Orchard Associates failed to repair unsafe conditions retaliatory eviction lied in court withheld deposit refund Menlo Park California
Throughout my almost 3-year tenancy with The Orchard Apartments, the management continuously practiced negligent and unethical practices. They often made promises to repair things, which they seldom did in a timely manner, or without repeated pestering.
Upon my move-in, I was promised that my rotting balcony would be repaired within a couple of weeks. When I finally had an estimate prepared for the necessary repairs, attached it to my rent payment, and deducted that amount from my rent (which is my legal right as a California tenant), they gave me a 3-day notice to pay or vacate! It took 9 months of battling with them, getting HUD involved, and threats of legal action to finally get it taken care of.
More recently, I had a terrible problem when the cigarette smoke from my downstairs neighbors was seeping up into my apartment. I am allergic to cigarette smoke and it caused health problems that affected my performance at work (and, therefore, my income). Management repeatedly promised to take measures to properly seal the problem areas of the apartment, and even lied about having doen so on two occasions when they hadn't done the work.
I always paid my rent on time, left the property in better condition than before my tenancy, and never caused any problems (excepting to ask for proper repairs or maintenance). They let other tenants work on their junk cars on the property (against lease rules), leaving trash everywhere; they knowingly let non-lease people reside with others for months (including drug abusers/dealers). A month after I moved out, S.W.A.T. surrounded the apartment that was below me, taking them away in handcuffs.
The on-site manager at the time of my move-in actually signed an agreement with me, stating that the conditin of the carpet was sub-standard, the apartment had not been repainted prior to my taking it over, and that I was not responsible for it in any way upon moving out. In addition, by California landlord-tenant law, the tenant is not responsible for carpet or regular painting or cleaning after 2 years on premises anyway. Therefore, upon giving my written 30-day notice to vacate, my suggestion of taking the last month's rent out of the security deposit (which they owed back to me anyway) was not unreasonable.
However, they responded with a Retaliatory Eviction... after I had given notice! They also produced phony receipts for cleaning, deodorizing, and painting (which happened to equal the amount of my security deposit to the penny). We ended up in court, where they continued their lack of ethics and produced phony photos of repairs they claimed they took care of (the photos were taken after I had moved out).
It's a shame that the California (at least Scaramento County) courts do not adhere to the tenants' legal rights as much as they protect the greedy landlords. This story is to warn anyone against renting a property owned by R.W. Zukin Corp. (4080 Campbell Ave., Menlo Park, CA, 94025-1036), especially their old property The Orchard Apartments (7969 Madison Ave., Citrus Heights, CA, 95610).
Shari
Chandler, Arizona
U.S.A.
2 Updates & Rebuttals
Jim
San Diego,California,
U.S.A.
California courts are tenant friendly
#3Consumer Comment
Sat, October 16, 2004
Generally, California courts are actually tenant friendly, but at the very least - they do follow the law.
If the lease indicates, it is perfectly legal for the landlord to require payment of the last month's rent (not to be deducted from the security). The eviction would not be considered retaliatory since you actually owed rent.
With regard to your comment about CA LAW and paint/carpet charges upon move out --- there is no law stating 2 yrs of age = zero cost. It is simply the expected life of the carpet and paint. Generally, paint is 2 years, and carpet is 5-10 years, but this is not a rule set in stone and will vary.
I am not disputing that you might have had a horrible landlord and awful living conditions. Simply, if you are basing your comments on the LAW that you actually know what the LAW is.
Jim
San Diego,California,
U.S.A.
California courts are tenant friendly
#3Consumer Comment
Sat, October 16, 2004
Generally, California courts are actually tenant friendly, but at the very least - they do follow the law.
If the lease indicates, it is perfectly legal for the landlord to require payment of the last month's rent (not to be deducted from the security). The eviction would not be considered retaliatory since you actually owed rent.
With regard to your comment about CA LAW and paint/carpet charges upon move out --- there is no law stating 2 yrs of age = zero cost. It is simply the expected life of the carpet and paint. Generally, paint is 2 years, and carpet is 5-10 years, but this is not a rule set in stone and will vary.
I am not disputing that you might have had a horrible landlord and awful living conditions. Simply, if you are basing your comments on the LAW that you actually know what the LAW is.