[WSBARP] We Knew It Was Gonna Happen

Wed Mar 31 09:47:59 PDT 2021

Listmates:

What are the exceptions to the Seattle moratorium.  I have a probate estate that needs to sell two tenant occupied homes in Seattle.  Any luck getting the tenants out?

Jeff

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Maxwell Glasson
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 9:03 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] We Knew It Was Gonna Happen

Correct, bearing in mind that Seattle doesn’t even allow you to use the “personal occupancy” exception to its moratorium anyway.  Either way, the Tenant undertaking the destruction that made it impractical/impossible to occupy or sell would be the bad faith/unclean hands defense to any action. 

Regards,

Maxwell B. Glasson 

Glasson Legal, PLLC 

2212 Queen Anne Ave. N, #659

Seattle, Washington, 98109

206-627-0528

max at glassonlegal.com <mailto:max at glassonlegal.com> 

www.glassonlegal.com <http://www.glassonlegal.com/>  

WA# 51948  NV# 13339  CA# 292356

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED. THE INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO WHOM OR THE ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of Kaitlyn Jackson
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 6:32 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Cc: realprop at googlegroups.com <mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com> 
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] We Knew It Was Gonna Happen

I think it also depends on the City the property is located in. For example, Seattle (I think) created some standard for terminating a month to month tenancy whereby the owner lists a reason to sell which creates a "rebuttable presumption" of bad faith on the part of the owner if the owner does not do so within X amount of time. In this case, however, it sounds like it would be the AG's Office who would have the authority to investigate and it would be up to them to prosecute if they felt there was a violation of the Governor's moratorium. I think it's a criminal penalty with potential jail time and/or a large fine. Under these facts, however, I think prosecutorial discretion is probably appropriate. However, if the family puts another tenant in there instead - that could cause problems. 

Sorry for the barely coherent ramble. 

Kaitlyn

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:43 PM Maxwell Glasson <max at glassonlegal.com <mailto:max at glassonlegal.com> > wrote:

Paul,

Per the Emergency Order, you only need to give the declaration of your intent to occupy, and does not give any other guidance as to timelines or actual occupation.  In this case, my thought is that only the former Tenant would have the right to complain, and they definitely don’t have the clean hands to bring any solid action against the elderly man. 

Regards, 

Maxwell B. Glasson 

Glasson Legal, PLLC 

2212 Queen Anne Ave. N, #659

Seattle, Washington, 98109

206-627-0528

max at glassonlegal.com <mailto:max at glassonlegal.com> 

www.glassonlegal.com <http://www.glassonlegal.com/>  

WA# 51948  NV# 13339  CA# 292356

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED. THE INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO WHOM OR THE ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of Paul Neumiller
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 4:33 PM
To: realprop at googlegroups.com <mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com> ; WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Subject: [WSBARP] We Knew It Was Gonna Happen

Elderly man brings an eviction and delivers a 60-day notice of affidavit of intent to personally occupy.  He intended to move in because he is in a wheelchair and the trailer has a handicap ramp.  Post-eviction, the family discovers the tenants totally trashed the place with holes in wall, garbage, and vermin.  Family (and elderly man) do not want to move elderly father into the trailer knowing its dangerous condition.  So, the gov’s moratorium requires the LL to state an intention to move in.  The moratorium does not give any requirements as to when the LL must move in or what happens under changed circumstances.  And, it seems to me that the elderly father fulfilled his requirement under the 60-day notice because, at the time he signed the notice, he had every intention of moving into the trailer.

Any of you UD Gurus come across this yet and what was your analysis or what was the resolution.  It does seem to me that, on a practical basis, who has standing to complain or who is going to complain (or even find out in order to complain)?

***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com> 
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

-- 

Thank you,

Kaitlyn R. Jackson | Attorney| DIMENSION LAW GROUP PLLC 
130 Andover Park East, Suite 300 | Tukwila, WA 98188

t: 206.973.3500 | f: 206.577.5090| e: kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com| <mailto:kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com|>  www.dimensionlaw.com <http://www.dimensionlaw.com/> 

Covid-19 Update - Dimension Law Group remains available to serve our clients and the public during this time, subject to the orders and recommendations of government authority. 

All attorneys and staff are working remotely regular business hours and are available via email and by phone. Videoconferencing also is available. We will continue to advise and support our clients throughout this health emergency.

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. Attempts to intercept this message are in violation of 18 USC 2511(1) of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which subjects the interceptor to fines, imprisonment and/or civil damages. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or telephone; return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy all paper and electronic copies. Any settlement offer contained herein is made pursuant to Washington ER 408, and without admitting fault or liability on the part of this firm’s client(s) or its agents.  IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLAIMER:  To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, I inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20210331/1be3b579/attachment.html>