[RPPTL LandTen] LLT: 3-Day Notice

Mon May 20 08:30:43 PDT 2013

I agree with Harry, these "form preparers" are out there and they are
causing a problem not only to our profession but the public as well.  I
called The Florida Bar on a blatant case where complaint and default
package were signed by an "agent" the plaintiff was a corporation and the
case was contested, Florida Bar said they already had an active
investigation and were in the process of getting an injunction.  I don't
think the injunction will have any effect on this "agent's" eviction
business.  I recently had a case where the tenant had actually made payment
to the landlord while case was pending and the "agent" signed an affidavit
of non-payment and obtained a default final judgment.  The tenant hired me
post-judgment and I moved to vacate judgment based on fraud and to amend
pleadings to bring counter-claim for fraud and unlicensed practice of law
against "agent" and plaintiff.  Case settled with the tenant getting
3-months free rent and money back to help him move.

I think the "form preparers" are more concerned with being sued than the
Florida Bar.

Alberto M. Cardet, P.A.
1330 Coral Way #301
Miami FL 33145
305-403-7783
305-403-7824 (fax)

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Lainie J. Simon <ljsimon1 at comcast.net>wrote:

> Please keep us updated on this.  I feel for your!  Especially when you
> explained to your client.
>
>
> On May 16, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Joseph Alexander wrote:
>
> ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
>
> Dear Group:****
>
> ** **
>
> I have encountered a problem in the ****County** **Court** **of** **Citrus
> ** **County****.  ****
>
> In short, my client drafted and issued a 3-Day Notice prior to retaining
> me.  Upon reviewing the 3-Day Notice I saw that the client had included
> Late Fees as part of the past-due “rent”.  I reviewed the Lease and it did
> include language that deemed late fees as “rent”.  Accordingly, I informed
> the client that we could proceed with the action for eviction using her
> 3-Day Notice.****
>
> I filed the Complaint with ****Citrus** **County****, and immediately
> received an Administrative Order indicating that if there is any
> non-compliance with the Complaint or evidence at the time of the Final
> Judgment that the Court could dismiss the action.  I reviewed my Complaint
> and exhibits again, and determined that everything was in order.  I
> obtained a Default (as to Possession) and proceeded with the Motion for
> Final Judgment (Possession).  After a week or so, I received an Order of
> Dismissal executed by the Judge, generally citing the Administrative Order,
> Rules of Procedure and Florida Statute, but making no specific
> identification of failures or deficiencies.****
>
> Upon talking to the JA I was able to “guess” that the defect was, in fact,
> the 3-Day Notice including late fees.  I filed a Motion for Rehearing,
> citing the Lease provision defining Late Fees as “Rent” and the 4
> references in the Complaint as to the inclusion of Late Fees as “Rent”,
> together with Section 83.43(6), FS, expecting the Judge to just execute the
> Order vacating the Dismissal.  However, I was notified today that the Judge
> is not going to sign the Order Vacating the Dismissal, and that the matter
> will be set for hearing on June 4, and that the Judge has sent the case to
> the Staff Attorney for research on the issue of inclusion of Late Fees in
> the 3-Day Notice.****
>
> Ignoring the fact that both counts have been dismissed without any
> notification of a specific failure, and ignoring the fact that the lease
> will have expired by the time the hearing occurs, I am looking for any case
> law on the late fees in the 3-Day Notice issue.  ****
>
> I Have always just relied on 83.43(6), FS and have never had any problems
> provided that the Lease defined the Late Fees (or anything else) as “Rent”.
> ****
>
> I would really appreciate any case law on the matter, as I don’t see
> anything other than secondary sources.****
>
> That thud you hear is my head hitting my desk.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you,                          P Think before you print.****
>
>  ****
>
> Joseph N. Alexander | Partner****
>
> *POTTER CLEMENT BERGHOLTZ ALEXANDER*****
>
> ****308 East Fifth Avenue********
>
> Mount ****Dora**, **Florida** **32757********
>
> Phone:  352.383.4186****
>
> Fax:       352.383.0087****
>
> 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.****
>
> ** **
>  _______________________________________________
> landten mailing list
> landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten****************
>
>
>
> Lainie J. Simon, Esq.
> 185 NW Spanish River Boulevard
> Suite 220
> Boca Raton, FL  33431
> 561.445.1361
> 561.997.6224(fax)
>
> PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is covered by
> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and
> is legally privileged. The contents of this e-mail message
> and any attachments are intended solely for the party or parties addressed
> and named in this message. This communication and all attachments, if
> any, are intended to be and to remain confidential, and it may be
> subject to the applicable attorney - client and or work product privileges.
> If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message
> has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the
> sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and its attachments. Do
> not deliver, distribute, or copy this message and or any attachments if
> you are not the intended recipient. Do not disclose the contents or take
> any action in reliance upon the information contained in
> this communication or any attachments. Although this E-mail and any
> attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might
> affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is
> the  responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and
> no responsibility is accepted by the sender for damage arising in any
> way from its use.
> Ê
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> landten mailing list
> landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
>

-- 
Alberto M. Cardet, P.A.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/private/landten/attachments/20130520/db018757/attachment.html>