Our neighbor is building a house. To avoid additional costs
Our neighbor is building a house. To avoid additional costs for concrete, they elevated their lot, with fill dirt, by about 4'-5' above what existed. Now when rain comes, drainage as well as their fill dirt pours into our lot. Whose responsibility is it to correct this issue?
During the closing of my home, I was instructed that I
During the closing of my home, I was instructed that I needed flood insurance. The surveyor completed the elevation certificate and my insurance agent provided a low annual premium. After purchasing the home, FEMA sent paperwork saying the application was wrong. The surveyor made an error on the elevation certificate causes my premiums to triple annually. Is the surveyor at fault for misrepresentation? Can I go after the purchase price of my home since I would not have purchased this property if an accurate certificate provided?
This question has to do with commercial lease in California.
Hello. This question has to do with commercial lease in California. I am the landlord. The lease is the AIR Form STG-17-2/13E of their AIR COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATION STANDARD INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL SINGLE-TENANT LEASE -- GROSS.The property is a retail / commercial / industrial property. The use is for retail sales and agricultural growing.The tenant improved 2/3's of the building and opened for business.Now he wants to improve the 1/3 and upgrade/change some of his previous improvements.The landlords received a request for consent, (Lease point 7.3 (b) Consent), a few days ago with the plans for the improvement,The tenant is in default of many lease points at this time.What are my rights in California at this moment? (please provide references to help understand for State laws, codes or cases).For example, can I insist that the defaults cured before I grant consent to the new proposed construction?There is more detail (always) but this is the overall view.Please help with some insight and references.Thanks,
Last year I put my home in new Hampshire into a contract for
Hello ,last year I put my home in new Hampshire into a contract for deed with a nice young family. the contract is a legit legal document, notarized, but the closing was all very informal. I was unaware at the time that I was required to provide a lead disclosure form (the house was built in 1815). I certainly had no acute knowledge of Lead in the home, but I certainly understand that it is always worth suspecting in a home of that age. I had renovated 80% of the interior of the home. the two rooms where original painted woodwork existed I cleaned and repainted with three coats. the siding is still original and unfinished though.last week the buyers informed me that their 1 year old son tested with elevated lead levels, and they are planning to move out, and expect me to buy back the equity they have in the house. to my knowledge, no tests have been done to find lead in the home yet.I have been in touch with the EPA, and I am trying to right things from there end, but I am wondering If anyone has insight into whether or not such claims nullify an existing contract.your time is much appreciated.
We have a situation in our HOA in which the professional
We have a situation in our HOA in which the professional manager convinced the board to pay $30,000 to install Ethernet in the building, even though the board was made aware that they needed not pay this at the time, as other providers would provide the 100mb internet service they were after without the $30,000 charge. The manger is now admitting that, now, the $30,000 charge would not be needed.We also have a situation, where Webpass (their monthly charge is more expensive than other services) was given exclusive access to the HOA email list, advertising in the elevators, and the use of the HOA club room to promote their services. This is unprecedented in the 22 years we have been in the building, and we therefore asked the following questions: "Who exactly, 1) requested access to the home owners by email on behalf of Webpass, and 2) who approved it? Same questions go for the advertising in the elevator, and the approval of the Webpass use of the HOA clubroom." Management and board flat out refuse to answer these questions.It should also be mentioned that HOA members do not get access to the HOA email list, and advertising space in the elevators, and have to pay for the use of the HOA club room.What is our legal recourse in finding out what is going on?
Our building closed its wide and architecturally designed
Our building closed its wide and architecturally designed main entrance decades ago,forcing coop shareholder/residents to use a narrow side "service entrance" ever since.This service entrance is far from the premium A/B apartment elevator, and reduces the value of A/B apartments (and all apartments) on the market. Does an A line shareholder/resident have a right to demand that the primary designated Main Entrancebe restored?
We built a new house and were never told it was in AE flood
We built a new house and were never told it was in AE flood plain. Even at closing, they said no. We found out after closing that we are in AE and flood insurance will be 13K a year. City ordinance states an elevation certificate on final built house must be done and meet flood zone specifications of at least 2 feet higher than base flood elevation before city will issue occupancy certificate. This was not done, no elevation certificate, but occupancy certificate was issued and we closed on the house
F.S. 633.0215 - Florida Prevention Code states as follows:
F.S.(###) ###-####- Florida Prevention Code states as follows:The State Fire Marshall shall adopt by rule pursuant to ss 120.536(1) and 120.54, the Fire Prevention Code which shall contain and incorporate by reference all firesafety laws and rules that pertain to and govern the design, construction, erection, alteration, modification, repair and demolition of public and private buildings, structures, and facilites and the enforcement of such firesafery laws and rules.Florida Fire Prevention Code under F.S 633.022 states as follows:—The Legislature hereby determines that to protect the public health, safety, and welfare it is necessary to provide for firesafety standards governing the construction and utilization of certain buildings and structures. The Legislature further determines that certain buildings or structures, due to their specialized use or to the special characteristics of the person utilizing or occupying these buildings or structures, should be subject to firesafety standards reflecting these special needs as may be appropriate.(1) The department shall establish uniform firesafety standards that apply to:(a) All new, existing, and proposed state-owned and state-leased buildings.(b) All new, existing, and proposed hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, adult family-care homes, correctional facilities, public schools, transient public lodging establishments, public food service establishments, elevators, migrant labor camps, mobile home parks, lodging parks, recreational vehicle parks, recreational camps, residential and nonresidential child care facilities, facilities for the developmentally disabled, motion picture and television special effects productions, tunnels, and self-service gasoline stations, of which standards the State Fire Marshal is the final administrative interpreting authority.Issues:F.S.(###) ###-####speaks in general of "public and private buildings". It defines those kinds of buildings as the appropriate category for application in a number of ways that clearly exclude "existing structures" unless said structure are in the process of some "alteration, modification or repair".But F.S.633.022 limits the application of the "uniform firesafety standards to only some categories of public and private buildings. Moreover, the mandatory standards are specifically mentioned and intended to apply to both new and existing but only to very specific public and private buildings.Thus the clear and convincing interpretation (to me anyway) of the law is as follows:1. No existing "private building" not in the process "alteration, repair or modification" is subject to the law under any circumstances.2. The precise articulation of the term "existing buildings" in FS 633.022, distinguishes existing buildings from the other categories defined in(###) ###-#### It is not therefore a matter of a "scrivener's error" or subject to any other interpretive intent but that which I have given it.Questions:1. Absent any other conflicting statute, is my interpretation shown in Issue # 1 above correct?2. In the light of the very specific listing in 633.022 of which "existing buildings" are covered, is it not very clear that private buildings not in the process of "alteration, medication and improvement" are absolutely not included?
In Chicago, I lived in a bldg on 3rd floor of a 4 floor
In Chicago, I lived in a bldg on 3rd floor of a 4 floor building that had a functioning elevator for 3years that was only not working at most for 4days in total at 2separate instances over 3years. as soon as I moved to the 4th floor and signed a lease to rent an apt on the 4th floor (up 45 stairs) under the pretense that this elevator would be working, the elevator is not working for over 10days. That's up and down 180stairs to do 1load of laundry. I am disabled and have had 5 surgeries on my ankle from falling down stairs once.Can I withhold rent per day until it is fixed and deduct it? Also, if it does not get fixed for weeks can I give a 30 day notice and break the lease? Old let me know. Thanks. Colleen 312 402_2363.