[RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out.
Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty
of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some
discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came
through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or
e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as
well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding
her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of
course no response. We are ready to file complaint for possession
today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a
3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not
required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed
immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our notice
to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the
issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged information. If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
A three day notice demands rent or possession. There is no further right
to occupancy, thus it is a simple demand for possession and an eviction
of the holdover.
David Weisman
Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer
Greenspoon Marder, P.A.
Trade Center South, Suite 700
100 West Cypress Creek Road
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309
Phone 954-491-1120
Toll Free 888-491-1120
Direct Phone 954-343-6941
Direct Fax 954-343-6942
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott
A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing
colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out.
Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty
of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some
discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came
through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or
e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as
well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding
her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of
course no response. We are ready to file complaint for possession
today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a
3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not
required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed
immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our notice
to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the
issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the
message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any
federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic
communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended
or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for
the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or
agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
The information contained in this transmission may be attorney/client privileged and confidential. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it
cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he owes double
rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he surrenders possession and
making a demand therefor. At the same time or at any time thereafter, I
would file suit for eviction and the section 83.58 double rent (which keeps
accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a demand for
double rent, with the double rent running from the date of the demand, not
from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574 So. 2d
1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06, allowing the recovery of
double rent "for the period during which the tenant refuses to surrender
possession". This leaves room for the landlord to take the position that
the holdover without paying any rent constitutes bad faith and a clear
refusal to surrender the premises. At worst, the landlord will recover
double rent from the time of the demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing
colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out. Lease
expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty of notice
that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some discussion of a
1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came through with the money
and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or e-mails.
On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as well as left
taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding her that the
lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of course no
response. We are ready to file complaint for possession today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a 3-day
notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not required
for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed immediately. But
if it is not required, will the court find our notice to somehow imply a
3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the issue is not
non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
http://www.arnstein.com/ www.arnstein.com
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message
without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal
tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including
any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it
cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any
tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any
other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing
or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Serve the tenant with a demand for double the former monthly rent as per the statute. You will be pleased to receive a prompt response.
If you are driven to the wall, wait until the end of the one month term, then serve a 3DN for the overdue double rent and sue under F.S. 83.625 for the rent and possession. Get personal service if you have to sue.
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank, Scott A.
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:22 PM
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out. Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of course no response. We are ready to file complaint for possession today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a 3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our notice to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged information. If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________________
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Thank you to all who responded.
As our demand to vacate letter also notified the tenant of the statutory
obligation to pay the double rent, we are going ahead and filing the
complaint - not waiting the 3 days - based on the holdover itself, not a
failure to cure.
And I had better not get an Answer signed by any of you!
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Warren P.
Gammill
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:31 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he owes
double rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he surrenders
possession and making a demand therefor. At the same time or at any
time thereafter, I would file suit for eviction and the section 83.58
double rent (which keeps accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a demand for
double rent, with the double rent running from the date of the demand,
not from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574
So. 2d 1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06, allowing the
recovery of double rent "for the period during which the tenant refuses
to surrender possession". This leaves room for the landlord to take the
position that the holdover without paying any rent constitutes bad faith
and a clear refusal to surrender the premises. At worst, the landlord
will recover double rent from the time of the demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott
A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing
colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out.
Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty
of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some
discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came
through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or
e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as
well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding
her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of
course no response. We are ready to file complaint for possession
today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a
3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not
required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed
immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our notice
to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the
issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the
message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any
federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic
communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended
or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for
the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or
agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged information. If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Scott,
I've been in mediation all day, so sorry for the late response.
Our committee had drafted a proposed amendment to the residential statute to
cover whether there was a need for a 3day notice for the holdover tenant.
However, t upon further discussion, the consensus was that no notice was
needed. Based on that you were correct to just file. Good luck.
Gale
Gale Silbermann
Baxter, Strohauer, Mannion & Silbermann, PA
1150 Cleveland Street, Suite 300
Clearwater, FL 33755
(727) 461-6100
(727) 447-6899 Fax
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication
is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose
of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii)
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or
matter addressed in this communication or in any attachment.
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential.
It is intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender by reply email and destroy and delete this message. Thank you for
your cooperation.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 4:08 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Thank you to all who responded.
As our demand to vacate letter also notified the tenant of the statutory
obligation to pay the double rent, we are going ahead and filing the
complaint - not waiting the 3 days - based on the holdover itself, not a
failure to cure.
And I had better not get an Answer signed by any of you!
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
http://www.arnstein.com/ www.arnstein.com
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Warren P.
Gammill
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:31 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he owes double
rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he surrenders possession and
making a demand therefor. At the same time or at any time thereafter, I
would file suit for eviction and the section 83.58 double rent (which keeps
accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a demand for
double rent, with the double rent running from the date of the demand, not
from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574 So. 2d
1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06, allowing the recovery of
double rent "for the period during which the tenant refuses to surrender
possession". This leaves room for the landlord to take the position that
the holdover without paying any rent constitutes bad faith and a clear
refusal to surrender the premises. At worst, the landlord will recover
double rent from the time of the demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing
colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out. Lease
expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty of notice
that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some discussion of a
1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came through with the money
and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or e-mails.
On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as well as left
taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding her that the
lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of course no
response. We are ready to file complaint for possession today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a 3-day
notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not required
for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed immediately. But
if it is not required, will the court find our notice to somehow imply a
3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the issue is not
non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
http://www.arnstein.com/ www.arnstein.com
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message
without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal
tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including
any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it
cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any
tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any
other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing
or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message
without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal
tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including
any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it
cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any
tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any
other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing
or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Thanks Gale. Some days, I will take all the reassurance I can get.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gale
Silbermann
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 5:13 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for myresidential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I've been in mediation all day, so sorry for the late
response. Our committee had drafted a proposed amendment to the
residential statute to cover whether there was a need for a 3day notice
for the holdover tenant. However, t upon further discussion, the
consensus was that no notice was needed. Based on that you were correct
to just file. Good luck.
Gale
Gale Silbermann
Baxter, Strohauer, Mannion & Silbermann, PA
1150 Cleveland Street, Suite 300
Clearwater, FL 33755
(727) 461-6100
(727) 447-6899 Fax
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed
by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this
communication is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal
Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another
party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication or in
any attachment.
The information contained in this message is privileged and
confidential. It is intended only for the use of the addressee named
above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you
are notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender by reply email and destroy and delete
this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott
A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 4:08 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Thank you to all who responded.
As our demand to vacate letter also notified the tenant of the statutory
obligation to pay the double rent, we are going ahead and filing the
complaint - not waiting the 3 days - based on the holdover itself, not a
failure to cure.
And I had better not get an Answer signed by any of you!
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Warren P.
Gammill
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:31 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he owes
double rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he surrenders
possession and making a demand therefor. At the same time or at any
time thereafter, I would file suit for eviction and the section 83.58
double rent (which keeps accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a demand for
double rent, with the double rent running from the date of the demand,
not from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574
So. 2d 1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06, allowing the
recovery of double rent "for the period during which the tenant refuses
to surrender possession". This leaves room for the landlord to take the
position that the holdover without paying any rent constitutes bad faith
and a clear refusal to surrender the premises. At worst, the landlord
will recover double rent from the time of the demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott
A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing
colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out.
Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty
of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some
discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came
through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or
e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as
well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding
her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of
course no response. We are ready to file complaint for possession
today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a
3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not
required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed
immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our notice
to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the
issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com/
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the
message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any
federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic
communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended
or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for
the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or
agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the
message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any
federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic
communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended
or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for
the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or
agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged information. If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
One issue to consider -- if you demand double rent you probably lose the
right to evict. This is an excerpt from the Leases chapter in the
Florida Real Property Complex Transactions manual that I authored:
When a tenant holds over, the landlord has three mutually exclusive
options: (1) demand double rent; (2) demand a specific amount of
continuing rent; or (3) sue for possession of the property and damages
including special damages for loss of use of the property. Lincoln
Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Branch, 574 So.2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The
landlord who chooses to collect double rent must make a demand under the
statute and this election precludes the landlord from seeking the other
remedies, including possession of the property, because the landlord
impliedly acquiesces to the continuing tenancy at a rental the landlord
determines to be fair. A claim for special damages, on the other hand,
implies the opposite - that the landlord objects to the continuing
tenancy and suffers damage from the loss of immediate possession of the
property. See Annot., Measure of Damages for Tenant's Failure to
Surrender Possession of Rented Premises, 32 A.L.R.2d 582 at 585 (1953,
updated 2003).
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Warren P.
Gammill
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:31 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he
owes double rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he
surrenders possession and making a demand therefor. At the same time or
at any time thereafter, I would file suit for eviction and the section
83.58 double rent (which keeps accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a
demand for double rent, with the double rent running from the date of
the demand, not from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v.
Branch, 574 So. 2d 1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06,
allowing the recovery of double rent "for the period during which the
tenant refuses to surrender possession". This leaves room for the
landlord to take the position that the holdover without paying any rent
constitutes bad faith and a clear refusal to surrender the premises. At
worst, the landlord will recover double rent from the time of the
demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott
A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasing colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased
out. Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with
plenty of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some
discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came
through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls
or e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail,
as well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice
reminding her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding
over. Of course no response. We are ready to file complaint for
possession today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or
will a 3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice
is not required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be
filed immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our
notice to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure
when the issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com <http://www.arnstein.com/>
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com <mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com>
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or
privileged information. If you believe that you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and
delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that
any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic
communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended
or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for
the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or
agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: Pursuant to recently enacted
U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required
to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated,
any federal tax advice expressed above was neither
written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be
used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose
of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax
law. If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice
in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or
other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any
taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have
been written to support the promotion or marketing by a
person other than the sender or this firm of that
transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek
advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances
from an independent tax advisor.
The information in this email transmission is privileged
and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination or copying of this transmission (including
any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender by
email reply. Thank you.
That's true but most tenants don't pay the double rent and then you post the
three day for double rent and evict that way. The problem is that if they
pay you're stuck.
Gale Silbermann
Baxter, Strohauer, Mannion & Silbermann, PA
1150 Cleveland Street, Suite 300
Clearwater, FL 33755
(727) 461-6100
(727) 447-6899 Fax
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication
is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose
of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii)
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or
matter addressed in this communication or in any attachment.
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential.
It is intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender by reply email and destroy and delete this message. Thank you for
your cooperation.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Arthur J. Menor
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 9:31 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Cc: Madelin D'Arce
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
One issue to consider -- if you demand double rent you probably lose the
right to evict. This is an excerpt from the Leases chapter in the Florida
Real Property Complex Transactions manual that I authored:
When a tenant holds over, the landlord has three mutually exclusive options:
(1) demand double rent; (2) demand a specific amount of continuing rent; or
(3) sue for possession of the property and damages including special damages
for loss of use of the property. Lincoln Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Branch, 574
So.2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The landlord who chooses to collect double
rent must make a demand under the statute and this election precludes the
landlord from seeking the other remedies, including possession of the
property, because the landlord impliedly acquiesces to the continuing
tenancy at a rental the landlord determines to be fair. A claim for special
damages, on the other hand, implies the opposite - that the landlord objects
to the continuing tenancy and suffers damage from the loss of immediate
possession of the property. See Annot., Measure of Damages for Tenant's
Failure to Surrender Possession of Rented Premises, 32 A.L.R.2d 582 at 585
(1953, updated 2003).
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Warren P.
Gammill
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:31 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he owes double
rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he surrenders possession and
making a demand therefor. At the same time or at any time thereafter, I
would file suit for eviction and the section 83.58 double rent (which keeps
accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a demand for
double rent, with the double rent running from the date of the demand, not
from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v. Branch, 574 So. 2d
1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06, allowing the recovery of
double rent "for the period during which the tenant refuses to surrender
possession". This leaves room for the landlord to take the position that
the holdover without paying any rent constitutes bad faith and a clear
refusal to surrender the premises. At worst, the landlord will recover
double rent from the time of the demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential leasing
colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased out. Lease
expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with plenty of notice
that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some discussion of a
1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came through with the money
and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls or e-mails.
On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail, as well as left
taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice reminding her that the
lease had expired and she was illegally holding over. Of course no
response. We are ready to file complaint for possession today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or will a 3-day
notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice is not required
for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be filed immediately. But
if it is not required, will the court find our notice to somehow imply a
3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure when the issue is not
non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
http://www.arnstein.com/ www.arnstein.com
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com SAFrank@arnstein.com
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information. If you believe that you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message
without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal
tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including
any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it
cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any
tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any
other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing
or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: Pursuant to recently enacted
U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required
to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated,
any federal tax advice expressed above was neither
written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be
used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose
of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax
law. If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice
in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or
other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any
taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have
been written to support the promotion or marketing by a
person other than the sender or this firm of that
transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek
advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances
from an independent tax advisor.
The information in this email transmission is privileged
and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination or copying of this transmission (including
any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender by
email reply. Thank you.
Or you must refuse the payment and return it evidently. I always thought
though you call it an accruing DAMAGE amount that happens to equal a sum
which is double the rent. But, I guess that doesn't fly...
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Gale
Silbermann
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 11:00 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for myresidential
leasingcolleagues
That's true but most tenants don't pay the double rent and then you post
the three day for double rent and evict that way. The problem is that
if they pay you're stuck.
Gale Silbermann
Baxter, Strohauer, Mannion & Silbermann, PA
1150 Cleveland Street, Suite 300
Clearwater, FL 33755
(727) 461-6100
(727) 447-6899 Fax
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed
by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this
communication is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal
Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another
party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication or in
any attachment.
The information contained in this message is privileged and
confidential. It is intended only for the use of the addressee named
above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you
are notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender by reply email and destroy and delete
this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Arthur J.
Menor
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 9:31 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Cc: Madelin D'Arce
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
One issue to consider -- if you demand double rent you probably lose the
right to evict. This is an excerpt from the Leases chapter in the
Florida Real Property Complex Transactions manual that I authored:
When a tenant holds over, the landlord has three mutually exclusive
options: (1) demand double rent; (2) demand a specific amount of
continuing rent; or (3) sue for possession of the property and damages
including special damages for loss of use of the property. Lincoln
Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Branch, 574 So.2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The
landlord who chooses to collect double rent must make a demand under the
statute and this election precludes the landlord from seeking the other
remedies, including possession of the property, because the landlord
impliedly acquiesces to the continuing tenancy at a rental the landlord
determines to be fair. A claim for special damages, on the other hand,
implies the opposite - that the landlord objects to the continuing
tenancy and suffers damage from the loss of immediate possession of the
property. See Annot., Measure of Damages for Tenant's Failure to
Surrender Possession of Rented Premises, 32 A.L.R.2d 582 at 585 (1953,
updated 2003).
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Warren P.
Gammill
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:31 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Madelin D'Arce'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasingcolleagues
Scott,
I would deliver a letter advising the holdover tenant that he
owes double rent of $_______ per month from June 15th until he
surrenders possession and making a demand therefor. At the same time or
at any time thereafter, I would file suit for eviction and the section
83.58 double rent (which keeps accruing).
A non-residential case based on Fla. Stat. 83.06 requires a
demand for double rent, with the double rent running from the date of
the demand, not from the date of the holdover. Lincoln Oldsmobile v.
Branch, 574 So. 2d 1111. However, 83.58 reads differently from 83.06,
allowing the recovery of double rent "for the period during which the
tenant refuses to surrender possession". This leaves room for the
landlord to take the position that the holdover without paying any rent
constitutes bad faith and a clear refusal to surrender the premises. At
worst, the landlord will recover double rent from the time of the
demand.
Warren P. Gammill, Esq.
Warren Gammill & Associates
Suite 1050, Courthouse Tower
44 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: (305) 579-0000
Telecopier: (305) 371-6927
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Frank, Scott
A.
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:23 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Quick question for my residential
leasing colleagues
We represent the owner of a single family house which was leased
out. Lease expired on June 14. We had previously provided tenant with
plenty of notice that lease was expiring and would not be renewed. Some
discussion of a 1-month extension, but tenant flaked and never came
through with the money and offer was rescinded.
The 14th came and went. tenant would not respond to phone calls
or e-mails. On Tuesday we delivered - via e-mail and first class mail,
as well as left taped to front door and in the mailbox - a notice
reminding her that the lease had expired and she was illegally holding
over. Of course no response. We are ready to file complaint for
possession today.
My question is: Will our letter be deemed a 3-day notice? Or
will a 3-day notice be required? As I read the statute, a 3-day notice
is not required for a holdover, as it appears that the action can be
filed immediately. But if it is not required, will the court find our
notice to somehow imply a 3-day right to cure? (But how can one cure
when the issue is not non-payment or some other non-performance?)
Any thoughts or guidance would be most appreciated. Thanks.
Scott A Frank
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com <http://www.arnstein.com/>
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.833.9800
Fax: 561.655.5551
433 Plaza Real
Suite 275
Boca Raton, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.322.6900
Fax: 561.322.6940
SAFrank@arnstein.com <mailto:SAFrank@arnstein.com>
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or
privileged information. If you believe that you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and
delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that
any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic
communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended
or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for
the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or
agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: Pursuant to recently enacted
U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required
to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated,
any federal tax advice expressed above was neither
written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be
used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose
of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax
law. If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice
in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or
other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any
taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have
been written to support the promotion or marketing by a
person other than the sender or this firm of that
transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek
advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances
from an independent tax advisor.
The information in this email transmission is privileged
and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination or copying of this transmission (including
any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender by
email reply. Thank you.