OT: Are you being rejected for rental space?

Is that from the court of an agency ?

Reason I ask is because if an agency they work for the property owner/manag er and beating one of them in court is not necessarily a good thing in thei r eyes.

Place I worked for got sued for stupid reasons by an asshole, I told the to countersue for the limit because the record of a lawsuit hurts the busines s' reputation. They did not take my advice, we totally embarrassed the idio t in court, but still there is that record.

Good Christian thing to do I guess but it cost them money. it negated some of their advertising. They saw it as vindictive I guess, but screw all that , business is business.

The guy sued for twenty times what he would have been entitled to if he had won.

The legal system in this country is totally f***ed.

I mean because if the defendant wins the case, the record should disappear.

On the other hand, deadbeats don't care. I have Unlawful Detainer filed in Justice Court, Order to show cause, Appeal to District Court. All showing up in his record, but he is not going to quit until the sheriff come to ki ck him out. When someone doesn't care about his name or credit, there is no t much you can do.

r.

What is the defendant's justification for illegally detaintaining the prope rty for months or years pending trial? Winning the case does not change th e fact he broke the law, and got away without much consequences. Yes, the court system is f*ck up, idiot judges allow them to game the system. I, as a property owner, would avoid such renters at all cost. Actually, i would avoid all renters after this, leaving the property vacant is less of an he adache.

If they actually squatted, they should not win the case. No disagreement there. Now if they stopped paying rent because the roof caved in or something...

And some people are that much of an asshole to sue in a case like that.

there. Now if they stopped paying rent because the roof caved in or somethi ng...

In my case, the root leaked for one day, did not cave in. I spent thousand s to repair it afterward. But he seems entitled to living free forever bec ause it leaked one day. It never leaked again. This is just an excuse, if not for this, there are others. He even stated in his answer that he is w ithholding rent because there are missing shelfs in the fridge. Any sane j udge would see that he is just gaming the system.

I am pretty sure to get a net judgment against the defendant, but probably unable to collect from the deadbeat. I am angry at the court to allow such non-sense. After the eviction, will take it to the federal court to sue th e state.

e >missing shelfs in the fridge. "

You might not believe this, but after he moves out I would make a very conc erted effort to find out where he went and make damn sure he has a run of v ery bad luck.

In fact, however he gets to court or the mailbox, it has pneumatic tires no ?

Other people don't s it that way, oh revenge is bad and all this shit, but I call it helping karma along. Seriously, when I gt into discussions over p eople killing thugs who try to rob them and they say "judge, jury and execu tionaer" I say "Damn right !, and it should happen EVERY TIME until motherf uckers get the idea to be straight uip with people, or are all dead.

When people get like that, I consider them animals.

I may not be a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you are fighting both an uphill and a losing battle. States have sovereign immunity meaning you can't sue them unless they agree to it. Obviously this has some limitations such as complying with Federal laws and such. But you will be hard pressed to try to recover any losses unless you can show they acted with malice or denied you your rights. Since your problem is that they followed due process, you just don't like the time it takes to do that, I think you are just shortening further the short end of the stick you were handed.

--

Rick

nt there. Now if they stopped paying rent because the roof caved in or some thing...

sands to repair it afterward. But he seems entitled to living free forever because it leaked one day. It never leaked again. This is just an excuse , if not for this, there are others. He even stated in his answer that he is withholding rent because there are missing shelfs in the fridge. Any sa ne judge would see that he is just gaming the system.

.

bly unable to collect from the deadbeat. I am angry at the court to allow s uch non-sense. After the eviction, will take it to the federal court to su e the state.

I know. But it will still catch their attention. Defendant did not respon d to Order to Show Cause (not serving plaintiff) and the Judge did not foll ow through with the Order. Did the judge not understanding the Order, or t he Court Order means nothing. If the court erred, they should be held acco untable.

Yeah, that sounds good, but there are laws that say you can't hold the government responsible for their actions. I'm not sure what you mean exactly by, "Judge did not follow through with the Order". If this was brought to the Judge's attention and he tossed it off, then maybe you have a shot. But if you expect the Judge to keep track of the defendant's failures, that is not really what they are there for. They do the judging based on what is brought to their attention. Nothing more.

--

Rick

e:

ment there. Now if they stopped paying rent because the roof caved in or so mething...

ousands to repair it afterward. But he seems entitled to living free forev er because it leaked one day. It never leaked again. This is just an excu se, if not for this, there are others. He even stated in his answer that h e is withholding rent because there are missing shelfs in the fridge. Any sane judge would see that he is just gaming the system.

at..

bably unable to collect from the deadbeat. I am angry at the court to allow such non-sense. After the eviction, will take it to the federal court to sue the state.

u l

at

ck

spond to Order to Show Cause (not serving plaintiff) and the Judge did not follow through with the Order. Did the judge not understanding the Order, or the Court Order means nothing. If the court erred, they should be held accountable.

.

The Order clearly say that matters in dispute are not to be considered for TWR (temporary eviction). I don't know what defendant filed with the court . But it's not admissible without serving plaintiff. He could lie his tai l off. In his answer to Appeal Court's Order to Show Answer, no valid reas on for defending UD, even if he served previously. Now, defendant's game w ith the system renders lower court proceeding meaningless. The lower court judge has all the information to rule on TWR, but choose not to.

• The copy, as i indicated, was from the reporting agency which is independent WRT the courts and the landlord.

Records NEVER disappear; look up any crook that has been dead for 20 years; pick a famous or infamous one where records abound andpay the online fee.

As i indicated, defendant WON.

"Consequences" were ALL unpaid rentals, and ALL past due fees. Tossing rental property and income into the bin is not exactly sane.

ear.

It say SETTLED. It still does not change the fact that defendant took matt er into his own hand and UNLAWFUL DETAINED property for months. Paying all the money does not mean the action was LAWFUL. These renters should be av oid at all cost and for good reason.

CAUSE: UND UNLAWFUL DETAINER DV:N RESOLUTION: STPR DATE 12 06 2013 SETTLED BY PARTIES AND/OR AGREED JUDGMEN COMPLETION: JODF DATE 12 06 2013 JUDGEMENT/ORDER/DECREE FILED STATUS : CMPL DATE 12 06 2013 COMPLETED/RE-COMPLETE

I'm sorry, I can't understand what you are saying. "In his answer to Appeal Court's Order to Show Answer, no valid reason for defending UD, even if he served previously." What does this mean? It doesn't even have a verb...

I do understand the final sentence which seems to be the important part. So what was the consequence of that? You mean this gives further delays?

--

Rick

ote:

eement there. Now if they stopped paying rent because the roof caved in or something...

thousands to repair it afterward. But he seems entitled to living free for ever because it leaked one day. It never leaked again. This is just an ex cuse, if not for this, there are others. He even stated in his answer that he is withholding rent because there are missing shelfs in the fridge. An y sane judge would see that he is just gaming the system.

that..

robably unable to collect from the deadbeat. I am angry at the court to all ow such non-sense. After the eviction, will take it to the federal court t o sue the state.

you

ill

y

that

do

tick

respond to Order to Show Cause (not serving plaintiff) and the Judge did no t follow through with the Order. Did the judge not understanding the Order , or the Court Order means nothing. If the court erred, they should be hel d accountable.

s y

ore..

for TWR (temporary eviction). I don't know what defendant filed with the c ourt.. But it's not admissible without serving plaintiff. He could lie hi s tail off. In his answer to Appeal Court's Order to Show Answer, no valid reason for defending UD, even if he served previously. Now, defendant's g ame with the system renders lower court proceeding meaningless. The lower court judge has all the information to rule on TWR, but choose not to.

s?

Yes, it forced me to appeal to the District Court and waited 5 months.

This is what i am going to file:

---------------------------------

MOTION TO QUASH DEFenDant's answer and request for temporary writ of restit ution

Plaintiff requested and court issued "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A TEMPORARY W RIT OF RESTITUTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE": "... to show cause, if any, why the Court should not issue a Temporary Writ of Restitution, allowing Plaintiff/Landlord to remove Defendant/Tenant fro m the rental premises ..."

"The hearing on this Order to Show Cause is not the trial on the merits. P laintiff/Landlord may request at a later date that a trial be set ..."

"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time period for Defendant/Tenant to file an answer or other response to the Complaint for Unlawful Detainer filed in t his case is hereby shortened to ten (10) calendar days from the day the Sum mons and Complaint for Unlawful Detainer are served on Defendant/Tenant (no t counting the day of service)."

For the Complaint and Order, plaintiff filed, served and provided proof of service to the court properly. The deadline for such answer expired more t han 10 days before the hearing. As of this filing, defendant did not and s till have not respond to plaintiff's request for the Order to Show Cause. As a consequence, the hearing was meaningless, since there was no answer fo r the plaintiff to examine and nothing for the defendant to contest. The c ourt below should have issued the Writ of Restitution immediately. Lack of such court action from below, plaintiff was forced to appeal to this court and suffers additional five months of liquidation damages.

Valid reasons to show cause include claims such as: Defendant claims owner ship of property. Defendant paid plaintiff $6000 to purchase the property, rather than to rent. Plaintiff gave the property to defendant. Defendant mailed payments somewhere. Defendant paid off someone. Of course, any s uch claims would be subject to criminal perjury prosecution in the court of law. Defendant did not provide relevant answer and plaintiff moves the co urt to quash defendant's answer.

Plaintiff filed appeal to contest lower court's failure to act, due to defe ndant's failure to answer. This court ordered defendant to answer why ther e was no answer. Defendant could have blamed the post office. Defendant c ould have accused plaintiff of lies. Defendant could have paid off someone . Defendant did not provide any such claims either. As a result, defendan t gave up the right to contest the order. Lower court should have acted ac cordingly and issue the Temporary Writ of Restitution.

Plaintiff already post the maximum bond of $2500, including around $3500 in illegally detained rental payments at that time, defendant could have clai med up to $6000 from plaintiff at trial. More than enough to cover all the payments made to plaintiff previously. Lower court did not consider the facts diligently, and rejected plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on t he Writ of Restitution. Did the court below not understand the order? Did the court below have a different standard for plaintiff and/or defendant? Or did the Court Order not mean anything? The court below made an error i n judgment and should be held responsible and liable.

Plaintiff is ready to go to trial to address defendant's allegations. Incl uding back rents and indemnification bond, defendant can claim up to $10,00

0 from plaintiff. However, plaintiff cannot claim anything from defendant, since defendant is not required to put up a dime. If defendant put the il legally detained rental money in escrow and/or bond, plaintiff is willing a nd ready to answer any and or allegations from defendant.

Lack of any reason not to issue the Writ, plaintiff demands this court to i ssue the Temporary Writ of Restitution immediately.

• YES, that is my point! READ what i wrote; the report is INCOMPLETE and INACCURATE. From a legal point, the whole action should not have been reported, due to the final court action: DISMISSED.

If it was dismissed, defendant can easily correct the record. It the agency incorrectly report, defendant can demand them to correct the record. But the record should stay, even as DISMISSED.

Whatever the cause, defendant started with an UNLAWFUL action. What is the justification for such action?

You point a gun at someone to collect debt. Yes, you are due the money, but does it make the action legal?