Empathy List Archives

CS

Cary Sabol

Thu, Aug 4, 2011 9:10 PM

Thanks everyone for the participation. It seems the problem here, which is what I am struggling with, is the lack of any clarity or authority on what the LL really can do with T's property after eviction. For example, what if LL put it on the street, but was then cited for a code violation. Is LL supposed to incur fines because T never comes to get his/her stuff. What if it sits there for weeks or even months. When is the magic moment when LL can actually throw the stuff away?

I just haven't found any clear authority on the issue. Maybe this would be a good issue to be clarified with the statutory revisions committee. Anyhow, if anyone finds anything clear cut, please let me know. If not, thanks all for your assistance and ideas.

Cary
Cary P. Sabol, Esq.
P.O. Box 15981
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416
Phone: (561) 281-2744
Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: Charles Levin levin@landlordlaw.com
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances?

Sent from iPhone
Charles J. Levin
Attorney at Law
Post Office Box 342727
Tampa, FL 33694
813.963.5135

For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments)
is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer.

NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly “subject to contract” and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral
statements will be binding.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass GregH@floridarealtors.org wrote:

I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don’t take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it’s worth, I just checked Hauser’s LL/T manual and there’s zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash.

Greg

From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property.

I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don’t want them to go straight to the dumpster.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Joe, I believe there’s a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5).

Cary, where was the trash bin? I’ll defer to one of the experts out there – but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that’s “near the property line” then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it’s not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I’ve always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn’t matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter.

To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T’s property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL’s own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it’s been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn’t around to grab it, then it’s too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations.

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy |FloridaRealtors®
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk:407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit:http://www.floridarealtors.org

Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo
http://convention.floridarealtors.orgAugust 24-28

<image001.jpg>

From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes;
Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act.”

Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act” in Chapter 83 (I don’t think there is a current reference).
Thank you, PThink before you print.

Joseph N. Alexander | Partner
POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY
308 East Fifth Avenue
Mount Dora, Florida 32757
Phone: 352.383.4186
Fax: 352.383.0087
jnalexander@pcld-law.com

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.

From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.
Cary
Cary P. Sabol, Esq.
P.O. Box 15981
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416
Phone: (561) 281-2744
Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

Thanks everyone for the participation. It seems the problem here, which is what I am struggling with, is the lack of any clarity or authority on what the LL really can do with T's property after eviction. For example, what if LL put it on the street, but was then cited for a code violation. Is LL supposed to incur fines because T never comes to get his/her stuff. What if it sits there for weeks or even months. When is the magic moment when LL can actually throw the stuff away? I just haven't found any clear authority on the issue. Maybe this would be a good issue to be clarified with the statutory revisions committee. Anyhow, if anyone finds anything clear cut, please let me know. If not, thanks all for your assistance and ideas. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: Charles Levin <levin@landlordlaw.com> To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:02 PM Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances? Sent from iPhone Charles J. Levin Attorney at Law Post Office Box 342727 Tampa, FL 33694 813.963.5135 For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly “subject to contract” and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding. On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass <GregH@floridarealtors.org> wrote: I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don’t take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it’s worth, I just checked Hauser’s LL/T manual and there’s zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash. > >Greg > >From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist >Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM >To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' >Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question > >My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property. > >I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don’t want them to go straight to the dumpster. > >Harry > >LAW OFFICES OF >HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. >PH: 1 800 253 8428 >FAX: 1 800 367 9038 >"Serving the Property Management Professional" >Website: www.evict.com >Email: harry@evict.com >THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. > > >From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass >Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM >To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol >Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question > >Joe, I believe there’s a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5). > >Cary, where was the trash bin? I’ll defer to one of the experts out there – but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that’s “near the property line” then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it’s not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I’ve always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn’t matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter. > >To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T’s property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL’s own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it’s been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn’t around to grab it, then it’s too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations. > >Greg > >Greg Hass, Senior Counsel > >Office of Law & Policy |FloridaRealtors® >7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 >talk:407.438.1400, ext. 2421 >visit:http://www.floridarealtors.org > >Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo >http://convention.floridarealtors.orgAugust 24-28 > ><image001.jpg> > >From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander >Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM >To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee >Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question > >Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes; >Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act.” > >Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act” in Chapter 83 (I don’t think there is a current reference). >Thank you, PThink before you print. > >Joseph N. Alexander | Partner >POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY >308 East Fifth Avenue >Mount Dora, Florida 32757 >Phone: 352.383.4186 >Fax: 352.383.0087 >jnalexander@pcld-law.com > >This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you. > >From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol >Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM >To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee >Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question > >Dear Group Members, > >I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property. > >Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules. > >Any ideas are appreciated. >Cary >Cary P. Sabol, Esq. >P.O. Box 15981 >West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 >Phone: (561) 281-2744 >Fax: (561) 691-6049 > >Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. _______________________________________________ >landten mailing list >landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org >http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

ML

Martin Lawyer

Thu, Aug 4, 2011 9:25 PM

Wow ! I agree with Chuck !

Marty

C. Martin (Marty) Lawyer, III

Florida Bar # 128095

BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

829 West M. L. King Blvd., Suite # 200

Tampa, FL 33603-3336

(813) 232-1222, Ext. 109

FAX: 232-1403

PRESERVING INDEPENDENCE, HOPE, AND DIGNITY

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles Levin
Sent: Thursday, 04 August 2011 17:02
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if
the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the
Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it
is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances?

Sent from iPhone

Charles J. Levin

Attorney at Law

Post Office Box 342727

Tampa, FL 33694

813.963.5135

For more information about the firm, please visit
http://www.landlordlaw.com/ http://www.landlordlaw.com/

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is
privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended
recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you
have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender
immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy
print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail
transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended
recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or
retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents
in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product
privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230
DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any
attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for
the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer.

NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary
notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject
matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for
ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute
an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of
imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory
estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate
the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any
time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party.
Terms and conditions are strictly "subject to contract" and are not binding
on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been
completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties.
No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral
statements will be binding.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass GregH@floridarealtors.org wrote:

I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative
advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of
time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don't take it straight to
the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated
below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the
contrary. For what it's worth, I just checked Hauser's LL/T manual and
there's zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took
it straight to the trash.

Greg

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the
stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the
property.

I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless
of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for
a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don't want them to go straight
to the dumpster.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: http://www.evict.com/ www.evict.com
Email: mailto:harry@evict.com harry@evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Joe, I believe there's a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5).

Cary, where was the trash bin? I'll defer to one of the experts out there -
but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that's "near the
property line" then that would be good enough to comply with the statute
(assuming it's not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable
access to it). I've always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL
hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just
a minute, then at that point it didn't matter what became of it. In other
words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even
just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff
right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter.

To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute,
to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from
taking the T's property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either
a locked trash bin or to LL's own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance
of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems
very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it's been
removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near
the property line, if T isn't around to grab it, then it's too bad for the T
if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to
avoid condo violations.

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org http://www.floridarealtors.org

Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo
http://convention.floridarealtors.org
http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28

<image001.jpg>

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes;

Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the "Disposition of
Personal Property L/T Act."

Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put
some reference to the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act" in Chapter
83 (I don't think there is a current reference).

Thank you, P Think before you print.

Joseph N. Alexander | Partner

POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY

308 East Fifth Avenue

Mount Dora, Florida 32757

Phone: 352.383.4186

Fax: 352.383.0087

BLOCKED::mailto:jnalexander@pcld-law.com jnalexander@pcld-law.com

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete
this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the
Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items.
Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord
interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing
landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines
what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction?
Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it
all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo
rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.

Cary

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

Wow ! I agree with Chuck ! Marty C. Martin (Marty) Lawyer, III Florida Bar # 128095 BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC. 829 West M. L. King Blvd., Suite # 200 Tampa, FL 33603-3336 (813) 232-1222, Ext. 109 FAX: 232-1403 PRESERVING INDEPENDENCE, HOPE, AND DIGNITY _____ From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles Levin Sent: Thursday, 04 August 2011 17:02 To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances? Sent from iPhone Charles J. Levin Attorney at Law Post Office Box 342727 Tampa, FL 33694 813.963.5135 For more information about the firm, please visit <http://www.landlordlaw.com/> http://www.landlordlaw.com/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly "subject to contract" and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding. On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass <GregH@floridarealtors.org> wrote: I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don't take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it's worth, I just checked Hauser's LL/T manual and there's zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash. Greg From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property. I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don't want them to go straight to the dumpster. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: <http://www.evict.com/> www.evict.com Email: <mailto:harry@evict.com> harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Joe, I believe there's a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5). Cary, where was the trash bin? I'll defer to one of the experts out there - but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that's "near the property line" then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it's not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I've always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn't matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter. To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T's property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL's own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it's been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn't around to grab it, then it's too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations. Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: <http://www.floridarealtors.org> http://www.floridarealtors.org Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo <http://convention.floridarealtors.org> http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28 <image001.jpg> From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes; Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act." Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act" in Chapter 83 (I don't think there is a current reference). Thank you, P Think before you print. Joseph N. Alexander | Partner POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY 308 East Fifth Avenue Mount Dora, Florida 32757 Phone: 352.383.4186 Fax: 352.383.0087 <BLOCKED::mailto:jnalexander@pcld-law.com> jnalexander@pcld-law.com This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you. _____ From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Dear Group Members, I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property. Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules. Any ideas are appreciated. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

AH

Anthony Horky

Thu, Aug 4, 2011 9:54 PM

My 2 cents. Chapter 715 is an reliable alternative when you are in doubt. It covers the entire process from the notice requirements, the form of the notice, disposition, no liability and assessing storage costs. If the value of the property is under $500.00, after the notice period the landlord can dispose of the property as he/she wishes without further liability – dumpster, etc. It’s only a 10/15 day notice period. Good luck.

Anthony J. Horky, Esquire

Anthony J. Horky, P.A.

620 Lavers Circle, Suite 228

Delray Beach, FL 33444

Tel: (754) 224-6178

Email: mailto:AJH1502@gmail.com AJH1502@gmail.com

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:11 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Thanks everyone for the participation. It seems the problem here, which is what I am struggling with, is the lack of any clarity or authority on what the LL really can do with T's property after eviction. For example, what if LL put it on the street, but was then cited for a code violation. Is LL supposed to incur fines because T never comes to get his/her stuff. What if it sits there for weeks or even months. When is the magic moment when LL can actually throw the stuff away?

I just haven't found any clear authority on the issue. Maybe this would be a good issue to be clarified with the statutory revisions committee. Anyhow, if anyone finds anything clear cut, please let me know. If not, thanks all for your assistance and ideas.

Cary

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: Charles Levin levin@landlordlaw.com
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances?

Sent from iPhone

Charles J. Levin

Attorney at Law

Post Office Box 342727

Tampa, FL 33694

813.963.5135

For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer.

NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly “subject to contract” and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass GregH@floridarealtors.org wrote:

I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don’t take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it’s worth, I just checked Hauser’s LL/T manual and there’s zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash.

Greg

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property.

I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don’t want them to go straight to the dumpster.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com
Email: harry@evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Joe, I believe there’s a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5).

Cary, where was the trash bin? I’ll defer to one of the experts out there – but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that’s “near the property line” then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it’s not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I’ve always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn’t matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter.

To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T’s property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL’s own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it’s been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn’t around to grab it, then it’s too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations.

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors®
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo
http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28

<image001.jpg>

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes;

Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act.”

Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act” in Chapter 83 (I don’t think there is a current reference).

Thank you, P Think before you print.

Joseph N. Alexander | Partner

POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY

308 East Fifth Avenue

Mount Dora, Florida 32757

Phone: 352.383.4186

Fax: 352.383.0087

jnalexander@pcld-law.com

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.

Cary

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

My 2 cents. Chapter 715 is an reliable alternative when you are in doubt. It covers the entire process from the notice requirements, the form of the notice, disposition, no liability and assessing storage costs. If the value of the property is under $500.00, after the notice period the landlord can dispose of the property as he/she wishes without further liability – dumpster, etc. It’s only a 10/15 day notice period. Good luck. Anthony J. Horky, Esquire Anthony J. Horky, P.A. 620 Lavers Circle, Suite 228 Delray Beach, FL 33444 Tel: (754) 224-6178 Email: <mailto:AJH1502@gmail.com> AJH1502@gmail.com From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:11 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Thanks everyone for the participation. It seems the problem here, which is what I am struggling with, is the lack of any clarity or authority on what the LL really can do with T's property after eviction. For example, what if LL put it on the street, but was then cited for a code violation. Is LL supposed to incur fines because T never comes to get his/her stuff. What if it sits there for weeks or even months. When is the magic moment when LL can actually throw the stuff away? I just haven't found any clear authority on the issue. Maybe this would be a good issue to be clarified with the statutory revisions committee. Anyhow, if anyone finds anything clear cut, please let me know. If not, thanks all for your assistance and ideas. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: Charles Levin <levin@landlordlaw.com> To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:02 PM Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances? Sent from iPhone Charles J. Levin Attorney at Law Post Office Box 342727 Tampa, FL 33694 813.963.5135 For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly “subject to contract” and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding. On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass <GregH@floridarealtors.org> wrote: I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don’t take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it’s worth, I just checked Hauser’s LL/T manual and there’s zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash. Greg From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property. I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don’t want them to go straight to the dumpster. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com Email: harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Joe, I believe there’s a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5). Cary, where was the trash bin? I’ll defer to one of the experts out there – but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that’s “near the property line” then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it’s not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I’ve always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn’t matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter. To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T’s property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL’s own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it’s been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn’t around to grab it, then it’s too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations. Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors® 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28 <image001.jpg> From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes; Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act.” Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act” in Chapter 83 (I don’t think there is a current reference). Thank you, P Think before you print. Joseph N. Alexander | Partner POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY 308 East Fifth Avenue Mount Dora, Florida 32757 Phone: 352.383.4186 Fax: 352.383.0087 jnalexander@pcld-law.com This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Dear Group Members, I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property. Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules. Any ideas are appreciated. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

HH

Harry Heist

Thu, Aug 4, 2011 10:16 PM

Impossible Marty.

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Martin Lawyer
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:26 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Wow ! I agree with Chuck !

Marty

C. Martin (Marty) Lawyer, III

Florida Bar # 128095

BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

829 West M. L. King Blvd., Suite # 200

Tampa, FL 33603-3336

(813) 232-1222, Ext. 109

FAX: 232-1403

PRESERVING INDEPENDENCE, HOPE, AND DIGNITY

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles Levin
Sent: Thursday, 04 August 2011 17:02
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if
the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the
Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it
is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances?

Sent from iPhone

Charles J. Levin

Attorney at Law

Post Office Box 342727

Tampa, FL 33694

813.963.5135

For more information about the firm, please visit
http://www.landlordlaw.com/

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is
privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended
recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you
have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender
immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy
print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail
transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended
recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or
retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents
in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product
privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230
DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any
attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for
the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer.

NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary
notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject
matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for
ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute
an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of
imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory
estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate
the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any
time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party.
Terms and conditions are strictly "subject to contract" and are not binding
on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been
completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties.
No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral
statements will be binding.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass GregH@floridarealtors.org wrote:

I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative
advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of
time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don't take it straight to
the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated
below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the
contrary. For what it's worth, I just checked Hauser's LL/T manual and
there's zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took
it straight to the trash.

Greg

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the
stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the
property.

I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless
of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for
a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don't want them to go straight
to the dumpster.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com
Email: harry@evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Joe, I believe there's a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5).

Cary, where was the trash bin? I'll defer to one of the experts out there -
but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that's "near the
property line" then that would be good enough to comply with the statute
(assuming it's not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable
access to it). I've always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL
hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just
a minute, then at that point it didn't matter what became of it. In other
words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even
just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff
right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter.

To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute,
to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from
taking the T's property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either
a locked trash bin or to LL's own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance
of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems
very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it's been
removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near
the property line, if T isn't around to grab it, then it's too bad for the T
if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to
avoid condo violations.

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo
http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28

<image001.jpg>

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes;

Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the "Disposition of
Personal Property L/T Act."

Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put
some reference to the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act" in Chapter
83 (I don't think there is a current reference).

Thank you, P Think before you print.

Joseph N. Alexander | Partner

POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY

308 East Fifth Avenue

Mount Dora, Florida 32757

Phone: 352.383.4186

Fax: 352.383.0087

jnalexander@pcld-law.com

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete
this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the
Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items.
Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord
interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing
landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines
what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction?
Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it
all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo
rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.

Cary

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

Impossible Marty. LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com <http://www.evict.com/> Email: harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Martin Lawyer Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:26 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Wow ! I agree with Chuck ! Marty C. Martin (Marty) Lawyer, III Florida Bar # 128095 BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC. 829 West M. L. King Blvd., Suite # 200 Tampa, FL 33603-3336 (813) 232-1222, Ext. 109 FAX: 232-1403 PRESERVING INDEPENDENCE, HOPE, AND DIGNITY _____ From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Charles Levin Sent: Thursday, 04 August 2011 17:02 To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances? Sent from iPhone Charles J. Levin Attorney at Law Post Office Box 342727 Tampa, FL 33694 813.963.5135 For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly "subject to contract" and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding. On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass <GregH@floridarealtors.org> wrote: I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don't take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it's worth, I just checked Hauser's LL/T manual and there's zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash. Greg From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property. I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don't want them to go straight to the dumpster. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com Email: harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Joe, I believe there's a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5). Cary, where was the trash bin? I'll defer to one of the experts out there - but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that's "near the property line" then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it's not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I've always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn't matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter. To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T's property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL's own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it's been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn't around to grab it, then it's too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations. Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28 <image001.jpg> From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes; Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act." Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the "Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act" in Chapter 83 (I don't think there is a current reference). Thank you, P Think before you print. Joseph N. Alexander | Partner POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY 308 East Fifth Avenue Mount Dora, Florida 32757 Phone: 352.383.4186 Fax: 352.383.0087 jnalexander@pcld-law.com This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you. _____ From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Dear Group Members, I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property. Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules. Any ideas are appreciated. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

WP

Warren P. Gammill

Fri, Aug 5, 2011 12:13 AM

Anthony Horky's view is the most prudent way to proceed if a landlord realistically thinks that he is risking citations by having the Sheriff follow his normal procedure of placing the tenant's property on the curb. McCready v. Booth is still good guidance.

Don't deposit the tenant's property in a dumpster, even curbside: dumping or otherwise disposing of a tenant's property is a conversion, which could even bring on a claim for punitive damages.

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

Gammill@MiamiLawOffice.com

www.GammillLaw.com

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Horky
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:55 PM
To: 'Cary Sabol'; 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My 2 cents. Chapter 715 is an reliable alternative when you are in doubt. It covers the entire process from the notice requirements, the form of the notice, disposition, no liability and assessing storage costs. If the value of the property is under $500.00, after the notice period the landlord can dispose of the property as he/she wishes without further liability – dumpster, etc. It’s only a 10/15 day notice period. Good luck.

Anthony J. Horky, Esquire

Anthony J. Horky, P.A.

620 Lavers Circle, Suite 228

Delray Beach, FL 33444

Tel: (754) 224-6178

Email: AJH1502@gmail.com

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:11 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Thanks everyone for the participation. It seems the problem here, which is what I am struggling with, is the lack of any clarity or authority on what the LL really can do with T's property after eviction. For example, what if LL put it on the street, but was then cited for a code violation. Is LL supposed to incur fines because T never comes to get his/her stuff. What if it sits there for weeks or even months. When is the magic moment when LL can actually throw the stuff away?

I just haven't found any clear authority on the issue. Maybe this would be a good issue to be clarified with the statutory revisions committee. Anyhow, if anyone finds anything clear cut, please let me know. If not, thanks all for your assistance and ideas.

Cary

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: Charles Levin levin@landlordlaw.com
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances?

Sent from iPhone

Charles J. Levin

Attorney at Law

Post Office Box 342727

Tampa, FL 33694

813.963.5135

For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer.

NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly “subject to contract” and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass GregH@floridarealtors.org wrote:

I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don’t take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it’s worth, I just checked Hauser’s LL/T manual and there’s zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash.

Greg

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property.

I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don’t want them to go straight to the dumpster.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com
Email: harry@evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Joe, I believe there’s a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5).

Cary, where was the trash bin? I’ll defer to one of the experts out there – but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that’s “near the property line” then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it’s not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I’ve always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn’t matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter.

To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T’s property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL’s own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it’s been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn’t around to grab it, then it’s too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations.

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors®
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo
http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28

<image001.jpg>

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes;

Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act.”

Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act” in Chapter 83 (I don’t think there is a current reference).

Thank you, P Think before you print.

Joseph N. Alexander | Partner

POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY

308 East Fifth Avenue

Mount Dora, Florida 32757

Phone: 352.383.4186

Fax: 352.383.0087

jnalexander@pcld-law.com

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question

Dear Group Members,

I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property.

Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules.

Any ideas are appreciated.

Cary

Cary P. Sabol, Esq.

P.O. Box 15981

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Phone: (561) 281-2744

Fax: (561) 691-6049

Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

Anthony Horky's view is the most prudent way to proceed if a landlord realistically thinks that he is risking citations by having the Sheriff follow his normal procedure of placing the tenant's property on the curb. McCready v. Booth is still good guidance. Don't deposit the tenant's property in a dumpster, even curbside: dumping or otherwise disposing of a tenant's property is a conversion, which could even bring on a claim for punitive damages. 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 Gammill@MiamiLawOffice.com www.GammillLaw.com From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Horky Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:55 PM To: 'Cary Sabol'; 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question My 2 cents. Chapter 715 is an reliable alternative when you are in doubt. It covers the entire process from the notice requirements, the form of the notice, disposition, no liability and assessing storage costs. If the value of the property is under $500.00, after the notice period the landlord can dispose of the property as he/she wishes without further liability – dumpster, etc. It’s only a 10/15 day notice period. Good luck. Anthony J. Horky, Esquire Anthony J. Horky, P.A. 620 Lavers Circle, Suite 228 Delray Beach, FL 33444 Tel: (754) 224-6178 Email: AJH1502@gmail.com From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:11 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Thanks everyone for the participation. It seems the problem here, which is what I am struggling with, is the lack of any clarity or authority on what the LL really can do with T's property after eviction. For example, what if LL put it on the street, but was then cited for a code violation. Is LL supposed to incur fines because T never comes to get his/her stuff. What if it sits there for weeks or even months. When is the magic moment when LL can actually throw the stuff away? I just haven't found any clear authority on the issue. Maybe this would be a good issue to be clarified with the statutory revisions committee. Anyhow, if anyone finds anything clear cut, please let me know. If not, thanks all for your assistance and ideas. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: Charles Levin <levin@landlordlaw.com> To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:02 PM Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question When I used to do evictions I told my clients to leave it on the street if the landlord chose to move it out of the premises and not follow the Abandoned PP Statute. The evicted tenant still owns the property even if it is on the street. I never let them touch it again. Why take any chances? Sent from iPhone Charles J. Levin Attorney at Law Post Office Box 342727 Tampa, FL 33694 813.963.5135 For more information about the firm, please visit http://www.landlordlaw.com/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this e-mail transmission unless you are a client of the sender and an intended recipient. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of Charles J. Levin, P.A., you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this e-mail transmission (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. NOT BINDING: Anything in this email or attachments to the contrary notwithstanding, reference to terms and conditions relating to the subject matter in this, previous and subsequent emails and attachments are for ongoing non-binding discussions and negotiations only and do not constitute an agreement or an offer to enter into an agreement. The submission of imbedded or attached documents shall not support a claim of promissory estoppel or reliance. Neither party shall have any obligation to negotiate the terms of a possible agreement and may withdraw from negotiations at any time for any reason or for no reason without liability to the other party. Terms and conditions are strictly “subject to contract” and are not binding on the writer or clients until a single formal written contract has been completed and a paper document has been signed and delivered by all parties. No emails, attachments or facsimile versions of any document or any oral statements will be binding. On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Greg Hass <GregH@floridarealtors.org> wrote: I agree with you Harry. Just to be clear, I do give similar conservative advice to our property manager members when asked about this issue ahead of time in order to keep them out of trouble (i.e., don’t take it straight to the dumpster). However, after the fact, I would argue my opinion stated below - at least until someone could provide a clear precedent to the contrary. For what it’s worth, I just checked Hauser’s LL/T manual and there’s zero info on the precise issue raised by Cary of what if the LL took it straight to the trash. Greg From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:33 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question My opinion is that the intent of the law is to give the tenant access to the stuff at the time of the eviction since they are no longer allowed on the property. I tell my client to take it to the property line, right of way, regardless of what the condo assn/HOA says or code enforcement says, leave it there for a couple hours then put it in the dumpster. I don’t want them to go straight to the dumpster. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com Email: harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:36 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee; Cary Sabol Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Joe, I believe there’s a veiled reference to it in 83.67 (5). Cary, where was the trash bin? I’ll defer to one of the experts out there – but in my opinion if the LL took the property to a dumpster that’s “near the property line” then that would be good enough to comply with the statute (assuming it’s not a locked dumpster and the former T could gain reasonable access to it). I’ve always read the statute to mean that as long as the LL hauled the stuff to or near the property line and set it down, even for just a minute, then at that point it didn’t matter what became of it. In other words, after having set it down near the property line and waiting for even just one minute, LL could then have a trash hauling company pick the stuff right back up and haul it off to the dump or anywhere else for that matter. To me the key is that the T has an opportunity, even if for just a minute, to pick the stuff up themselves. The idea being to prevent the LL from taking the T’s property out of the dwelling and taking it directly to either a locked trash bin or to LL’s own pickup truck, etc, where T has zero chance of getting it. This may seem harsh, but the last sentence of 83.52(2) seems very clear about not holding the LL liable for the stuff once it’s been removed. So to me, once LL can show he set the stuff down for a minute near the property line, if T isn’t around to grab it, then it’s too bad for the T if the LL needs to pick it back up and haul it off to the dump in order to avoid condo violations. Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors® 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org Be a Star at Florida Realtors Convention & Trade Expo http://convention.floridarealtors.org August 24-28 <image001.jpg> From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alexander Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:10 PM To: Cary Sabol; RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Section, 83.62, Florida Statutes; Sections 715.10-715.12, Florida Statutes represent the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act.” Now that you mention it, maybe we should suggest that the legislature put some reference to the “Disposition of Personal Property L/T Act” in Chapter 83 (I don’t think there is a current reference). Thank you, P Think before you print. Joseph N. Alexander | Partner POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY 308 East Fifth Avenue Mount Dora, Florida 32757 Phone: 352.383.4186 Fax: 352.383.0087 jnalexander@pcld-law.com This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Cary Sabol Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:53 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Eviction Question Dear Group Members, I have a case where my client (landlord) evicted a tenant and when the Sheriff execute the Writ, tenant had not moved any of the personal items. Sheriff told landlord to "dispose" of the property, which landlord interpreted to mean throw in the trash. Now, former tenant is suing landlord for the lost value of tenant's property. Does anyone know of any case law or legal authority that clearly defines what landlord can and cannot do with tenant's property after eviction? Since the leased premises was a condo, landlord could not simply leave it all at the property line because that would have been a violation of condo rules. Any ideas are appreciated. Cary Cary P. Sabol, Esq. P.O. Box 15981 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 Fax: (561) 691-6049 Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

GH

Greg Hass

Wed, Jan 11, 2012 6:32 PM

Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly.

I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this?

Thanks,
Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors(r)
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

The Voice for Real Estate(r) in Florida

[cid:image001.jpg@01C8B0EE.0B556530]

Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly. I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this? Thanks, Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors(r) 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org The Voice for Real Estate(r) in Florida [cid:image001.jpg@01C8B0EE.0B556530]

HH

Harry Heist

Wed, Jan 11, 2012 7:20 PM

2 items:

HB 921/SB 1830: Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the
Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental
housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die
easily. It will move along.

Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does
Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we
are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early
consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is
decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year
where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something
we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea).

Late Charges: I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An
"average" rent is about $800.

It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be
made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated.

The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the
APR so to speak.

Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they
really take up a lot of resources.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com

THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees

Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6
dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount
of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes
"late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for
each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly.

I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the
maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by
a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this?

Thanks,

Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

The Voice for Real EstateR in Florida

cid:image001.jpg@01C8B0EE.0B556530

2 items: HB 921/SB 1830: Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along. Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea). Late Charges: I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800. It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated. The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak. Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com <http://www.evict.com/> Email: harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly. I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this? Thanks, Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtorsR 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org The Voice for Real EstateR in Florida cid:image001.jpg@01C8B0EE.0B556530

DW

David Weisman

Wed, Jan 11, 2012 8:26 PM

I was of the impression that late charges are not subject to usury rules since they are not mandatory. One is not obligated to be late.

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

[cid:image002.jpg@01CCD074.DC6D0DE0]

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:21 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees

2 items:

HB 921/SB 1830: Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along.

Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea).

Late Charges: I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800.

It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated.

The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak.

Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com mailto:harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees

Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly.

I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this?

Thanks,
Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors(r)
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

The Voice for Real Estate(r) in Florida

[cid:image003.jpg@01CCD074.DC6D0DE0]

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.

I was of the impression that late charges are not subject to usury rules since they are not mandatory. One is not obligated to be late. 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 [cid:image002.jpg@01CCD074.DC6D0DE0] From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:21 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees 2 items: HB 921/SB 1830: Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along. Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea). Late Charges: I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800. It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated. The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak. Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com<http://www.evict.com/> Email: harry@evict.com<mailto:harry@evict.com> THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly. I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this? Thanks, Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors(r) 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org The Voice for Real Estate(r) in Florida [cid:image003.jpg@01CCD074.DC6D0DE0] 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.

CS

Cary Sabol

Wed, Jan 11, 2012 8:31 PM

I agree that late fees shouldn't fall under a usury argument. But I've seen them challenged and thrown out using the "unconscionable" argument, especially when the late fees accrue daily and reach near or above the actual amount due for rent. As far as I know, there is no bright line rule, seems to be a matter of judicial discretion.

Cary

Law Offices of Cary P. Sabol
P.O. Box 15981 | West Palm Beach | Florida | 33416
Phone: (561) 281-2744

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.

Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail transmission is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. Thank you for your cooperation.

From: David Weisman David.Weisman@gmlaw.com
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees

I was of the impression that late charges are not subject to usury rules since they are not mandatory. One is not obligated to be late.

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 Harry Heist
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:21 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees

2 items:

HB 921/SB 1830:Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along.

Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea).

Late Charges:I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800.

It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated.

The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak.

Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees

Our FAR “Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex” has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes “late”. If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly.

I’m curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable – has anyone seen any cases on this?

Thanks,
Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy |FloridaRealtors®
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk:407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit:http://www.floridarealtors.org

The Voice for Real Estate® in Florida

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.

landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

I agree that late fees shouldn't fall under a usury argument. But I've seen them challenged and thrown out using the "unconscionable" argument, especially when the late fees accrue daily and reach near or above the actual amount due for rent. As far as I know, there is no bright line rule, seems to be a matter of judicial discretion. Cary Law Offices of Cary P. Sabol P.O. Box 15981 | West Palm Beach | Florida | 33416 Phone: (561) 281-2744 ________________________________ 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. Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail transmission is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. Thank you for your cooperation. ________________________________ From: David Weisman <David.Weisman@gmlaw.com> To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:26 PM Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees I was of the impression that late charges are not subject to usury rules since they are not mandatory. One is not obligated to be late. 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 Harry Heist Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:21 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees 2 items: HB 921/SB 1830:Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along. Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea). Late Charges:I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800. It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated. The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak. Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com Email: harry@evict.com THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees Our FAR “Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex” has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes “late”. If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly. I’m curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable – has anyone seen any cases on this? Thanks, Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy |FloridaRealtors® 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk:407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit:http://www.floridarealtors.org The Voice for Real Estate® in Florida 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. _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

NB

Neil B. Shoter

Wed, Jan 11, 2012 9:30 PM

The RPPTL Section so far to my knowledge has not official position, several committees have given opinion and the comments have been on specific detailed provisions, but no consensus on entire opposition. The Bill is in process. I do not have any information on other constituencies.

Neil

[cid:image002.jpg@01CCD07E.4C426C60]

Neil B. Shoter
Partner / LEED Accredited Professional

Shutts & Bowen LLP
1100 CityPlace Tower, 525 Okeechobee Boulevard | West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Direct: (561) 650-8535 | Fax: (561) 822-5525
E-Mailmailto:NShoter@shutts.com | Biographyhttp://www.shutts.com/attorneys-Neil-Shoter.html | V-Cardhttp://www.shutts.com/vcard-181.vcf | Websitehttp://www.shutts.com

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:21 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees

2 items:

HB 921/SB 1830: Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along.

Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea).

Late Charges: I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800.

It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated.

The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak.

Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com mailto:harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees

Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly.

I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this?

Thanks,
Greg

Greg Hass, Senior Counsel

Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors(r)
7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822
talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421
visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org

The Voice for Real Estate(r) in Florida

[cid:image003.jpg@01CCD07E.4C426C60]
</pre>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. <pre>

The RPPTL Section so far to my knowledge has not official position, several committees have given opinion and the comments have been on specific detailed provisions, but no consensus on entire opposition. The Bill is in process. I do not have any information on other constituencies. Neil [cid:image002.jpg@01CCD07E.4C426C60] Neil B. Shoter Partner / LEED Accredited Professional ________________________________ Shutts & Bowen LLP 1100 CityPlace Tower, 525 Okeechobee Boulevard | West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Direct: (561) 650-8535 | Fax: (561) 822-5525 E-Mail<mailto:NShoter@shutts.com> | Biography<http://www.shutts.com/attorneys-Neil-Shoter.html> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/vcard-181.vcf> | Website<http://www.shutts.com> From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Harry Heist Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:21 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] HB 921 and Late Fees 2 items: HB 921/SB 1830: Senator Anitere Flores is the Senate sponsor and is the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Representative Stargel is a rental housing owner/manager. This will probably be a bill that will not die easily. It will move along. Where does the Bar stand on this bill? Where does FAR stand? Where does Legal Services stand? As attorney for the Florida Apartment Association, we are having a call on this Friday. Hopefully everyone can come to an early consensus to avoid time consuming stuff and fighting later unless it is decided that this should be killed and a real proper re-write done next year where we all start early, sit at a table with all groups and get something we all can agree on. (You can tell I like that idea). Late Charges: I generally see $35 to $100 and sometimes up to 10%. An "average" rent is about $800. It technically is not usury as it is not a loan but a good argument can be made. I have seen it made in pleadings but never had it litigated. The per diem late charges really give us a headache and can skyrocket the APR so to speak. Please chime in on your thoughts. Once these bills begin rolling, they really take up a lot of resources. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE, DAVIS & WOLK P.A. PH: 1 800 253 8428 FAX: 1 800 367 9038 "Serving the Property Management Professional" Website: www.evict.com<http://www.evict.com/> Email: harry@evict.com<mailto:harry@evict.com> THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hass Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:32 PM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] residential lease late fees Our FAR "Residential Lease for Single Family Home or Duplex" has a Section 6 dealing with late fees. It has blanks to be filled in for both the amount of the late fee and the number of days after rent is due that it becomes "late". If left blank, the default setting is 4% of the rent payment for each rent payment made 5 days after the rent is due if paid monthly. I'm curious to hear what the committee members thoughts are as to what the maximum the late fee can be before it is deemed unconscionably high/usury by a judge and rendered unenforceable - has anyone seen any cases on this? Thanks, Greg Greg Hass, Senior Counsel Office of Law & Policy | FloridaRealtors(r) 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando, FL 32822 talk: 407.438.1400, ext. 2421 visit: http://www.floridarealtors.org The Voice for Real Estate(r) in Florida [cid:image003.jpg@01CCD07E.4C426C60] </pre>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. <pre>