[RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

Tue Dec 22 11:32:23 PST 2009

Agreed on all points.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF 
HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website:  www.evict.com <http://www.evict.com/>  
Email: harry at evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY.  ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 2:16 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

Harry, I would argue that disabling an access gate card would fall within
the umbrella of prohibited practices under 83.62 (2), but of course this
brings me back to the original conundrum of whether or not a condo
association can lawfully engage in what would otherwise be considered
"prohibited practices" for a landlord under the LL/T statute.

Tequisha, I also had a call recently where a condo association, as part of
its T approval process, was requiring the T to sign something purportedly
making the T personally liable to the association for unpaid assessments in
the event the LL doesn't pay the assessments.  The question posed to me was
If a "Contract to Lease" (an FAR form) that's already been signed by
prospective LL and prospective T says it's contingent on Association
approval and approval is subsequently denied based on prospective T's
refusal to sign a document that is arguably unreasonable, does prospective T
get his money back?  The FAR Contract to Lease provides that prospective T
will "make all reasonable efforts.to obtain Association approval."   My
opinion FWIW was that it would be reasonable for a prospective T to balk at
signing such a lease addendum mandated by the association.

Regards,

Greg   

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of harry at evict.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 1:54 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

I have never seen a condo association change locks but have seen them deny
access by disabling an access gate card.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF 
HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website:  www.evict.com <http://www.evict.com/>  
Email: harry at evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY.  ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Tequisha Myles
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 1:43 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

We are starting to see many Condo Associations in Palm Beach County that
require the Tenant to sign lease addendums that force a tenant to pay rent
to the Association directly if the landlord fails to pay his or her
maintenance fees.  Also these lease addendums state that the Association is
somehow authorized to evict the tenant for non-payment.  So a prohibited
practices amendment to include any type of community association may be
worth exploring.

Tequisha Y. Myles, Esq.

Fair Housing and Elder Law Projects

Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County

423 Fern Street, Suite 200

West Palm Beach, FL 33401

(561) 655-8944 Ext. 296

(561) 655-5269 Fax

 <BLOCKED::BLOCKED::mailto:tmyles at legalaidpbc.org> tmyles at legalaidpbc.org

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric A. Jacobs
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 1:01 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

While that's true, I think the Association would have clear exposure for
trespass and other claims.  It would in my view make no sense to amend the
statute since the Association is not in any case the Tenant's Landlord.  At
best, I think the Association might be able to bring an action for Ejectment
if the association docs permit.  

Our firm and our family supports the wonderful work of 

Mount Sinai Medical Center and its Neonatal ICU.  

Please check out our Share page at

  <http://www.msmcfoundation.org/EricandNicoleJacobs>
http://www.msmcfoundation.org/EricandNicoleJacobs

cid:image001.jpg at 01CA830F.9209BBE0

Eric Jacobs, J.D., M.B.A.
Managing Partner
Board Certified - Real Estate

 <mailto:eric at jacobsoffir.com> eric at jacobsoffir.com

<http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=1911+Harrison+Street&csz=Hol
lywood%2C+Florida+33020&country=us> 1911 Harrison Street
Hollywood, Florida 33020

Tel:
<http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?src=jj_signature&To=954-929-0679&Email=e
ricj at jerichotitle.com> 954-929-0679 
fax: 954-929-0926
mobile:
<http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?src=jj_signature&To=954-243-3100&Email=e
ricj at jerichotitle.com> 954-243-3100 

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information contained in this electronic
communication, including any and all attachments and enclosures, may be
privileged and is strictly confidential, intended solely for the use of the
person(s) identified above to receive this communication. If you are not the
person(s) identified above to receive this communication, you are hereby
notified that you may not disclose, print, copy, disseminate, or otherwise
use the information contained herein. If you are an employee or agent of the
person(s) identified above to receive this communication and, as such, you
have been authorized to deliver this communication to such person(s), you
may disclose, print, copy, disseminate, or otherwise use the information
contained in this communication solely for the purpose of such delivery.
Unauthorized interception and/or use of this communication are/is strictly
prohibited and may be punishable by law. If you have received this
communication in error, please reply and notify the sender (only) of that
fact and delete the communication, including any and all attachments and
enclosures, from your computer or other electronic device on which you may
have received this communication.

  _____  

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 12:42 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

Thanks Harry.  I agree with you that the proper procedure is for the LL to
file for eviction.   However, I'm starting to think that perhaps 83.67 needs
to be amended to clarify that not only the Landlord, but also his/her
association is prohibited from engaging in any of the so-called prohibited
practices / self-help eviction techniques.  As it stands now, a literal
reading of the statute would suggest it doesn't directly apply to
associations.

Regards,

Greg 

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of harry at evict.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 12:28 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

The landlord needs to file an eviction. No lockout is legal. The tenant is a
holdover if the tenancy was properly terminated by the lease or by proper
notice, if necessary, from the landlord. The association has no right to
deny the tenant access but may have a right to file an eviction on behalf of
the unit owner if stated in the docs. The landlord would be wise to have an
attorney file the eviction as it will be less complex and cheaper. 

Harry Heist

LAW OFFICES OF 
HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website:  www.evict.com <http://www.evict.com/>  
Email: harry at evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY.  ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 12:17 PM
To: landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Condo changing locks on Tenants

Curious to hear the committee members' thoughts on the question I got today.
Apparently a T of a condo unit is holding over beyond the termination date
of their written lease with LL.  LL wants them out and notifies their condo
association that T is a squatter.  Association then sends letter to T saying
the association will be changing the locks because their rules require that
there must be a valid/current written lease on file with the association and
there no longer is a current lease.

The question I have is can a condo association lawfully engage in what would
be considered "prohibited practices" for a landlord under the LL/T statute?

Here are some of the statutes that I think may come into play:

Section 83.67 (2) provides that a ".a landlord of any dwelling unit.shall
not prevent the tenant from gaining reasonable access to the dwelling unit
by any means, including, but not limited to, changing the locks."

Section 718.303 provides that Tenants are governed by the condo docs and
they are deemed incorporated into any lease.

However, Section 83.17 provides that any provision in a rental agreement is
void and unenforceable to the extent that it purports to waive or preclude
the rights, remedies, or requirements set forth in this part, etc.

Under 83.58 the remedy for a tenant holding over is for the Landlord to file
for an eviction.

Section 718.303 also provides that an association or unit owner may file an
action for "damages" or "injunctive relief" against a tenant.

718.106 provides that ".when a unit is leased, a tenant shall have all use
rights in the association property and those common elements otherwise
readily available for use generally by unit owners."

Does the fact that 718.303 provides for the filing of actions for damages
and injunctive relief against Tenants imply that other actions (such as
changing locks, cutting off electricity, etc) would be prohibited?  Would it
be possible to argue that the LL should be held responsible for the actions
of his association (of which the LL is a member) and therefore claim damages
for prohibited practices under 83.67(6)?  Note that 83.67 (1) uses the
phrase ".shall not cause, directly or indirectly, ."  Is the LL "indirectly"
engaging in prohibited practices where he stands by and perhaps even
encourages his association to engage in what would be prohibited practices
if the LL were to take the action directly?

Thanks for your comments in advance.

Regards,

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy

Florida REALTORSR

7025 Augusta National Drive

Orlando, FL  32872-5025

Ph:  (407) 438-1400

 <mailto:GregH at FAR.org> GregH at FAR.org

cid:image001.jpg at 01C8B0EE.0B556530

LEGAL DISCLAIMER:  The information transmitted is intended solely for the
individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or
other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have
received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the
material from any computer.

Florida RealtorsR
A brand new real estate organization with 93 years of experience!
 <http://www.floridarealtors.org> http://www.floridarealtors.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20091222/8c04e19a/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3644 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20091222/8c04e19a/attachment-0002.jpe 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3508 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20091222/8c04e19a/attachment-0003.jpe 