. Just because I'm here doesn't excuse their wrong actions in the beginning and it hurts. I had a bad seizure last Sunday into Monday. Fortunately, even though I went into the hall, nobody was around and I didn't get sick to my stomach to damage their hallways.
I hoping I can get on a lower floor somehow. It's really ashame they
acted this way and, if anything, I hope they did learn something. But I doubt it.
- Brian
--- In epilepsy@yahoogroups.com, "Amy Tapscott" <amymknipp@...> wrote:
>
> Brian, I was under the impression they were coming into your apartment and cleaning up. I didn't realize it was in the hallways. That is entirely different. And you are absolutely correct, when we have seizures we are unconscious and are not aware what happened. My most recent occurrence was last month and I had 3 massive grand mals right in a row. I was considered status epilepticus. I fell in my home and fractured my skull and have two hematomas on my brain. There is a course of several days I have no memory of whatsoever. I think that them cleaning the hallways is completely reasonable, as you aren't physically able to do it, and if they are showing any apartments near yours, they need to be clean. We normally would clean the hallways on a regular basis anyway. Have you contacted the management company directly, and not just the employees who work there? It could very well just be the employees who are causing the issue and not the company itself. I know you filed suit and your attorney probably talked with them. I am wondering if a change in staff would ease the problems? Most apartments here have a high turnover rate, basically because the employees have quotas they have to meet when renting an apartment, they have to stay within budget and get good reviews from "secret shoppers". Has there been new employees that suddenly started causing these problems for you? Now this has me upset, since it does sound like they are discriminating other people as well. We can't tell people who they can and can't have for guests! Best of luck. If you were here in Florida I could get you some help through Legal Aid.
>
> Amy
>
> --- In epilepsy@yahoogroups.com, "fakeMacGyver" <nairbrian@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mrs. Tapscott:
> >
> > Thanks for you info, though it seems contrary to much of what my attorney had told me last year.
> >
> > "The termination of tenancies in NJ are covered by the NJ anti-eviction act (NJSA 2A:18-61.1 et seq.) Landlords can only terminate a tenancy and/or evict a tenant for good cause as defined by that act. Your landlord's alleged concern over your medical condition as reflected in her letter to the Housing Authority does not constitute good cause on the AEA and is not a basis to terminate your tenancy."
> >
> > "The Housing Authority's response to your landlord's letter was completely inappropriate. The should not have just given you a new voucher and told you to find new housing."
> >
> > They wouldn't give me the reason, neither would the management, and each wanted me to find out from the other.
> >
> > "The HA should have required the landord to sign the HAP contract and if the landlord refused, they should have suspended his receipt of those payments. The actions of both your landlord and the Housing Authority violate your rights as a tenant, as a housing assistance recipient, and as a person with a disability. Since you are disabled, you are legally entitled to a reasonable accomodation from both the landlord and the Housing Authority. Thie means the that Housing Authority must modify its policies, practices, and/or procedures when the modifications are necessary to avoid discrimination based on the basis of disability.
> >
> > The landlord is equally obligated to accomodate your disability to avoid such discrimination. In your case, that may mean that the landlord is obligated to obtain a cleaning service to clean the hallway if there is any vomit and/or bleeding associated with your having a seizure. Under no circumstances can the landlord just decide he no longer wants you as a tenant and not renew your leas and/or your HAP contract because you have a seizure disorder."
> >
> > I don't think that is an unreasonable request. Since they claim they aren't trained, they shouldn learn or don't do such a cleanup. Rather than even tell me about how they cleaned up after me -- I never had a clue that happened -- they report it to the Housing Authority first and then don't want to renew the lease. The even tell the investigator that I was never appreciative of their cleaning up after me. When you're unconscious, it's hard to know what happens.
> >
> > The are always cleaning here like crazy for anything. Anybody could get sick to there stomach here and that's not a reason to evict them -- especially if they have no knowledge of it.
> >
> > On of my requests for settlement was to be in a first-floor apartment whenever that was possible. So that, if I had an episode, I would't risk falling down steps. This is surely an easy accomodation and they didn't even want to agree to that. That's quite wrong, too.
> >
> > To the Housing Authority from the same lawyer:
> >
> > "In response to Mrs. *****'s letter, the Housing Authority issued him a new voucher and told him to look for alternate housing. This was wholly inappropriate. His assistance at his current unit was effectively terminated without his knowledge, without notice, and without due process and is in violation of a myriad of both state and federal laws."
> >
> > "The manner in which this was handled clearly violates the grievance procedure set forth at 24 C.F.R. 982.555 as well as the HA's own Grievance Procedures Policy. Of the most critical importance is that Mrs. ***** not only notified the HA that she not longer wants Mr. ****** as a tenant, but she was permitted to unilaterraly take action adverse to Mr. ****** and contrary to both state and federal law. The Housing Authority's tacit agreement with Mrs. *****'s position maked the HA complicit in Mrs. *****'s unlawful actions."
> >
> > "Mrs. *****'s decision that she no longer wants to rent to Mr. ****** constitutes a violation of the NJ Law Against Discrimination, NJSA 10:5-12(g)(1)(2)&(4) and NJSA 10:5-12(h)(1)(2)&(4).
> >
> > The Housing Authority's actions supporting Mrs. ***** by giving a new voucher and telling him to locate new housing violates section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 794(2000), Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12101 et. seq. (2000) and 24 C.F.R. 8.1 et seq., 28 C.F.R. 35.101 et seq."
> >
> > I stay here because it's where I mostly grew up, it's in the center of many locations I frequent since I walk, and I'm not required to leave just because they don't like a couple seizures a year. It's not the biggest of disabilities and I don't like being treated like I'm a danger or something. Nobody here likes that.
> >
> > Of course you can't have people just 'move in' to an apartment. But the landlord was specifically telling the man he couldn't have any visitors and because she didn't like one of the person's nationality. Wrong? Of course.
> >
> > The painting is, according to the Board Of Health inspector, a requirement because of the water damage that was done. The insides of the wall were soaked, even around the electrical outlet, and he needed the roof fixed, the walls properly patched-up, and the brown water stains covered over.
> >
> > According to the attorney, I was effectively homeless suddenly and without warning or explanation from anybody. The Division On Civil Rights is, apparently, claiming that because I'm still here there's nothing discriminatory. There surely was and it's not from the management's change of heart that they let me stay -- it was from the letter from the attorney that showed them they were wrong in what they said.
> >
> > Well, I'll file an appeal on Tuesday. It's good for me; it can be good for others if a change is made.
> >
> > - Brian
> >
> > --- In epilepsy@yahoogroups.com, "Amy Tapscott" <amymknipp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am going to step in here, because I have worked in property management before and I am a paralegal. I have taken Federal Fair Housing classes. While an apartment may be required to offer you Reasonable Accommodations if you ask in writing, the cleaning up after you is way beyond that and would require you to pay them for it. Reasonable Accommodations would include things like a ramp for a wheelchair, lowered door knobs or light switches, rails in the bathroom, letting you mail your rent rather than bring it to the office, etc. Cleaning up for you after a seizure is not a Reasonable Accommodation and they could charge you for time and supplies. I also don't understand why you still want to live there. There are assisted living facilities that are sometimes cheaper than an apartment (some go based on your income) and people have their own apartments and someone only comes to help them if needed. They have transportation for their residents daily to the stores or places they need to go. Check with your county, there are probably even shuttles offered to people who need rides to dr. appointments. And also, I am not sure that the painting would be a required repair and certainly it wouldn't be enough to warrant a complaint to Housing Authority. That is merely cosmetic. Things that would warrant that would be things you would call Code Enforcement office for, such as no heat or air conditioning, no water, mold, they had your electric cut off. Now, you might be able to stay if you offer to pay for the services of cleaning or have a cleaning service come in yourself. Them hiring a cleaning service and picking up the tab is a completely unreasonable request. I hope you get this resolved and that it doesn't cause a lot of stress. Unfortunately stress is a major trigger for seizures in myself and many people. Oh and for the visitors thing, management can request visitors leave if they are becoming a nuisance to other tenants and they cannot stay for more than 14 days without asking the management in writing and getting approval. That would be like adding someone else to the lease unofficially and all adult tenants have to be ran through a computer system to be approved. I hope that helps explain it from a person who has done the job and has training in fair housing. I am not an attorney, but I work for Legal Aid and we handle fair housing stuff quite often.
> >
>
No comments:
Post a Comment