[RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Thu Aug 4 14:25:58 PDT 2011

Wow !   I agree with Chuck !

Marty

C. Martin (Marty) Lawyer, III

Florida Bar # 128095

BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

829  West M. L. King Blvd.,  Suite # 200

Tampa,  FL 33603-3336

(813) 232-1222,  Ext. 109

FAX: 232-1403

PRESERVING INDEPENDENCE, HOPE, AND DIGNITY

  _____  

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles Levin
Sent: Thursday, 04 August 2011 17:02
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if
the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the
Abandoned PP Statute.  The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it
is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances?  

Sent from iPhone

Charles J. Levin

Attorney at Law

Post Office Box 342727

Tampa, FL 33694

813.963.5135

For more information about the firm, please visit
<http://www.landlordlaw.com/> http://www.landlordlaw.com/

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is
privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended
recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you
have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender
immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy
print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail
transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended
recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or
retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents
in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product
privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230
DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any
attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for
the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. 

NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary
notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject
matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for
ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute
an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of
imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory
estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate
the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any
time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party.
Terms and conditions are strictly "subject to contract" and are not binding
on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been
completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties.
No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral
statements will be binding.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass <GregH at floridarealtors.org> wrote:

I agree with you Harry.  Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative
advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of
time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don't take it straight to
the dumpster).  However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated
below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the
contrary.  For what it's worth, I just checked Hauser's LL/T manual and
there's zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took
it straight to the trash.

Greg

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the
stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the
property.

I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless
of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for
a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don't want them to go straight
to the dumpster.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF 
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website:   <http://www.evict.com/> www.evict.com 
Email:  <mailto:harry at evict.com> 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: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Joe, I believe there's a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5).

Cary, where was the trash bin?  I'll defer to one of the experts out there -
but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that's "near the
property line" then that would be good enough to comply with the statute
(assuming it's not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable
access to it).  I've always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL
hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just
a minute, then at that point it didn't matter what became of it.  In other
words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even
just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff
right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter.

To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute,
to pick the stuff up themselves.  The idea being to prevent the LL from
taking the T's property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either
a locked trash bin or to LL's own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance
of getting it.  This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems
very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it's been
removed.  So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near
the property line, if T isn't around to grab it, then it's too bad for the T
if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to
avoid condo violations.

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit:  <http://www.floridarealtors.org> http://www.floridarealtors.org

Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo
 <http://convention.floridarealtors.org>
http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28

<image001.jpg>

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes; 

Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the "Disposition of
Personal Property L/T Act."

Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put
some reference to the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act" in Chapter
83 (I don't think there is a current reference).

Thank you,                          P Think before you print.

Joseph N. Alexander | Partner

POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY 

308 East Fifth Avenue

Mount Dora, Florida 32757

Phone:  352.383.4186

Fax:       352.383.0087

 <BLOCKED::mailto:jnalexander at pcld-law.com> jnalexander at pcld-law.com

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete
this message and any attachments from your system.  Thank you.

  _____  

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the
Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items.
Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord
interpreted to mean throw in the trash.  Now, former tenant is suing
landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.  

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines
what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction?
Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it
all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo
rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.

Cary 

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax:     (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are
confidential and may be legally privileged.  If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. 

_______________________________________________
landten mailing list
landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20110804/71470d73/attachment-0001.html 