State Supreme Court To Jump Into The Debate Over Restricting Information on CCAP

Mar 15

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in CCAP, Rep. Marlin Schneider | No Comments

The Journal Sentinel published an article on Saturday, March 13, 2010 entitled “Supreme Court Considers Limits To Online Court Records.”  It appears that while landlords have pretty much quashed Rep. Schneiders attempts to pass legislation on the restriction of infromation posted on CCAP, that the State Supreme Court will be reviewing the issue in the near future.

Patrick Marley’s article states that Rep. Schneider did not believe his CCAP bill would come up for a vote this spring.  However, Marley states that in an administrative meeting last month, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed that they should study limiting what is posted on CCAP.  Justice Prosser was quoted as saying that “whatever problems we have has been incredibly exacerbated by CCAP and the Internet.  The case for redress is much too compelling to just let it die.”

The State Bar of Wisconsin has also asked the Supreme Court to make it easier to remove CCAP records and filed a request with the Supreme Court to make it easier to expunge records, both online and at the courthouse.

So while the legislative attempt to restrict CCAP may be over the overall fight appears to be continuing.  Be sure and read the comments to Marley’s article for a lively discussion for and against restrictions on CCAP.

Tags: , ,

AASEW Trader’s Corner To Be Held Prior to Monthly Meeting on Monday, March 15th

Mar 13

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, Investing In Rental Property | 1 Comment

Are you thinking about buying or selling or trading? Or, maybe you’re just wondering where the RE market is currently at. Or, maybe you know a non-member (future member?) who is. No matter, because all are welcome to join us at the new AASEW Traders’ Corner.

If that isn’t enough, check this out. The Traders’ Corner is also a great place to find a buyer for that truck you no longer need or someone selling their over-supply of rehab materials. Whatever it is that you are looking to find or trying to sell that is related to our business, this is the place to be.

If all of that still isn’t enough, consider the networking possibilities.

When? Monday, March 15th, 6:30 – 7:00 PM
(One half hour before the AASEW General Meeting)

Where? Best Western Motel, 1005 S. Moorland Rd.
(I-94 to Exit 301A, then south 1/4 mile)

We look forward to seeing you there.

Finally, Some Legislation That Actually Assists Landlords – Senate Bill 607

Mar 11

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Evictions, Legislation, Notices of Breach | 3 Comments

Senators Plale, Hansen, and Lasee introduced Senante Bill (SB) 607 yesterday.  What a breath of fresh air it is to read this bill.  Rather then making landlords jump through more and more hoops to protect our tenants and rental property, this bill actually assists us in doing our jobs.  I am so used to blogging about proposed legislation that hurts (or at the very least hinders) landlords that this is a nice change.

If passed, this bill will allow a landlord to terminate a tenant’s tenancy, regardless if they are a month-to-month tenant, tenant under a lease for 1 year or less, or a tenant with a lease for more than 1 year, if the tenant or the tenant’s guest, commits certain crimes, in property or near the property.

Currently if you have a tenant under a lease for one year or less or more than one year (as opposed to a periodic tenancy like a month-to-month) and if that tenant commits a crime you are legally prevented for terminating that tenant’s tenancy and evicting them.  The current law states that if a tenant under a lease commits a breach (including criminal activity) that they landlord MUST serve them with a 5 day notice that allows the tenant the opportunity to cure the breach. 

Currently the only two exceptions to the above, are the very limited situations in which the tenant has created a gang or drug nuisance at the property AND the landlord has received a written notice of drug or gang nuisance from a law enforecement agency.  Only in these two limited circumstances can a landlord serve a 5 day notice on the tenant that does not afford the tenant the right to cure the breach.

To better illustrate the current status of the law, here is an example: 

Tenant A gets drunk and runs around the apartment complex brandishing a gun and threatening to shoot anyone that he passes.  Assuming that Tenant A is not arrested and hauled off to jail,  Tenant A’s landlord is not legally allowed to terminate Tenant A’s tenancy and file an eviction action as a result of this criminal behavior if Tenant A is under a lease for one year or less or a lease for more than one year.  The only legal recourse that the landlord has is to serve Tenant A with a 5 day notice which affords Tenant A with the opportunity to cure the breach (the criminal activity) or vacate.  How does Tenant A cure the breach?  By not running around the apartment complex within the next 5 days brandishing a gun and threatening to shoot people.  Ridiculous I know, but that is all Tenant A must do to cure his breach and if he does that, the landlord is legally required to keep him as a tenant as long as the tenant is under a lease. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

I Discovered A Really Informative Blog Devoted To Fair Housing Issues

Mar 10

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Fair Housing / Discrimination | 2 Comments

This past weekend I was trying to think of some ways to add some variety and fun to Tristan’s Landlord-Tenant Law Blog.  While I feel that my blog is informative and helpful I wish that I could make it more fun.  Toward that end I decided that I would spend some time trying some new types of blog posts in the future — a list post (i.e. Top Ten Reasons To Not Allow Cats in Your Rental Unit, Top Ten Excuses for Paying Rent Late), a video post, a book review post. 

Those of you that are regular readers of my blog or those of you that have met me personally may know that I really enjoy learning knew things relating to Landlord-Tenant law.  Because of this, I was really excited this past weekend to discover a blog devoted totally to discrimination/Fair Housing issues. 

The Fair Housing Blog is published by Attorney Ron Leshnower.  He started his blog in 2008 to coincide with the 40th anniversary of the Fair Housing Act.  The purpose of his blog, according to his bio, is to explore housing discrimination issues that are important and interesting but do not always get much press.

This blog covers all issues that could possible arise in the Fair Housing context.  He talks about all of the protected classes, reasonable modifications and reasonable accomodations for individuals with disabilities, testing, voice profiling, steering, and many more issues.  What I like most about this blog is that the author provides links to the actual legal documents that the federal or state government filed against the landlord,  property manager, or owner who allegedly violated the law.  This allows you to read the actual factual allegations.  While many of these lawsuits are resolved without a need for a hearing and therefore there is no written decision necessary,  it is still very enlightening to read about what specific situations are egregious enough to cause the government file a lawsuit. 

What better way to learn then from other’s mistakes.  Some of the author’s blog posts include links to fair housing studies performed by various municipalities as well as media reports. 

If you are interested in Fair Housing issues as I am or just want to learn what type of actions can land you in trouble I would encourage you to spend some time at the Fair Housing Blog.

I have previously posted a three-part series about Fair Housing law that will give you some useful basic information to better understand the Fair Housing Blog.  You can read those posts here, here and here.

Tags: , ,

SECURITY DEPOSIT TRANSMITTAL LETTERS: How To Draft A Legal 21-Day Letter

Mar 4

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in ATCP 134, Security Deposit | 3 Comments

Security deposit withholding issues are the second most litigated area in landlord tenant law after evictions.  If a landlord makes improper deduction from a tenant’s security deposit, pursuant to ATCP 134 and §100.20, Wis. Stats., the tenant may sue the landlord for double damages and attorney’s fees.  There are numerous published Court of Appeals decisions in Wisconsin dealing with this exact issue.  I would like to offer a few suggestions to landlords which will hopefully keep you from making any improper security deposit deductions.

 

First, we need to address some basics . . .

A security deposit is defined as “any payment that is given to a landlord as security for the performance of the tenants obligations under the rental agreement.” ATCP 134.01(11).

ATCP 134.06(2), states that “within 21 days after a tenant surrenders the rental property, the landlord shall deliver or mail to the tenant the full amount of any security deposit held by the landlord, less any amounts properly withheld by the landlord.”

If you would like to know what a landlord may legally deduct from a tenant’s security deposit you will want to read my Jan. 17th post.

ATCP 134.06(4), states “If any portion of a security deposit is withheld by the landlord, the landlord shall, within the time period and manner prescribed in sub.(2) – 21 days — deliver or mail to the tenant a written statement accounting for all amounts withheld.  The statement shall describe each item of physical damages or other claim made against the security deposit, and the amount withheld as reasonable compensation for each item or claim.”

I will refer to this written statement interchangeably as either the “security deposit transmittal letter” or the “21-day letter.”

According to ATCP 134 all prepaid rent in excess of one month is legally considered to be a security deposit.  So if you require a new tenant to pay first and last months rent plus a security deposit, legally the security deposit will also include the last month’s rent

Essentially a landlord must either return a tenant’s security deposit or send the tenant an itemization of how the tenant’s security deposit was applied within 21 days after the tenant surrenders the premises.  This is mandatory.  No matter what the situation – even if you are legally entitled to keep all of the tenant’s security deposit – you must still send the tenant a letter explaining to them why you can legally keep it and how it was applied.  There is no situation in which you should not be sending the 21-day letter to a vacating residential tenant in Wisconsin.  Even if common sense tells you it is not necessary (i.e. the tenant told me to use his/her security deposit to pay for the last month’s rent) you should still send out the letter.  If you are wrong the ramification may be expensive.  Be safe – send the letter each and every time. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

Wisconsin’s New Lead-Safe Renovation Rule is Upon Us – April 22, 2010 – Get Trained

Mar 1

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

From a March 1, 2010 post by Tim Ballering on the AASEW Advisors listserv:

Beginning April 22nd you will be required to be trained and have WI
DHFS or EPA certification even to work on your own pre 1978 rental
housing.

Yes the rule will be very expensive to comply with (See the articles
below). Yes it is another — to put it in terms the government uses –
unfunded mandate.  But it is now the law and it will eventually be
painfully expensive not to comply. (Big fines, lawsuits etc.)

The good news, if there is such a thing in this context, is the AASEW has a
tentative agreement with another state certified trainer to provide
this training for less than $200 per person.

We need a head count of how many owners and their crew members would
be interested in taking advantage of this.  That number will set the
final pricing.  If we hustle the training would be prior to 4/22/10 so
that no one is out of compliance.

This rule will affect you if you replace windows, disturb 6 square feet of paint on the interior or 20 square feet of paint on the exterior of any pre-1978 rental housing.  Essentailly this will affect all of us that own rentals.

If you would be interested in attendng — please post a comment below along with the number of people you would be sending and I will pass the info on to Tim.

Thanks

T

————-Recent News on EPA Rules —————–

http://bit.ly/bWjTs8

“The price for homeowners could be hiked by $500 to $1,000 per room,
McComas said.”

———-

http://bit.ly/9mHQMN

“It’s going to price a lot of these jobs right out of the market,” he
said.”I think it’s going to put me out of business.”

———–

http://bit.ly/bTXEoh

The new federal lead safety rules that take effect this spring are
coming just as work gears up on federal stimulus projects that may be
affected by the new regulations.

———–

http://bit.ly/a9uZnL

“You’re talking about at least a few thousand dollars extra,” said
DiBernardo. Gehrig estimated the extra labor might add 25 percent to
a siding job.

———–

http://bit.ly/b8hnjr

New regulations aimed at protecting homeowners from lead based paint
could make your renovation costs skyrocket.

Landlords Will Be Required To Install Carbon Monoxide Detectors In Single Family and Duplex Rentals

Feb 23

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Legislation | No Comments

A new bill was recently passed by the Wisconsin Senate that will require landlords that rent out single-family homes and duplexes to install carbon monoxide detectors on all floors of these dwellings by Febraury 1, 2011.

Senate Bill 415 was passed 69-27 via voice vote after the Assembly previously passed the bill by a 2/3’s margin.  You can read the entire history of the bill here.  It is anticipated that the Governor will sign the bill.

SB 415 requires the owner of most buildings that contain one or two dwelling units to install a carbon monoxide detector in the basement and on each floor of the dwelling unit except for the attic.

Additionally, the bill requires that if the tenant notifies the owner in writing that a detector is not working properly, that the owner must perform the necessary maintenance to repair the detector or replace it within 5 days after receipt of the notice by the tenant.

The bill also exempts an owner for any liability for any false alarms or from the failure of the detector to work properly if its failure was due to tampering, as long as the owner reasonably maintained the detector.

Existing 1 and 2 unit dwellings will be allowed to use battery operated carbon monoxide detectors.

A carbon monoxide detector is not required to be installed if the unit does not have an attached garage, has no fireplace, and has no fuel-burning appliances.

Finally, the bill authorizes a building inspector to inspect new dwellings, and if requested to do so by the owner or tenant, to inspect the interior of an existing rental unit to ensure that the owner has complied with the requirements set forth in this bill.

This new law will become effective as of February 1, 2011 and will be contained in Section 101.647 of the Wisconsin Statutes.

Please remember that the carbon monoxide law that affects rentals that include 3 units or greater goes into effect April 1, 2010.  This law can be found in Sec. 101.149, of the Wisconsin Statutes.  ADDED 3/1/10:  These regulations were issued as emergency rules by the Department of Commerce, Safety and Building Division, as required 2007 Wisconsin Act 205 (in April 2008).  The Wisconsin Department of Commerce’s brochure on this law is very informative.

———————————–

Thanks to Atty. Heiner Giese for forwarding this information to me.

Tags: , ,