Empathy List Archives

NB

Neil B. Shoter

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 4:33 AM

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

[http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg]
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/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/ | V-Cardhttp://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/ | Websitehttp://www.shutts.com/

</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>

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil [http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg] 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/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> | Website<http://www.shutts.com/> </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>

AM

Alberto M Cardet

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 4:35 PM

83.49(10) gives the foreclosing lender the option of requiring the landlord
to turn over tenant deposits and advance rent to the lender rather than
depositing in the court registry. Although, I think it is a bad idea, my
opinion is leave the monies in the Court Registry to maintain the status quo
and protect the money, I can foresee the following scenarios:

Tenants who move during the pendency of the foreclosure will not get
their security deposits back from the landlord in the time frame provided by
the LL/T Act, because the lender is holding the money. Foreclosure firms
that are notorious for lack of communication will force tenants to sue the
landlord or intervene in foreclosure to get deposits back.
Conversely, if the landlord makes claim on the security deposit or the
tenant, as sometimes happens, decides to use his security deposit as rent,
is the lender going to return the money to the landlord or use it to offset
the debt owed to the lender.
What if Lender goes under or is taken over by FDIC, where is the money
then and how are security deposit claims or returns made.

I think if the lender is going to hold security deposits there must be some
obligation built in regarding the lender's obligation to maintain the money
safe, like their lawyer's trust account that has unlimited FDIC protection,
and how the money can either be claimed by the tenant or landlord.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the
attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior
to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by
foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure
Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of
foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of
residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of
this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of
the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee.
You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

Image removed by sender.

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
mailto:NShoter@shutts.com E-Mail |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | http://www.shutts.com/
Website

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.

83.49(10) gives the foreclosing lender the option of requiring the landlord to turn over tenant deposits and advance rent to the lender rather than depositing in the court registry. Although, I think it is a bad idea, my opinion is leave the monies in the Court Registry to maintain the status quo and protect the money, I can foresee the following scenarios: 1. Tenants who move during the pendency of the foreclosure will not get their security deposits back from the landlord in the time frame provided by the LL/T Act, because the lender is holding the money. Foreclosure firms that are notorious for lack of communication will force tenants to sue the landlord or intervene in foreclosure to get deposits back. 2. Conversely, if the landlord makes claim on the security deposit or the tenant, as sometimes happens, decides to use his security deposit as rent, is the lender going to return the money to the landlord or use it to offset the debt owed to the lender. 3. What if Lender goes under or is taken over by FDIC, where is the money then and how are security deposit claims or returns made. I think if the lender is going to hold security deposits there must be some obligation built in regarding the lender's obligation to maintain the money safe, like their lawyer's trust account that has unlimited FDIC protection, and how the money can either be claimed by the tenant or landlord. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil Image removed by sender. 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 <mailto:NShoter@shutts.com> E-Mail | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | <http://www.shutts.com/> Website 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.

DW

David Weisman

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 4:46 PM

While I like the idea, I think that the proposal in 83.49 is going to cause more trouble than cash. It is going to have lenders or annoyed tenants filing criminal charges which will have to be dealt with.

Anyone who thinks that a defaulting property owner will come forward with the security deposit and advance rent also believes that the same person has these funds in a separate bank account, probably at the First Bank of the Easter Bunny.

Rather than make it criminal, why not provide a right of setoff to let the tenant do what they are going to do anyway.

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:image001.jpg@01CBD998.A4E57A70]

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

[http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg]

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/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/ | V-Cardhttp://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/ | Websitehttp://www.shutts.com/

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.

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.

While I like the idea, I think that the proposal in 83.49 is going to cause more trouble than cash. It is going to have lenders or annoyed tenants filing criminal charges which will have to be dealt with. Anyone who thinks that a defaulting property owner will come forward with the security deposit and advance rent also believes that the same person has these funds in a separate bank account, probably at the First Bank of the Easter Bunny. Rather than make it criminal, why not provide a right of setoff to let the tenant do what they are going to do anyway. 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:image001.jpg@01CBD998.A4E57A70] From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil [http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg] 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/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> | Website<http://www.shutts.com/> 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. 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.

H

harry (at) evict.com

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 4:55 PM

My experience is that the lenders want absolutely nothing to do with the
security deposits. They won't accept them if you can even find them.

I think the safest thing is for the money to go into the court registry and
then the tenant has to motion for the money out. The property manager can
be forced to notify the tenant what he has done with the deposit. What
happens though if the tenant motions for the money out but still are living
there, possibly and usually in default? In my experience, the banks could
care less. What happens if the foreclosure is dismissed but the tenant has
received the money back?

I have hundreds of Realtor clients who have no clue what to do with the
deposits when the owner walks away, the property is in foreclosure or near
foreclosure, FREC will not give any guidance and they are put in really bad
situations as am I as I cannot give safe advice. It is a daily problem for
me.

It is a burden on the tenant to get involved in a Circuit Court case with
all the people who may need to be notified of the motion but possibly this
can be combined with a notification process that tells the tenant how to
motion for the money. I can't see the banks fighting for the money in most
cases. They are a complete mess.

I have no answers.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, 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.

<http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1016157733#!/profile.php?id=101615773
3> Description: Description: facebook

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Alberto M Cardet
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:36 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

83.49(10) gives the foreclosing lender the option of requiring the landlord
to turn over tenant deposits and advance rent to the lender rather than
depositing in the court registry. Although, I think it is a bad idea, my
opinion is leave the monies in the Court Registry to maintain the status quo
and protect the money, I can foresee the following scenarios:

Tenants who move during the pendency of the foreclosure will not get
their security deposits back from the landlord in the time frame provided by
the LL/T Act, because the lender is holding the money. Foreclosure firms
that are notorious for lack of communication will force tenants to sue the
landlord or intervene in foreclosure to get deposits back.
Conversely, if the landlord makes claim on the security deposit or the
tenant, as sometimes happens, decides to use his security deposit as rent,
is the lender going to return the money to the landlord or use it to offset
the debt owed to the lender.
What if Lender goes under or is taken over by FDIC, where is the money
then and how are security deposit claims or returns made.

I think if the lender is going to hold security deposits there must be some
obligation built in regarding the lender's obligation to maintain the money
safe, like their lawyer's trust account that has unlimited FDIC protection,
and how the money can either be claimed by the tenant or landlord.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the
attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior
to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by
foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure
Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of
foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of
residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of
this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of
the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee.
You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

Image removed by sender.

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
mailto:NShoter@shutts.com E-Mail |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | http://www.shutts.com/
Website

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.

My experience is that the lenders want absolutely nothing to do with the security deposits. They won't accept them if you can even find them. I think the safest thing is for the money to go into the court registry and then the tenant has to motion for the money out. The property manager can be forced to notify the tenant what he has done with the deposit. What happens though if the tenant motions for the money out but still are living there, possibly and usually in default? In my experience, the banks could care less. What happens if the foreclosure is dismissed but the tenant has received the money back? I have hundreds of Realtor clients who have no clue what to do with the deposits when the owner walks away, the property is in foreclosure or near foreclosure, FREC will not give any guidance and they are put in really bad situations as am I as I cannot give safe advice. It is a daily problem for me. It is a burden on the tenant to get involved in a Circuit Court case with all the people who may need to be notified of the motion but possibly this can be combined with a notification process that tells the tenant how to motion for the money. I can't see the banks fighting for the money in most cases. They are a complete mess. I have no answers. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, 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. <http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1016157733#!/profile.php?id=101615773 3> Description: Description: facebook From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Alberto M Cardet Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:36 AM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) 83.49(10) gives the foreclosing lender the option of requiring the landlord to turn over tenant deposits and advance rent to the lender rather than depositing in the court registry. Although, I think it is a bad idea, my opinion is leave the monies in the Court Registry to maintain the status quo and protect the money, I can foresee the following scenarios: 1. Tenants who move during the pendency of the foreclosure will not get their security deposits back from the landlord in the time frame provided by the LL/T Act, because the lender is holding the money. Foreclosure firms that are notorious for lack of communication will force tenants to sue the landlord or intervene in foreclosure to get deposits back. 2. Conversely, if the landlord makes claim on the security deposit or the tenant, as sometimes happens, decides to use his security deposit as rent, is the lender going to return the money to the landlord or use it to offset the debt owed to the lender. 3. What if Lender goes under or is taken over by FDIC, where is the money then and how are security deposit claims or returns made. I think if the lender is going to hold security deposits there must be some obligation built in regarding the lender's obligation to maintain the money safe, like their lawyer's trust account that has unlimited FDIC protection, and how the money can either be claimed by the tenant or landlord. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil Image removed by sender. 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 <mailto:NShoter@shutts.com> E-Mail | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | <http://www.shutts.com/> Website 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.

L

lesstevens

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 5:00 PM

Just a random thought...if the Lender is not going to "foreclose" the
tenant, then they are responsible for any security deposit which was posted
by Tenant, similar to an advance of taxes, etc. for the property, and add
same to any deficiency they may pursue...I am having this argument with a
Lender right now who did not foreclose out the tenant and wishes to "honor"
the Lease as it provides some cash flow..

Les H. Stevens, Esquire

Les H. Stevens, P.A.

5301 North Federal Highway

Suite 130

Boca Raton, Florida 33487

Tel. - (561) 989-9797

Fax - (561) 989-8484

E-Mail - lesstevens@earthlink.net

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO
WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED,
CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED
THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE
IMMEDIATELY

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of harry@evict.com
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:55 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

My experience is that the lenders want absolutely nothing to do with the
security deposits. They won't accept them if you can even find them.

I think the safest thing is for the money to go into the court registry and
then the tenant has to motion for the money out. The property manager can
be forced to notify the tenant what he has done with the deposit. What
happens though if the tenant motions for the money out but still are living
there, possibly and usually in default? In my experience, the banks could
care less. What happens if the foreclosure is dismissed but the tenant has
received the money back?

I have hundreds of Realtor clients who have no clue what to do with the
deposits when the owner walks away, the property is in foreclosure or near
foreclosure, FREC will not give any guidance and they are put in really bad
situations as am I as I cannot give safe advice. It is a daily problem for
me.

It is a burden on the tenant to get involved in a Circuit Court case with
all the people who may need to be notified of the motion but possibly this
can be combined with a notification process that tells the tenant how to
motion for the money. I can't see the banks fighting for the money in most
cases. They are a complete mess.

I have no answers.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, 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.

<http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1016157733#!/profile.php?id=101615773
3> Description: Description: facebook

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Alberto M Cardet
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:36 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

83.49(10) gives the foreclosing lender the option of requiring the landlord
to turn over tenant deposits and advance rent to the lender rather than
depositing in the court registry. Although, I think it is a bad idea, my
opinion is leave the monies in the Court Registry to maintain the status quo
and protect the money, I can foresee the following scenarios:

Tenants who move during the pendency of the foreclosure will not get
their security deposits back from the landlord in the time frame provided by
the LL/T Act, because the lender is holding the money. Foreclosure firms
that are notorious for lack of communication will force tenants to sue the
landlord or intervene in foreclosure to get deposits back.
Conversely, if the landlord makes claim on the security deposit or the
tenant, as sometimes happens, decides to use his security deposit as rent,
is the lender going to return the money to the landlord or use it to offset
the debt owed to the lender.
What if Lender goes under or is taken over by FDIC, where is the money
then and how are security deposit claims or returns made.

I think if the lender is going to hold security deposits there must be some
obligation built in regarding the lender's obligation to maintain the money
safe, like their lawyer's trust account that has unlimited FDIC protection,
and how the money can either be claimed by the tenant or landlord.

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the
attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior
to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by
foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure
Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of
foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of
residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of
this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of
the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee.
You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

Image removed by sender.

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
mailto:NShoter@shutts.com E-Mail |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | http://www.shutts.com/
Website

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.

Just a random thought...if the Lender is not going to "foreclose" the tenant, then they are responsible for any security deposit which was posted by Tenant, similar to an advance of taxes, etc. for the property, and add same to any deficiency they may pursue...I am having this argument with a Lender right now who did not foreclose out the tenant and wishes to "honor" the Lease as it provides some cash flow.. Les H. Stevens, Esquire Les H. Stevens, P.A. 5301 North Federal Highway Suite 130 Boca Raton, Florida 33487 Tel. - (561) 989-9797 Fax - (561) 989-8484 E-Mail - lesstevens@earthlink.net ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT AND NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of harry@evict.com Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:55 AM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) My experience is that the lenders want absolutely nothing to do with the security deposits. They won't accept them if you can even find them. I think the safest thing is for the money to go into the court registry and then the tenant has to motion for the money out. The property manager can be forced to notify the tenant what he has done with the deposit. What happens though if the tenant motions for the money out but still are living there, possibly and usually in default? In my experience, the banks could care less. What happens if the foreclosure is dismissed but the tenant has received the money back? I have hundreds of Realtor clients who have no clue what to do with the deposits when the owner walks away, the property is in foreclosure or near foreclosure, FREC will not give any guidance and they are put in really bad situations as am I as I cannot give safe advice. It is a daily problem for me. It is a burden on the tenant to get involved in a Circuit Court case with all the people who may need to be notified of the motion but possibly this can be combined with a notification process that tells the tenant how to motion for the money. I can't see the banks fighting for the money in most cases. They are a complete mess. I have no answers. Harry LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE & DAVIS, 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. <http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1016157733#!/profile.php?id=101615773 3> Description: Description: facebook From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Alberto M Cardet Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:36 AM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) 83.49(10) gives the foreclosing lender the option of requiring the landlord to turn over tenant deposits and advance rent to the lender rather than depositing in the court registry. Although, I think it is a bad idea, my opinion is leave the monies in the Court Registry to maintain the status quo and protect the money, I can foresee the following scenarios: 1. Tenants who move during the pendency of the foreclosure will not get their security deposits back from the landlord in the time frame provided by the LL/T Act, because the lender is holding the money. Foreclosure firms that are notorious for lack of communication will force tenants to sue the landlord or intervene in foreclosure to get deposits back. 2. Conversely, if the landlord makes claim on the security deposit or the tenant, as sometimes happens, decides to use his security deposit as rent, is the lender going to return the money to the landlord or use it to offset the debt owed to the lender. 3. What if Lender goes under or is taken over by FDIC, where is the money then and how are security deposit claims or returns made. I think if the lender is going to hold security deposits there must be some obligation built in regarding the lender's obligation to maintain the money safe, like their lawyer's trust account that has unlimited FDIC protection, and how the money can either be claimed by the tenant or landlord. From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil Image removed by sender. 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 <mailto:NShoter@shutts.com> E-Mail | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | <http://www.shutts.com/> Website 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.

LO

Law Offices of Scott A. Frank

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 5:22 PM

My $0.02.

SB 784

I agree with David about the nightmare of enforcement. Also, why would the
monies be given to the lender? If the lender is not the foreclosure buyer,
are they required to hand over the funds to the actual buyer? Yeah, that
will work. Maybe we could require that the monies, if not paid into the
court, are then distributed directly to the buyer out of the seller's
proceeds at issuance of certificate of title.

Again, it's a great idea, but horrendous in potential execution. If it is
in fact the desired policy to protect legitimate deposits, then the
legislature should just state that any proven security deposit will be
credited to tenant's account regardless of whether the foreclosure
buyer/landlord ever received it. May not be "fair" to buyers, but at least
it's clear, and people can be aware of their risks before they buy.

As to the right of setoff of unreturned deposits by the tenant, I don't
object to it wholesale - in truth it just becomes an additional "lien" or
cost that a foreclosure buyer needs to calculate into his costs when making
a bid - but I'm not so sure that it doesn't also invite a whole new class of
fraud. But maybe that can be handled by strictly defining proof.

However, "proof" is, in my opinion, the biggest issue here. The statute
requires evidence, but what is enough? A receipt from the landlord? How
will we verify its legitimacy with a landlord that is, in most cases, long
gone? A cancelled check? Better, but how do we know what the purpose of
the check was? It could have just been the tenant's payment of ordinary
rent. Again, no landlord around to verify. It just seems to me that this
is pretty much unworkable.

Finally, I do have one added suggestion with respect to the legitimate lease
issue. Beyond all other limitations, I would like the Act to provide that a
pre-existing lease expires 1 year after foreclosure sale, regardless of the
term of the lease itself.

However, what this statute has done right is creating the form of the 90-day
notice, which specifically states that rent is payable during the 90-day
period. That is long overdue. But I would add one thing - and that is in
order to have the benefit of the full lease term, the tenant must give a
copy of the existing lease, certified (under pains and penalties of perjury)
by the tenant to be a true and correct copy, within 30 days of receiving the
notice. Otherwise, how will the buyer know what the lease terms are?

SB 738

Just see my comments to 784, with the added comment that this one is not
drafted as well as 784. So if I had to choose as to which one is closer to
being a workable bill, it would be 784.

All:

Please provide any additional comments to me by end of week so I can compile
them as best I can and forward them up the chain.

Thanks.

Scott A. Frank

Attorney at Law

LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. FRANK, P.A.

621 NW 53rd Street, Suite 420

Boca Raton, FL 33487

p: (561) 372-7860

f: (561) 423-5721

sfrank@saflaw.com

www.saflaw.com http://www.saflaw.com/

If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or
disclosing it.

Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal
tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including
any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it
cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any
tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any
other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing
or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

From: David Weisman [mailto:David.Weisman@gmlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:47 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: RE: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

While I like the idea, I think that the proposal in 83.49 is going to cause
more trouble than cash. It is going to have lenders or annoyed tenants
filing criminal charges which will have to be dealt with.

Anyone who thinks that a defaulting property owner will come forward with
the security deposit and advance rent also believes that the same person has
these funds in a separate bank account, probably at the First Bank of the
Easter Bunny.

Rather than make it criminal, why not provide a right of setoff to let the
tenant do what they are going to do anyway.

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

Email Logo -Resize 30

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the
attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior
to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by
foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure
Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of
foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of
residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of
this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of
the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee.
You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg

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
mailto:NShoter@shutts.com E-Mail |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography |
<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4
b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | http://www.shutts.com/
Website

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.

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.

My $0.02. SB 784 I agree with David about the nightmare of enforcement. Also, why would the monies be given to the lender? If the lender is not the foreclosure buyer, are they required to hand over the funds to the actual buyer? Yeah, that will work. Maybe we could require that the monies, if not paid into the court, are then distributed directly to the buyer out of the seller's proceeds at issuance of certificate of title. Again, it's a great idea, but horrendous in potential execution. If it is in fact the desired policy to protect legitimate deposits, then the legislature should just state that any proven security deposit will be credited to tenant's account regardless of whether the foreclosure buyer/landlord ever received it. May not be "fair" to buyers, but at least it's clear, and people can be aware of their risks before they buy. As to the right of setoff of unreturned deposits by the tenant, I don't object to it wholesale - in truth it just becomes an additional "lien" or cost that a foreclosure buyer needs to calculate into his costs when making a bid - but I'm not so sure that it doesn't also invite a whole new class of fraud. But maybe that can be handled by strictly defining proof. However, "proof" is, in my opinion, the biggest issue here. The statute requires evidence, but what is enough? A receipt from the landlord? How will we verify its legitimacy with a landlord that is, in most cases, long gone? A cancelled check? Better, but how do we know what the purpose of the check was? It could have just been the tenant's payment of ordinary rent. Again, no landlord around to verify. It just seems to me that this is pretty much unworkable. Finally, I do have one added suggestion with respect to the legitimate lease issue. Beyond all other limitations, I would like the Act to provide that a pre-existing lease expires 1 year after foreclosure sale, regardless of the term of the lease itself. However, what this statute has done right is creating the form of the 90-day notice, which specifically states that rent is payable during the 90-day period. That is long overdue. But I would add one thing - and that is in order to have the benefit of the full lease term, the tenant must give a copy of the existing lease, certified (under pains and penalties of perjury) by the tenant to be a true and correct copy, within 30 days of receiving the notice. Otherwise, how will the buyer know what the lease terms are? SB 738 Just see my comments to 784, with the added comment that this one is not drafted as well as 784. So if I had to choose as to which one is closer to being a workable bill, it would be 784. All: Please provide any additional comments to me by end of week so I can compile them as best I can and forward them up the chain. Thanks. Scott A. Frank Attorney at Law LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. FRANK, P.A. 621 NW 53rd Street, Suite 420 Boca Raton, FL 33487 p: (561) 372-7860 f: (561) 423-5721 sfrank@saflaw.com www.saflaw.com <http://www.saflaw.com/> If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it. Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. From: David Weisman [mailto:David.Weisman@gmlaw.com] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:47 AM To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: RE: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) While I like the idea, I think that the proposal in 83.49 is going to cause more trouble than cash. It is going to have lenders or annoyed tenants filing criminal charges which will have to be dealt with. Anyone who thinks that a defaulting property owner will come forward with the security deposit and advance rent also believes that the same person has these funds in a separate bank account, probably at the First Bank of the Easter Bunny. Rather than make it criminal, why not provide a right of setoff to let the tenant do what they are going to do anyway. 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 Email Logo -Resize 30 From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil <http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg> 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 <mailto:NShoter@shutts.com> E-Mail | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> Biography | <http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4 b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> V-Card | <http://www.shutts.com/> Website 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. 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

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 5:37 PM

I am 100% in agreement with David Weisman's comments on this issue.

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.

--- On Thu, 3/3/11, David Weisman David.Weisman@gmlaw.com wrote:

From: David Weisman David.Weisman@gmlaw.com
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)
To: "RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee" landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Cc: "'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'" sfrank@saflaw.com
Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 11:46 AM

While I like the idea, I think that the proposal in 83.49 is going to cause more trouble than cash. It is going to have lenders or annoyed tenants filing criminal charges which will have to be dealt with.

Anyone who thinks that a defaulting property owner will come forward with the security deposit and advance rent also believes that the same person has these funds in a separate bank account, probably at the First Bank of the Easter Bunny.

Rather than make it criminal, why not provide a right of setoff to let the tenant do what they are going to do anyway.

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 Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

Neil B. Shoter
Partner / LEED Accredited Professional

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. 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.

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

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

I am 100% in agreement with David Weisman's comments on this issue. 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. --- On Thu, 3/3/11, David Weisman <David.Weisman@gmlaw.com> wrote: From: David Weisman <David.Weisman@gmlaw.com> Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) To: "RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee" <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org> Cc: "'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'" <sfrank@saflaw.com> Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 11:46 AM While I like the idea, I think that the proposal in 83.49 is going to cause more trouble than cash. It is going to have lenders or annoyed tenants filing criminal charges which will have to be dealt with. Anyone who thinks that a defaulting property owner will come forward with the security deposit and advance rent also believes that the same person has these funds in a separate bank account, probably at the First Bank of the Easter Bunny. Rather than make it criminal, why not provide a right of setoff to let the tenant do what they are going to do anyway. 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 Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil 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 | Biography | V-Card | Website 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. 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. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ landten mailing list landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten

AJ

Arthur J. Menor

Tue, Mar 8, 2011 9:42 PM

SB 738 seems to be virtually identical to the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. Why is it needed or what does it add?

[http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg]
Arthur J. Menor
Partner

Shutts & Bowen LLP
1100 CityPlace Tower, 525 Okeechobee Boulevard | West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Direct: (561) 650-8510 | Fax: (561) 822-5510
E-Mailmailto:AMenor@shutts.com | Biographyhttp://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/8051073b-833e-444a-8b57-a6912a6d5435/Arthur_J_Menor.cfm/ | V-Cardhttp://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/8051073b-833e-444a-8b57-a6912a6d5435/Arthur_J_Menor.cfm/ | Websitehttp://www.shutts.com/

From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject)

Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009.

SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013.

Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank.

Thank you.

Neil

[http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg]
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/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/ | V-Cardhttp://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/ | Websitehttp://www.shutts.com/

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.

SB 738 seems to be virtually identical to the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. Why is it needed or what does it add? [http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg] Arthur J. Menor Partner ________________________________ Shutts & Bowen LLP 1100 CityPlace Tower, 525 Okeechobee Boulevard | West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Direct: (561) 650-8510 | Fax: (561) 822-5510 E-Mail<mailto:AMenor@shutts.com> | Biography<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/8051073b-833e-444a-8b57-a6912a6d5435/Arthur_J_Menor.cfm/> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/8051073b-833e-444a-8b57-a6912a6d5435/Arthur_J_Menor.cfm/> | Website<http://www.shutts.com/> ________________________________ From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:34 PM To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' Cc: 'Law Offices of Scott A. Frank' Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] (no subject) Our Committee has been asked to provide comments with respect to the attached proposed Bills. Senate Bill 738 creates notice prerequisites prior to termination of residential tenancies by a successor in interest by foreclosure to harmonize with the Federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. SB 784 modifies Section 83.49 relating to security deposits in event of foreclosure and creating Section 83.683 dealing again with notification of residential tenants prior to termination in foreclosure. Note the sunset of this law n 2013. Please provide any specific comments on these bills by no later than end of the day on Friday so that they may be passed onto our legislative committee. You may give comments directly to our Co-Chair Scott Frank. Thank you. Neil [http://www.shutts.com/shutts100.jpg] 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/index.cfm/fa/attorney.bio/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/index.cfm/fa/attorney.vcf/atty/466a1d2b-4049-425b-af4b-a56f3cb8a441/Neil_B_Shoter.cfm/> | Website<http://www.shutts.com/> 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.