How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask P. Simmons Your Own Question
P. Simmons
P. Simmons, Lawyer
Category: Real Estate Law
Satisfied Customers: 34759
Experience:  12+ yrs. of experience including real estate law.
Type Your Real Estate Law Question Here...
P. Simmons is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Ok I went and saw a house in Ridgecrest CA while they were

Customer Question

Ok I went and saw a house in Ridgecrest CA while they were fixing it and I was assured it would all be repaired before I moved in. I signed the lease without going through the house, big mistake. The ground fault circuit breakers were wired upside down, the kitchen faucet leaked bad the bathroom doors will not lock the bath room vent do not work there are exposed wires in the garage the circuit box had burned and broken circuit breakers the back yard is full of holes and weeds and the water system has exposed piping in back yard the master shower cannot be used due to it being cracked. It has bee 2 months now they have ripped out shower bottom and i see the slab is cracked, they did fix the circuit breaker box but it is outside and will not shut can I move out this month and get my 2 months rent back and my deposit back. The property is rented by Vaughn realty and is located at*****, Ridgecrest CA. I have not unpacked yet due to all the problems just my cloths they are not moving fast enough and I need to get settled in please help.
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Real Estate Law
Expert:  CalAttorney2 replied 1 year ago.

Dear Customer,

These issues appear to be "habitability" issues (problems with health or safety affecting the unit - see this CA Attorney General bulletin:

As they have failed to repair the unit in a "reasonable period of time" you have 3 options: 1) "repair and deduct" (where you make the repairs yourself and deduct this from your rent) - not really viable for this kind of extensive damage; 2) sue for damages (try to get the value of the rent back from the landlord); and 3) lease termination.

I always recommend trying to reach a settlement in writing with the landlord as opposed to simply picking up and moving out. The reason is that if you do this, the landlord has the leverage to sue you for unpaid rent, file a negative entry against your credit, and other underhanded things. If you settle the matter upfront you do not have to deal with these things on the back end (suing to try to correct them).

If you cannot reach a mutually agreeable resolution, you can always file a small claims action against the landlord.

Short of filing a lawsuit, you can try to mediate the dispute with them - contact your local bar association and request referrals to mediators, a third party neutral can often help you reach a mutually agreeable resolution. Use the bar association's referrals to contact a mediator or two, the mediator will then contact the other party to set up a mediation session, and you can go from there - hopefully resulting in a formal or written settlement agreement, and save yourself the time and expense of litigation. This is really the ideal option if you cannot reach a direct agreement in this kind of situation as it is much faster (most mediators can get you into mediation within a week or two).

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I am well aware of this I found this on my own. I also found several case that went to the CA supreme court where the habitability question was even further defined. Since the association will not help me here in Ridgecrest I was hoping you could point me in the right direction as to who could help me get these issues resolved or I move out. I already printed out these rights and many supreme court cases further defining my rights. I just don't want to fight this alone. I was hoping for you to give me direction on how to pursue this issue this is a small town and every one will know Vaughn so what can I do?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
No I am not satisfied with this answer anyone with computer knowledge can find this
Expert:  CalAttorney2 replied 1 year ago.

Dear Customer,

I am going to "opt out" and allow another expert to follow up with you.

Please do not post any further at this time as it will delay the next expert's ability to follow up.

If you need any assistance in the meantime, please contact our customer service at:

Thank you for using our forum, and I do wish you the best of luck.


Expert:  P. Simmons replied 1 year ago.

Hello! My name is ***** ***** I am a licensed attorney with more than 18 years of experience. I am here to assist you with your questions. Please understand that if I ask you for additional information, you are NOT charged again and our communications are NOT timed. So please see this as a relaxed conversation between friends. I am here to help

Also, if you would like to chat on the phone, let me know and I can make that happen.

I am assuming you are referring to the US Constitution. The U.S. Constitution uses but does not define the phrase "natural born Citizen".

Based on the current event, sure would have been helpful had the drafters taken some time to tell us what they intended by that phrase. The consensus from "case law" (courts interpreting this phrase) is that natural-born citizens include, subject to exceptions, those born in the United States

The leading case is came from the Supreme Court in 1939, where it stated in its decision in Perkins v. Elg, that a person born in America and raised in another country was a natural born citizen, and specifically stated that they could "become President of the United States"

In 1951, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit noted in Zimmer v. Acheson that "[t]here are only two classes of citizens of the United States, native-born citizens and naturalized citizens" The court ruled that Zimmer, who was born abroad in 1905 to a U.S. citizen father and a noncitizen mother, was himself a citizen under the nationality law in force at the time of his birth, but "his status as a citizen was that of a naturalized citizen and not a native-born citizen".

In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Montana v. Kennedy that an individual who was born in 1906 in Italy to a U.S. citizen mother and a noncitizen father was not a U.S. citizen by birth under the nationality laws in force at the time of his birth. It observed that automatic citizenship was granted to children of U.S. citizen fathers and noncitizen mothers by a 1855 act of Congress, but the reverse situation was only addressed, non-retroactively.

In 2010, a three-judge panel of the United States court of appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that natural born citizens can lose their citizenship if their territory of birth later ceases to be U.S. territory. The case involved a Philippine-born litigant who could not claim U.S. citizenship on the basis of his parents, who lived all their lives in the Philippines, because they were born while the Philippines was U.S. territory prior to being given its independence.

So, as far a Rubio goes, since Puerto Rico is still US territory, there is support that he meets the definition of natural born.

For Cruz?

There is no Supreme Case directly on no case that holds he meets that definition (that of natural born citizen)

Please let me know if you have more questions. I am happy to help if I can. Otherwise, please rate the answer so I may get credit for my work.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Boy are you way off base here what in the world does this have to do with renting a house? Just drop it I will find someone local or I will handle it myself this was of no help to me at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I would like a refund please no further request after the second answer which had nothing to do with my question