Posts Tagged AASEW

LLC’s – PART 2: How To Insure They Protect You From Personal Liability

Nov 4

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, LLC's | No Comments

In my October 28, 2009 post entitled LLC’s – Part 1: Why You Should Consider Using Them To Hold Your Rental Property,  I indicated that in the near future I would write a second post on LLC’s and include a link to the outline that I drafted and presented to the AASEW membership at the October monthly meeting.  My portion of the presentation on LLC’s focused on the following topics:

1.     General information on business entities (corporations, partnerships etc.) and how they are distinct from an individual person.

2.     How those general principles apply to LLC’s.

3.   What is “piercing the corporate veil” or “disregarding the corporate fiction” and what are the various tests and factors that courts look at when evaluating whether or not they should hold an individual liable for the actions or debts of the LLC under the “alter ego” theory.

You can read my outline here.

Tags: ,

FREE SEMINAR ON LLC’S – WHY YOU NEED THEM AND HOW TO INSURE THEY PROTECT YOU FROM PERSONAL LIABILITY

Oct 15

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, LLC's, Seminars | No Comments

Lydia Chartre and I will be presenting a free seminar at the AASEW’s October monthly meeting on October 19, 2009 at 7 pm.  The meeting will be held at the Best Western Midway Hotel which is located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield.

Lydia and I will be speaking on LLC’s and why you should consider using this form of business entity to hold your rental property and what you must do when handling your LLC to insure that your personal assets are protected.

Lydia will be discussing the nuts and bolts of  LLC’s including:

- Why you may want to form an LLC to hold your rental property

- The necessary steps to form an LLC

- Information that you (or an attorney) will need to form your LLC

I will speak on the topic of what formalities you will need to follow when handling your LLC to insure that your personal assets will be protected.  While the general law is that an LLC — just like a corporation – is a separate and distinct entity from its  individual members, there are instances where courts have allowed an injured party or a creditor to “pierce the corporate veil” or hold the individual personally liable for the actions and/or debts of the LLC. 

Last summer I defended a client that was sued personally for the debt of his then defunct corporation.  The creditor attempted to “pierce the corporate veil” and hold my client and his new corporation responsible for the debts of  his prior company.  I will draw from my research, arguments and the experience that I gained during this multi-day trial to explain what you must do in order to keep the shiled of your LLC and avoid anyone suing you personally for its actions or debts.

If you have never been to an AASEW meeting before — or if you haven’t been to one in awhile – I would strongly encourage you to attend this seminar.  It will be filled with lots of practical infromation.  I hope to see you there.

Tags: ,

AASEW Has New Online Forum at MeetUp.com

Aug 20

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

The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin (AASEW) has recently joined MeetUp.com.  Registration and participation is free.

Below is the introductory message by AASEW Board member and organizer, Tim Ballering:

Welcome to the Apartment Association of Southeastern WI.  Thank you for joining our MeetUp group.

Our objective is to help members become more successful landlords, investors and managers.

We are the oldest and largest landlord group in Southeastern WI. Members include many larger owners, mom and pop owners, businesses that provide services to the rental housing industry, and many of the best landlord / tenant and real estate attorneys in the state.

The Association provides training in evictions, collections and other aspects necessary for you to succeed. Many of our business members offer discounts to Association members.

We also provide discounted tenant screening and bad debt reporting for our members.

We provide free eviction notices to members as well as other forms.

We are a nonprofit, member managed association since 1977.

We look forward to meeting you.

The Association’s webpage
www.apartmentassoc.org

Have landlord or real estate questions? Join the discussion at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ApartmentAssoc

Tags:

SSN Validator: Free Website That Allows You to Verify A Social Security Number

Aug 19

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, Screening Tenants | 1 Comment

I attended last night’s AASEW monthly meeting which featured Kathy Huens of Landlord Services, LLC as the main speaker.  Landlord Services, LLC is a company that provides credit reports to landlords to assist them in the screening process of rental applicants.  Landlord Services, LLC is a business member of the AASEW and comes highly reccomended.  During Kathy’s speech she alerted the audience to a website that allows you to verify certain information regarding a person’s social security number.

SSN Validator allows you to input a person’s social security number and will then provide you with basic information such as:

- Has that SSN been issued or not,

- Approximate date when the SSN was issued,

- State in which the SSN was issued,

- Whether or not the person that was issued that SSN is deceased.

This website is completely free.  I have added this site to my list of websites to assist you during the screening process.  Use of this website will certainly assist a landlord in determining whether or not a SSN supplied by a prospective tenant is valid.  For instance if the applicant appears to be between the age range of 20-30 years old and the SSN Validator indicates that the SSN was issued in 1950 — you now have a red flag and will need to do some more due dilligence on that applicant.  Or suppose that after inputting the rental applicant’s SSN you are notified that the person to whom that SSN was issued is deceased – you have now been alerted to the possibility that your applicant has assumed another’s identity.

I love free tools that assist me in evaluating my rental applicants.  Thanks Kathy!

Tags: ,

AASEW’S Annual Landlord Tradeshow To Be Held On September 16th at Serb Hall

Aug 17

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

The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin’s (AASEW) 10th Annual Landlord Tradeshow and Seminar will be held on Wednesday, September 16, 2009 from 12 noon – 7 pm at American Serb Hall (5101 W. Oklahoma Ave, Milwaukee).

Admission is free for rental property owners and potential owners.  Free food and snacks will be offerred.  This is a great event for landlords, future landlords, property managers, real estate investors, and anyone else interested in learning how to succeed in today’s real estate market.

Attendees will learn how to run their rental properties with more profit and less hassle.  They will also have the opportunity to meet the vendors that rental property owners use on a regular basis.

Seminars that will be presented include:

- “How To Collect Tenant Bad Debt” by Bill Gray of Rent Recovery Services

-  “Causes for Eviction: Which Notice To Use When” by Tristan Pettit, Esq. of Petrie & Stocking S.C.

- “New Lead Paint Renovation Rules” by Ada Duffy of Milwaukee Lead and Asbestos Center

-  “How To Improve the Eviction Process” by the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Department

-  “How To Benefit from a 1031 Exchange” by Patrick Harrington, Esq. of M&I 1031 Exchange Service

- Town Hall Meeting – Get Answers to Your Rental Property Questions featuring:  Attorney Tristan R. Pettit of Petrie & Stocking S.C. and AASEW President, Attorney Heiner Giese of Giese & Weiden LLC and AASEW’s general counsel, and Susan Ipsarides, Portfolio Director for StuartCo.

For more information go to www.LandlordTradeShow.com

You will not want to miss this!  Hope to see you there.

Tags:

Milwaukee’s Chronic Nuisance Ordinance and It’s Improper Use Against Landlords

Jul 29

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, City of Milwaukee, Evictions, Nuisance Properties | 4 Comments

 
The City of Milwaukee’s Chronic Nuisance Ordinance (80-10) is a thorn in the side of many landlords.  Essentially the ordinance says that if your property generates more than 3 calls for police service for “nuisance activities” within a 30 day period  that the city will charge you  for the costs associated with abating the alleged nuisance. 
 
Nuisance activities include the following: harassment, disorderly conduct, battery, indecent exposure, prostitution, littering, theft, possession, manufacture or delivery of drugs, gambling, illegal possession of firearms, keeping a dangerous animal, trespass to land, conspiracy to commit a crime, discharge of a firearm, excessive noise, loitering, public drinking, sale of liquor, possession of counterfeit items, possession or selling of drug paraphenalia, selling or giving tobacco products to children, misuse of emergency telephone numbers, harboring an animal that causes a disturbance, illegal use or sale of fireworks, and truancy.  In summary, a nuisance activity is pretty much anything and everything you can think of.
 
If your rental property is being used as a drug house or is the headquarters for a gang or if you are allowing tenant to run a house of prostitution out of your apartment complex then I agree that your property is more than likely occupying more than its fair share of the police department’s time and resources and that the property may be a chronic nuisance.  But this is not the only — nor is it the typical — situation in which this ordinance is being used against landlords.
 
Oftentimes landlords are having fines added to their property tax bill or being contacted by the police becasue a tenant called 911 to report a legitimate crime, or because a neighbor (who is mad that they live next to an apartment complex) called the police because s/he doesn’t like it when the tenants stand and talk in front of the building, or my all-time favorite, a person (not a tenant or the owner) walked by the rental property and decided to drop their hamburger wrapper on the lawn.  All of the above instances qualify as nuisance activities under Milwaukee’s ordinance and can result in a property being declared a chronic nuisance.
I have heard from many landlords — both in my capacity as an attorney representing landlords and as the president of the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin (AASEW) — about circumstances in which they have been contacted by the police as a result of examples similar to those mentioned above.  I recently received an email from a new AASEW member who was very upset at being in such a situation and contacted the AASEW for assistance and guidance.  I have reproduced the member’s email, with his permission, ommitting his name and the property address to protect his identity. 
 
 
I own a 30 unit building at __________________.  Last December there were 2 family arguments in which police were called, and a misdialed 911 call.  According to the City’s Nuisance Ordinance, 3 or more nuisance calls in any 30 day period from a property puts the owner on a list for “supervision” from the district’s community liaison officer for a full 12 months.  The owner must submit a plan for abatement for acceptance by MPD, fully execute the plan in a timely manner, check for nuisance incidents monthly at MPD Public Records office, and then submit a report and action plan for abatement for each incident.
 
My plan was approved and executed.  I do have continuing nuisance incidents occurring though, but so far only one was a repeat from the same tenant.  She had called the police to report that her son was receiving death threats.  If my son where receiving death threats, I’d call the police too, but the community liaison officer told me that that was considered a nuisance, and strongly implied that if I didn’t deal with it, the property would be designated as a Chronic Nuisance.  So, against my better judgment, I filed an eviction.  Of course, I was laughed out of court.  As any landlord will tell you, a failed eviction action usually means the situation will deteriorate. This is not good business, but the fact is I’m being strong-armed by MPD to act.
 
I have taken absolutely EVERY action I was directed to take, or suggested I take, by MPD and more.  I have responded to nuisance reports in as heavy-handed ways I can muster, with warnings, fines, and 5 Day Notices, to try and satisfy MPD.  However, I feel like I’m being railroaded, and no matter what I do MPD will designate it as a Chronic Nuisance.
 
Please understand that, while my building is by no means the “Ritz”, it is also by no means a slum either.  Nor am I a slum landlord.  This is a nice building in which we have invested heavily, increasing the value, as well as the tax collections for the City of Milwaukee. We turned this building around from a bad property in 2003, with crappy tenants who avoided calling the police like the plague, to a rehabbed property with much better tenants with higher expectations and no qualms about calling the police to demand service (which I pay for).
 
My understanding is that this ordinance was originally enacted to give the City some ammunition against irresponsible landlords.  I fear that MPD is using the ordinance to coerce landlords to enforce the law in their stead.  I have asked MPD on several occasions, both verbally and in writing, to provide me with information regarding any citations given to people who are involved in the nuisance activity, and I have gotten none.  The ordinance extends to 911 abuse.  Why landlords are put in a position where they are required by MPD to enforce 911 abuse is a mystery to me.  Why not fine AT&T – it’s their line!  The whole thing boils down to MPD’s inability to enforce the laws, and the abdication of their enforcement responsibilities in favor of coercing landlords to do their job for them, under threat of fines.  The whole thing is, in a word, insane. Even if a landlord is successful in eviction someone, the problem just goes somewhere else anyway.
 
The final insult to me is the fact that MPD’s definition of “property” may be a single family home, or a 30 unit building like mine. I get the same 3 call limit per month for 30 families as a single family in a regular house.  I pay 30 times more taxes than the single family owner, but I receive 1/30th of the service quota.  In my opinion this is an impossible and patently unfair standard.
There are single family homes and condos next to some of my buildings where the tenants are involved in gun play, drugs and prostitution.  I have lost tenants due to these neighboring activities.  Alas, these are not nuisance properties because there are less than 3 calls per month regarding each property.  I have a few family disputes and misdialed 911 calls each month from my 30 family building, and I’m the nuisance.
 
I thought that this individual’s email was extremely well-written and clearly pointed out several of the problems with how the City is applying the Chronic Nuisance property against landlords, such as:
1.   Regardless of the size of the property (whether it be a single family home or a 100 unit apartment complex) after 3 “nuisance activities” your property can be declared a chronic nuisance.

2.   Many of the so-called nuisance activities are not activities for which a Milwaukee County Court Commissioner or Judge will evict a tenant for participating in.   As this person stated, the writer indicaterd, when he tried to evict the tenant he was  “laughed out of court.”   I have been involved in eviction trials where at the close of evidence, rather then evicting the tenant that was selling drugs out of my client’s property, the Judger told the tenant that he really didin’t need to have 20 people coming and going from his apartment between the hours of 11 pm and 3 am most nights of the week and that he should stop that activity as it wasn’t fair to his neighbors.  The Judge then denied my clients request for a judgment of eviction but rather scheduled the case for a staus conference in 60 days to see if things improved.   If landlords cannot even get obvious drug dealers evicted how are they going to be able to have a tenant that littered, called 911, or made an excessive noise evicted?

3.   Some of the 911 calls are legitimate calls for which the police should be called and the owner of that property should not be put in the position of having to choose between receiving a fine and having his/her property declared to be a nuisance or telling his tenants not to call 911 for real emergencies.

4.   Oftentimes the property that is attributed with the call is not where the actual “nuisance activity” occurred.  I heard of an instance where a woman had gotten into a fight with her boyfriend at her home and then fled, she then stopped at a nearby apartment complex and asked one of the tenant’s if she could use her phone to call the police.  Seeing that the lady was upset, the tenant allowed her to make the call.  The lady called 911.  As a result of the tenant being a helpful neighbor to the victim, the tenant’s landlord was contacted by the police becasue the telephone call was considered to be an improper use of an emergency number.

I think the police and the Department of Neighborhood Services (which often gets involved in these situations) need to use some “common sense” and distinguish true nuisance activity from other activity rather than classifying everything as a nuisance. 

I also think that it would also be helpful for the police and DNS to spend some time in eviction court and observe just how difficult it is to evict a tenant for anything other than failure to pay rent.  Maybe after sitting in room 400 of the Milwaukee County Courthouse for an afternoon they will realize that they are living in an alternate universe if they think that a landlord can obtain an eviction judgment against a tenant who litters, improperly calls 911, makes loud noises, or loiters.

I have met with the new Commissioner of DNS, Art Dahlberg, along with other members of the AASEW board, and Mr. Dahlberg was also kind enough to speak at one of the AASEW’s membership meetings.  In speaking with the Commissioner, he has commented that he agrees that some common sense used when determining if something a a nuisance activity.  It is my hope that the addition of some common sense will occur ASAP so that landlords like the one that emailed me above, are not being placed in such an unfair position.

If Milwaukee’s Chrnoic Nuisance ordinance has been unfairly applied to you and your rental properties I would appreciate you providing me with the details by adding a comment to this post. 

Tags: , ,

AASEW’s Response to Rep. Schneider’s CCAP Legislation Can Be Found at www.DefeatAB340.org

Jul 20

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, CCAP, Rep. Marlin Schneider, Screening Tenants | 5 Comments

For those of you that have been following my blog, you are well aware that State Rep. Marlin Schneider (D-Wisconsin Rapids) has introduced yet another bill attempting to restrict the public’s access to CCAP.  This new bill also will remove certain information from even being included on CCAP.  My prior blogs on this topic can be read here, here and here.

The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin (AASEW), a collection of landlords and rental property managers, are strongly opposed to Schenider’s new bill which is entitled AB 340,  and have decided to do something about it.  The AASEW has created a web page that can be found at www.DefeatAB340.org or by clicking here, which contains links to the actual bill as well as links to your state senators and representative so that you can contact them and convey your displeasure with this bill.

Please visit the AASEW’s web page and consider contacting your elected officials to express your views as to AB 340.  You should also forward the link to anyone and everyone you know that may be affected by this legislation. 

If passed, this bill will affect more than just landlords.  Parents, employers, day care providers and more, will be unable to use CCAP without paying an annual fee and having their CCAP searches recorded by the state.  Additionally, you will be unable to learn whether a person has been charged with a crime, found liable in a civil lawsuit, or had an eviction action filed against them – until after the case has been resolved, which is often months or years after the action was filed.

The bill will also allow a person who has information contained on CCAP but which did not result in a convictions or judgment (even if this was the result of a stipulated dismissal) to remove all reference to that information from CCAP.  The concept of open records will be hurt severly should AB 340 pass.

Please do your part to insure that AB340 fails.

Tags: , , , ,