Complaint Review: wyvernwood apts

FPI Management, Inc.
3187 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 220
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Re: Request for Reasonable Accommodations on behalf of Mr. Zaybastian Xoss
and his minor son, A.L., tenants.
Dear Landlord and Agents of Landlord,
The tenant, Mr. Zaybastian Xoss lives at 2820 The Mall, Unit 6, Los Angeles, CA 90023 and
has lived there since March 1
st
, 2011. Mr. Xoss is a qualified individual with a disability, as
defined by the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), such that his disability--a mental,
developmental, or physical impairment--substantially limits one or more major life activities,
such as walking, seeing, hearing, working, learning, or caring for himself. (42 U.S.C. § 3604
(f)(3)(B); Cal. Fair Emp. and Hous. Act (FEHA), Cal. Gov't Code §12927(c)(1), §12955, (42
U.S.C. § 3602(h); Cal. Gov't Code §12955.3.)) Mr. Xoss’s son, a minor, is also disabled and a
tenant. He suffers from muscular dystrophy, among other physical disabilities.
In 2000, my client incurred serious injuries as a result of an accident. The serious injuries
sustained brought about my clients disability. The accident caused traumatic brain injuries in
which my client incurred a seizure disorder, TODD’s syndrome and Post Traumatic Concussion
Disorder (PTCD) resulting in partial. He also suffered inexorable damage to his cervical spine,
which further made the use of a wheelchair necessary for much of his mobility.
Mr. Xoss is requesting necessary changes in the landlord's rules, policies, or practices on
behalf of himself and his son, as individuals with disabilities, such that they are afforded an
opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling, i.e. a reasonable accommodation. (Fair Housing
Amendments Act (FHAA), 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B); Cal. Fair Emp. and House. Act (FEHA),
Cal. Gov't Code §§ 12927(c)(1), 12955.)
My client, Mr. Xoss, on behalf of himself and his son, requests the following necessary and
reasonable accommodations:
1. Use of a Service Animal
A number of courts have considered claims relating to accommodations for service
animals. (Green v. Hous. Auth., 994 F. Supp. 1253 (D. Or. 1998); Bronk v. Ineichen, 54
F.3d 891 (7th Cir. 1996); see also, 24 C.F.R. § 100.204(b).) Since there is a relatively
small impact on the landlord, courts have continually required landlords to make
exceptions to "no pet" policies to allow service animals. Service animals include not only
seeing-eye dogs, but also companion animals that provide emotional support to people
who have mental disabilities. (Majors v. Hous. Auth., 652 F.2d 454 (5th Cir.
1981); Whittier Terrace Assoc. v. Hampshire, 532 N.E.2d 712 (Mass. App. 1989).
Mr. Xoss, during the second meeting with management on February 25
th
, 2011,
inquired as to a service dog, namely a comfort dog. He continued to communicate this
request both orally and in writing throughout his entire tenancy and he is renewing this
request. (Please see paragraph 21 and 3, page 4 and 18 of the signed lease agreement
dated February 25
th
, 2011.) Mr. Xoss also provided verification from his treating
physician, Doctor James Caplan. In the verification letter dated May 23
rd
, 2012, Doctor
Caplan explained that a companion animal would only benefit Mr. Xoss as people with
seizure disorders, such as Mr. Xoss, who have companion animals, experienced a
significant reduction in incidents of seizures, thus less trauma to their brain and body and,
as a result, a reduction in the need for seizure medication.
2. Disabled Parking Space
The law is clear that when a disabled person needs a parking space, but is lower
on the waiting list than nondisabled tenants (who may have been waiting for years),
landlords must move the disabled person that needs the space to the top of the waiting
list. While not having a close space may be inconvenient for a nondisabled tenant; it is
often an insurmountable barrier for the disabled tenant. (Shapiro v. Cadman Towers, 844
F. Supp. 116 (E.D.N.Y. 1994); see also, Jankowski Lee & Assoc. v. Cisneros, 91 F.3d
891 (7th Cir. 1996); 24 C.F.R. § 100.204.)
Mr. Xoss requested and filled out the requisite forms for a parking space
immediately upon entering into the lease agreement. In fact, he requested it in writing,
see page 1, Row H, of the signed lease agreement. However, Mr. Xoss was told that it
would be highly unlikely that he would ever receive one. Marcelo Gigena, Community
Director/Manager stated that there was a year waiting list, “so good luck getting one”.
3. Use of Electric Wheelchair in Common Areas (Please note, use of a wheelchair does
not fall into the category of a reasonable accommodation, thus permission from a
landlord is not necessary, nor required.)
My client’s Doctor, James Caplan, M.D., made it clear, in a letter dated May 23
rd
,
2012, that, “Since his accident, Mr. Xoss relies on his wheelchair for much of his
mobility. It is an important assistive device that enables him to live a full and complete
life. ” Unfortunately, my client’s repeated requests were ignored despite the fact that he
is entitled to use his wheelchair and portable ramp, period. My client put the landlord on
notice when he added a handwritten disclosure to the addendum that stated, “any and all
Mini Scooters of any kind, that are powered by any type of motor, shall not be stored or
operated at anytime on the premises or the common areas of Wvvernwood Garden
Apartments”, in order to make sure management knew he used a wheelchair. He
handwrote, into the lease, “not including handicapped device”. The manager, Marcelo
Gigena, initialed “MG”, next to that handwritten statement. My client also added a
further disclosure, on that same page that, “I have and use a personal wheelchair.”
Despite my client’s open disclosure of his need to use a wheelchair and
management’s acknowledgment of this need, less than a week later, Mr. Gigena
approached Mr. Xoss while he was in his wheelchair exiting the unit through the
common area and said that he was obstructing and/or interfering other tenants’ ability to
use the common area. (It is important to note that no one else was present at the time, not
even one other person.)
From that moment on, Management and Security reprimanded and or mocked Mr.
Xoss when he used his wheelchair. Thus, he would try to avoid security and management
by timing his leaving and returning to when there would be less likelihood that either
were present. However, this plan was not fail-proof. The harassment continued on a
regular basis. He was forced to use his cane more and more, despite the fact that the
wheelchair was and continues to be a medical necessity. Thus, his injuries have been
exacerbated and he has increased physical pain.
4. Use of Portable Ramp (Please note, use of a portable ramp does not fall into the
category of a reasonable accommodation, thus permission from landlord is not necessary,
nor required.)
Doctor Caplan expressed to Management of Wyvernwood and the Housing Rights
Council in the letter dated May 23
rd
, 2012 that receiving permission to use the portable
ramp was “critical.” The Doctor further explained that “the ramp should be approved
without delay, and it is in fact a medical necessity.”
Mr. Xoss’s use of the portable ramp does not require Management’s permission, as it
is not a fixed and permanent alteration to the property. ADA specifications apply only to
permanent ramps on commercial property, not portable ramps. In fact Mr. Xoss’s ramp
eradicates the need to request a reasonable accommodation or modification, alleviates the
need for the Landlord to apply and attain a building permit, does away with the
construction of a permanent ramp and all the issues that come with that, especially when
needed in a common area, removes the requisite financial burden on Mr. Xoss and his
family as a result of building a permanent ramp and then restoring the property upon their
departure. But, most importantly, it allows for immediate use of his wheelchair, without
any delay or burden whatsoever.
Although my client’s use of the portable ramp did not require an accommodation
request, my client repeatedly requested their approval for its use on several, documented,
occasions over the last three years of his tenancy. The use of the portable ramp requires
only a few seconds of the ramp being placed on the ground, once he travels over step he
immediately retrieves it, and continues on his way, with the ramp stored on his chair.
Using his portable ramp takes less than 30 seconds from the moment of placement to its
removal. Further its use requires no action from the Landlord, no alteration to the
premises, no shared costs, no involvement on your part whatsoever.
5. Carpeting Throughout the Unit
Tenants, upon the first walk-through, were shown a first floor unit with carpeting
throughout. Tenants notified Management, during that first tour on February 20
th
, 2011
that Mr. Xoss and his son are disabled and having wall-to-wall carpeting was necessary
to accommodate the symptoms of their son’s disability. Carpeting eases his ability to
move safely about the unit with less discomfort and reduces the incidents of falling as a
result of his disability where losing one’s balance is a common symptom. Furthermore,
the carpeting lessens Mr. Xoss’s discomfort while moving about the unit when using his
cane as it makes mobility easier and less painful.
Upon being informed that the unit with carpeting was no longer available and the
replacement unit had no carpeting, whatsoever, Mr. Xoss reminded Management that
carpeting was necessary to accommodate both him and his son as a result of their
disabilities. Marcelo Gigena and Mario, after endless, seemingly futile attempts to
convince them, reluctantly, and with great annoyance, agreed to carpet only one room.
All other rooms remain uncarpeted.
As you are aware, it is unlawful discrimination to deny a person with a disability a
reasonable accommodation if such accommodation may be necessary to afford such person full
enjoyment of the premises. Thus, if a tenant has a disability, as defined under the FHAA, made
an accommodation request, demonstrated the necessity of the accommodation and the landlord
cannot show that the accommodation would impose an undue cost or effect a fundamental
change, the landlord must grant the accommodation. Failing to grant the accommodation request
that meets the above noted requirements constitutes illegal discrimination.
I am urging that you grant the requested reasonable accommodations enumerated above.
In so doing you enable both Mr. Xoss and his son an equal opportunity to live in and enjoy their
home, whether it be through granting these requests or providing reasonable relocation monies.
Please let me know what, if any, additional information you need from Mr. Xoss, his
son, and/or their health care providers so that you may better understand the disabilities they
have and the limitations they impose. I look forward to your response and appreciate your
attention to this matter.
Dated: June 5
th
, 2014 Very truly yours,v

 I fear for my safty as security workers and others have threatened me my fmaily and my service animal