|
December 11, 2007
Noise Disturbance not enforcing rules
I reside in the McKinley Park Lofts located at 2323 W Pershing Rd. The building was developed and is managed by The Habitat Company (350 West Hubbard Street Chicago , IL 60610 312-527-5400) and they are also the board becuase we are not at 75% sold yet .
I have an issue that I thought someone might be able to give me assistance on. Since January I have had to call the Chicago Police for noise disturbance on the unit above me over 30 times. I have all records indicating that the police we dispatched and management at the McKinley Park Lofts was notified, to date nothing has been done to resolve this issue. In August a "Resident Handbook" was distributed to all residents. A fine system was stated in this book. When talking to Habitat's lawyer, she stated:
"The proposed resident handbook was distributed at the request of several residents at McKinley Park in an effort to provide clarification on the operation of the building. In accordance with the By-Laws for McKinley Park , these rules can only be enforced by a unit-owner controlled board after formal adoption by the residents. As such, we have not issued a fine to the unit owners of 520, nor would the current board have the authority to do so.
A developer-controlled board may in some circumstances levy a reasonable fine for a unit owner's violation of the terms of the declaration, but even then, only after notice and a hearing. It is a very unusual circumstance that a developer board would hold a hearing. Nonetheless, that would have to be the next step in the process.
As I suggested, The Habitat Company, as managing agent for the property and not as a representative of the board, would be happy to assist in an informal mediation process in an effort to resolve this dispute. We have explored the option of a professional mediator, but it is a costly process and is not binding on either party. Further, it is not an avenue that is typically used in owner disputes.
Both the management company and the developer-board will be happy to continue to work with you and the owners of 520 to resolve this issue to the fullest extent possible under the terms of the declaration and by-laws governing McKinley Park."
They have done nothing to resolve this issue and my wife and I have lost sleep and even missed work because of the noise. I hope someone can assist me in this matter.
Since October 8th the lawyer was to set up a mediation and a sound test and has yet to do so and her excuse is that she can not get a hold of the residents making the noise.
|
|
|
December 19, 2006
Illegal policies!
On the afternoon of 10-18-6 I received a call from Kim Walker, an employee of the Habitat Company that works in the Lafayette Towers apartments where I currently reside. She stated that since I failed to inform her 30 days prior of my lease ending that I would be charged for an additional months rent.
My lease ends on the 31st of October 2006.
I have been there for exactly 12 months.
I told her that I was never informed of or read it in the lease agreement. Her response was, "It's in the lease, and it's a Michigan law." I then asked where it was located in the lease and what law was she talking about. Her response was, "I don't know, I don't know."
My next step that evening was to read and re-read the lease. I found that it did not state anything in reference to a 30-day notice. More specifically, the Surrender of Premises, the Landlord's Recovery of Premises, and the Surrender of Possession & Liability Holdover Tenant clauses say nothing to the effect of a 30-day notice.
The next day, 10-19-6, I spent searching the Michigan.gov web site and about dozen other sites to determine the validity of her claim that this was in fact a Michigan law. I found the Truth In Renting Act, the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Landlord And Tenant Relationships Act, and the practical guide to Tenants and Landlords prepared by the Michigan Legislature. In all of these I still did not find anything pertaining to a 30-day notice from the lessee to the landlord. In fact, I found that they must give you a 30-day notice if they want you to vacate the premises. And that if any written notification is warranted it will be clearly spelled out in the lease.
I then called the Michigan State Law Library as well as the University of Michigan Law Library. At both center, the attendant looked at their books and also found nothing pertaining to the tenant giving a thirty-day notice other than when spelled out in the lease.
I then spoke to a lawyer, which is not representing me as of yet on 10-20-6 for further clarification. She read the lease and the information (Acts) that I received from Michigan.gov website, when she returned it to me, she said that I was correct in not having to pay an extra months rent. Simply because it is not spelled out in the lease. She then said to take copies of the Acts to the landlord and explain that what they are asking for, the extra months rent, was not valid, according to Regulation M under the Consumer Leasing Act section 213.3 general disclosure requirements and section 213.4 contents of disclosures.
I then went to the office at Lafayette Towers to explain the situation to Kim. She was very confrontational and wouldn’t listen to my side of the story at all. I then told her that the 30-day policy was not in the lease. She said, "Well even if it isn't, it's our policy and you will pay it." With that statement I left the office.
On the afternoon of 10-23-6 I called the corporate office at 312-527-5400 to speak with Dan Woodworth. I left several messages on his voice mail of the situation and the urgency to resolve the situation. The calls were never returned. I then called the regional office at 248-357-2068 and spoke with Ted Vernor. Before I could finish explaining the situation, he told me that it was in the lease agreement and I would have to pay. I then said to him, "I have the lease in front of me and if you could point out were it states that I have to give a 30 day notice." He then told me that, "it not my job to do that and if we go to court you will lose." He then ended the call.
When I sought legal council for the second and third time, (different lawyers each time), I was told by both that if the written lease advises that it terminates specifically on a date and there are no additional notice provisions in the lease, no notice whatsoever is required. You are expected to vacate the premises on that date.
In my professional opinion, I believe further investigation is warranted. If they are doing this to me, who's to say that they are not doing this to every tenant that has lived in the building. I think that people are just giving in to them because they do not have the time and or the resources to find the truth and it is just easier to pay them off. Just because it is “their policy” doesn’t make it legal. I am a former Marine of four years and I will not this stand. I am trying to take care of my sick father and this is uncalled for, plain wrong, and a waste of precious time that could be used to help my father.
Thank you for your time
Kevin
Detroit MI 48207
|
