|
We have a small commercial building, that has two upstairs apartments
(Ohio).
We received a letter from the city building department and fire department
wanting to come and "inspect" the apartments (knowing full well that the
apartments are occupied).
It is a nice building and apartments, and to our knowledge there is
absolutely no reason for the request ..other than the head of the bldg
department is a known political animal.
Isn't that a violation of the privacy of the tenants?
Will be protesting the request through the mayor, and also possibly
consulting an attorney if we want to fight the request to make a point.
Opinion?
|
| |
| |
M.Burns wrote in message ...
We have a small commercial building, that has two upstairs apartments
(Ohio).
We received a letter from the city building department and fire department
wanting to come and "inspect" the apartments (knowing full well that the
apartments are occupied).
It is a nice building and apartments, and to our knowledge there is
absolutely no reason for the request ..other than the head of the bldg
department is a known political animal.
Isn't that a violation of the privacy of the tenants?
Will be protesting the request through the mayor, and also possibly
consulting an attorney if we want to fight the request to make a point.
Opinion?
In my City, every apartment is inspected on a regular schedule, occupied
or not. I can't remember if it's every year or every two years.
They're looking for code violations and it can get expensive for the
landlord if they find any.
(The prior tenant in my unit kept removing the vacuum breaker from the
laundry tub faucet. The inspector caught the violation every time but was
a nice guy and let my landlord replace it. Finally, the landlord
super-glued the threads. )
Regards
Old Al
|
| |
| |
"M.Burns" <mhburns@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<gybVb.24629$CJ1.12462@lakeread01>...
We have a small commercial building, that has two upstairs apartments
(Ohio).
We received a letter from the city building department and fire department
wanting to come and "inspect" the apartments (knowing full well that the
apartments are occupied).
It is a nice building and apartments, and to our knowledge there is
absolutely no reason for the request ..other than the head of the bldg
department is a known political animal.
Isn't that a violation of the privacy of the tenants?
Will be protesting the request through the mayor, and also possibly
consulting an attorney if we want to fight the request to make a point.
Opinion?
I suggest the City familiarize itself with the 4th Amendment. You
should too, with the help of legal counsel, if you intend to challenge
its threatened actions.
|
| |
| |
"M.Burns" <mhburns@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<gybVb.24629$CJ1.12462@lakeread01>...
We have a small commercial building, that has two upstairs apartments
(Ohio).
We received a letter from the city building department and fire department
wanting to come and "inspect" the apartments (knowing full well that the
apartments are occupied).
It is a nice building and apartments, and to our knowledge there is
absolutely no reason for the request ..other than the head of the bldg
department is a known political animal.
Isn't that a violation of the privacy of the tenants?
Will be protesting the request through the mayor, and also possibly
consulting an attorney if we want to fight the request to make a point.
Opinion?
Keep a copy of the Constitution on hand, and point the fourth
amendment out to them. Videotape the incident, with a hidden camera if
possible. If they force an inspection anyway make it clear that you
are denying permission for a search and they are searching over your
objections. Then sue them in Federal court for violating your civil
rights. Have as many witnesses on hand as possible. Contact your local
ACLU.-Jitney
|
| |
| |
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
I suggest the City familiarize itself with the 4th Amendment. You
should too, with the help of legal counsel, if you intend to challenge
its threatened actions.
Another crackpot....what has the 4th Amendment got to do with a city inspecting
a building to see if it is safe for occupancy???? If a landlord doesn't want
the building inspected, then he just doesn't rent it....
|
| |
| |
From: jtnospam@yahoo.com (jitney)
Keep a copy of the Constitution on hand, and point the fourth
amendment out to them. Videotape the incident, with a hidden camera if
possible. If they force an inspection anyway make it clear that you
are denying permission for a search and they are searching over your
objections. Then sue them in Federal court for violating your civil
rights. Have as many witnesses on hand as possible. Contact your local
ACLU.-Jitney
Yet another crackpot....
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040207225922.11652.00001412@mb-m12.aol.com>...
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
Another crackpot....what has the 4th Amendment got to do with a city inspecting
a building to see if it is safe for occupancy???? If a landlord doesn't want
the building inspected, then he just doesn't rent it....
[sorry if this is a repeat post]
Yeah, as a former prosecutor, federal law clerk and current civil
rights defense litigator, what would I know about the 4th Amendment?
The city's building code enforcement duties do not constitute an
exception to 4th amendment restrictions that protect all private
dwellings. The city needs to meet constitutional standards to enter
these apartments even though it claims not to be investigating purely
criminal activity.
The advice of the other poster suggesting the landlord videotape
events and sue the city later is also bad advice. You need to show
more than a mere constitutional violation to win a civil rights
lawsuit against a governmental entity; you also need to prove actual
damages. Without property or persons being injured by the city's
actions, this lawsuit won't be worth the filing fees it takes to get
it started.
The most effective way to handle this in court will be to obtain an
injunction, assuming the city is not meeting constitutional standards
(e.g., gaining the prior consent of the tenants).
|
| |
| |
M.Burns wrote:
We have a small commercial building, that has two upstairs apartments
(Ohio).
We received a letter from the city building department and fire
department wanting to come and "inspect" the apartments (knowing full
well that the apartments are occupied).
It is a nice building and apartments, and to our knowledge there is
absolutely no reason for the request ..other than the head of the bldg
department is a known political animal.
Isn't that a violation of the privacy of the tenants?
Will be protesting the request through the mayor, and also possibly
consulting an attorney if we want to fight the request to make a point.
Opinion?
Yes and no.
By law, they can enter an occupied apartment for any reason giving at least
24 hours notice.
As this is a code violation inspection, they are within their rights to
enter and inspect.
What they can not do is, go through your personal belongings at any time.
All they can do is basically look around, and make notes of any obvious
signs of something that may not be up to code.
This is NOT a search and does not require a search warrant.
By doing these inspections periodically, they can know fairly well before
hand when something is most likely going to need to be replaced.
When they do inspect, you WILL be there to make sure they do not do any
thing with your personal stuff for any reason without asking first. With you
present, they will ask questions to find out if there any problems that only
you would know about.
Most likely, the landlord will be with them.
If you come to find out they have entered while you were not there, this is
trespassing and you can have them charged under Ohio law.
Cooperate and be friendly. They are not the bad guys.
|
| |
| |
cbreitel wrote:
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
[sorry if this is a repeat post]
Yeah, as a former prosecutor, federal law clerk and current civil
rights defense litigator, what would I know about the 4th Amendment?
The city's building code enforcement duties do not constitute an
exception to 4th amendment restrictions that protect all private
dwellings. The city needs to meet constitutional standards to enter
these apartments even though it claims not to be investigating purely
criminal activity.
The advice of the other poster suggesting the landlord videotape
events and sue the city later is also bad advice. You need to show
more than a mere constitutional violation to win a civil rights
lawsuit against a governmental entity; you also need to prove actual
damages. Without property or persons being injured by the city's
actions, this lawsuit won't be worth the filing fees it takes to get
it started.
The most effective way to handle this in court will be to obtain an
injunction, assuming the city is not meeting constitutional standards
(e.g., gaining the prior consent of the tenants).
A building inspection is not a violation of the 4th amendment.
These take place every day of the year in every city of the country.
I know of one building inspector who went through hospitals using a four
foot stick.
Walking down the corridor, if anything touched the stick, and was not easily
movable, such as a guerney or wheelchair, it got wrote up as a violation.
Building inspectors determine if the building is safe for occupancy.
That is not a violation of the 4th amendment.
What building inspectors can not do, is go into your aparment or condo at
any time they damn well please; open drawers that do not have access to any
plumbing or wiring; demand to see any personal effects; use your computer or
other electrical devices without consent; and a lot of other things that
would be construed as being in violation of the 4th amendment.
It would be like an officer walking past your car and without any trouble,
can see into your vehicle.
He can not open the car without probable cause or search warrant, just
because he wants to have a better look.
In Ohio, and most other states, 24 hour notice to enter your apartment/condo
for necesary repairs or what ever, must be given to the tenant. They can not
simply walk in. And if you do not want them in, you have that right as well.
As one who claims to be so knowledgeable of the law, with a college degree,
it would appear you don't know jack #@($.
|
| |
| |
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
Yeah, as a former prosecutor, federal law clerk and current civil
rights defense litigator, what would I know about the 4th Amendment?
Rolling on the floor laughing.....apparently not much if you can't tell the
difference between a city's right to enforce building codes and the 4th
amendment.....
|
| |
| |
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
Rolling on the floor laughing.....apparently not much if you can't tell
the
difference between a city's right to enforce building codes and the 4th
amendment.....
So you think there's no 4th Amendment issue if the building inspector
demands entry to your home? The last one we saw at our door we sent
packing. He said he'd be back with the police. It's been five years and
we're still waiting.
|
| |
| |
From: " jls" jls1016ns@bellsouth.net
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
the
So you think there's no 4th Amendment issue if the building inspector
demands entry to your home? The last one we saw at our door we sent
packing. He said he'd be back with the police. It's been five years and
we're still waiting.
You poor fool, you can't seem to tell the difference between a private
residence and a commercial building?????
|
| |
| |
From: " jls" jls1016ns@bellsouth.net
You poor fool, you can't seem to tell the difference between a private
residence and a commercial building?????
You made a general statement, I made a general retort to your general
statement, which is, btw, made by someone with obviously no legal background
or understanding, causing us who read him to rotfl.
The residents of an apartment building also have something to say about
whether their premises are invaded. If they let the BI in, of course,
there's nothing the landlord can do about it.
You like to inspect trucks by invading the cab, do you?
|
| |
| |
From: " jls" jls1016ns@bellsouth.net
You poor fool, you can't seem to tell the difference between a private
residence and a commercial building?????
You made a general statement, I made a general retort to your general
statement, which is, btw, made by someone with obviously no legal background
or understanding, causing us who read him to rotfl.
The residents of an apartment building also have something to say about
whether their premises are invaded. If they let the BI in, of course,
there's nothing the landlord can do about it.
You like to inspect trucks by invading the cab, do you?
You know as much about the trucking industry as you do about the 4th
amendment....been taking instruction from Bullis again?
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040208072531.28446.00001557@mb-m15.aol.com>...
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
Rolling on the floor laughing.....apparently not much if you can't tell the
difference between a city's right to enforce building codes and the 4th
amendment.....
Why don't you get up off the floor and cite us a few of the key 4th
Amendment decisions which lay the legal foundation for your argument?
|
| |
| |
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
Why don't you get up off the floor and cite us a few of the key 4th
Amendment decisions which lay the legal foundation for your argument?
Try Amendment X
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040208090017.19241.00001218@mb-m26.aol.com>...
From: " jls" jls1016ns@bellsouth.net
You poor fool, you can't seem to tell the difference between a private
residence and a commercial building?????
See Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, 387
U.S. 523 (1967).
|
| |
| |
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
See Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, 387
U.S. 523 (1967).
The situation isn't the same.....the original poster talked about the code
inspectors wanting to inspect a building he rents.....he was hardly talking
about a leasee not wanting anyone in their apartment....
A state or city has a vested interest in the safety of its people and so CAN
require building inspections of commercial property.....
If I thought my landlord was giving the building inspectors a hard time about
checking the building I live in for safety violations, I'd INVITE them into my
apartment to look around.....
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040208141721.11541.00001593@mb-m12.aol.com>...
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
Yeah, as a former prosecutor, federal law clerk and current civil
rights defense litigator, what would I know about the 4th Amendment?
Rolling on the floor laughing.....apparently not much if you can't tell the
difference between a city's right to enforce building codes and the 4th
amendment.....
Why don't you get up off the floor and cite us a few of the key 4th
Amendment decisions which lay the legal foundation for your argument?
Try Amendment X
Thank you for confirming, for anyone who actually had any doubt, that
you are clueless.
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040208154105.24672.00001584@mb-m13.aol.com>...
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
The situation isn't the same.....the original poster talked about the code
inspectors wanting to inspect a building he rents.....he was hardly talking
about a leasee not wanting anyone in their apartment....
A state or city has a vested interest in the safety of its people and so CAN
require building inspections of commercial property.....
If I thought my landlord was giving the building inspectors a hard time about
checking the building I live in for safety violations, I'd INVITE them into my
apartment to look around.....
Gee, another Usenetter who refuses to admit he's wrong. I'm shocked.
My prospects at this point are to either waste hours going back and
forth about this with someone who's clueless and achieve nothing, or
be satisfied that everyone ELSE following this thread, especially the
original poster, understands who's correct and who's incorrect.
So for the record, for that original poster: you can ask either a
state or federal court for an injunction based on 4th Amendment
issues, provided that the tenants (as I noted earlier) do not wish to
give consent to the City to come in.
|
| |
| |
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
From: charlesbreitel@yahoo.com (cbreitel)
CAN
about
my
Gee, another Usenetter who refuses to admit he's wrong. I'm shocked.
My prospects at this point are to either waste hours going back and
forth about this with someone who's clueless and achieve nothing, or
be satisfied that everyone ELSE following this thread, especially the
original poster, understands who's correct and who's incorrect.
I'm not so sure I'm wrong.....I haven't had time to do the research......so
when I do, I'll get back to you.....
If you are right, then there is no reason for states and cities to have ANY
kind of compliance officers....which I sincerely doubt.....
So for the record, for that original poster: you can ask either a
state or federal court for an injunction based on 4th Amendment
issues, provided that the tenants (as I noted earlier) do not wish to
give consent to the City to come in.
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040207225947.11652.00001413@mb-m12.aol.com>...
From: jtnospam@yahoo.com (jitney)
We have a small commercial building, that has two upstairs apartments
(Ohio).
We received a letter from the city building department and fire department
wanting to come and "inspect" the apartments (knowing full well that the
apartments are occupied).
It is a nice building and apartments, and to our knowledge there is
absolutely no reason for the request ..other than the head of the bldg
department is a known political animal.
Isn't that a violation of the privacy of the tenants?
Will be protesting the request through the mayor, and also possibly
consulting an attorney if we want to fight the request to make a point.
Opinion?
Keep a copy of the Constitution on hand, and point the fourth
amendment out to them. Videotape the incident, with a hidden camera if
possible. If they force an inspection anyway make it clear that you
are denying permission for a search and they are searching over your
objections. Then sue them in Federal court for violating your civil
rights. Have as many witnesses on hand as possible. Contact your local
ACLU.-Jitney
Yet another crackpot....
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040208225243.26490.00001743@mb-m07.aol.com>...
I'm not so sure I'm wrong.....
You're not too sure about the Constitution either.
I haven't had time to do the research......so
when I do, I'll get back to you.....
If you are right, then there is no reason for states and cities to have ANY
kind of compliance officers....which I sincerely doubt.....
The 4th amendment doesn't ban cities from inspecting buildings. It
simply imposes certain requirements be met in order for the
inspections to be carried out. Check back with us when you've bothered
understanding the law you're arguing with me about.
|
| |
| |
I'm not so sure I'm wrong.....
You're not too sure about the Constitution either.
The 4th amendment doesn't ban cities from inspecting buildings. It
simply imposes certain requirements be met in order for the
inspections to be carried out. Check back with us when you've bothered
understanding the law you're arguing with me about.
Does that mean that when the inspector comes to my apartment and
declares the 500 pounds of marijuana in my kitchen a fire hazard,
my bomb-making lab to be an even worse one, my collection of dead
drug dealer bodies to be unsanitary, and the living conditions for
my underage sex slaves to be inhumane, that they *WON'T* report
this to the police? Or can't the police use that evidence against
me?
Gordon L. Burditt
|
| |
| |
From: gordonb.odfjr@sneaky.lerctr.org (Gordon Burditt)
Does that mean that when the inspector comes to my apartment and
declares the 500 pounds of marijuana in my kitchen a fire hazard,
my bomb-making lab to be an even worse one, my collection of dead
drug dealer bodies to be unsanitary, and the living conditions for
my underage sex slaves to be inhumane, that they *WON'T* report
this to the police? Or can't the police use that evidence against
me?
Gordon L. Burditt
LOLOLOL...and when the fire department comes to put out the blaze caused by the
meth cooking, you can tell them they can't come in unless they have a search
warrant.....
|
| |
| |
gordonb.odfjr@sneaky.lerctr.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote in message news:<c08pc4$pof@library2.airnews.net>...
I'm not so sure I'm wrong.....
You're not too sure about the Constitution either.
I haven't had time to do the research......so
when I do, I'll get back to you.....
If you are right, then there is no reason for states and cities to have ANY
kind of compliance officers....which I sincerely doubt.....
The 4th amendment doesn't ban cities from inspecting buildings. It
simply imposes certain requirements be met in order for the
inspections to be carried out. Check back with us when you've bothered
understanding the law you're arguing with me about.
Does that mean that when the inspector comes to my apartment and
declares the 500 pounds of marijuana in my kitchen a fire hazard,
my bomb-making lab to be an even worse one, my collection of dead
drug dealer bodies to be unsanitary, and the living conditions for
my underage sex slaves to be inhumane, that they *WON'T* report
this to the police? Or can't the police use that evidence against
me?
No, to both questions. In your hypothetical the inspector already
entered your apartment and found marijuana in your kitchen. If you let
him in, you voluntarily consent to his entry into your dwelling.
Anything he finds inside is fair game for prosecution against you.
|
| |
| |
truckinsp@aol.com (Truckinsp) wrote in message news:<20040209192739.04510.00001798@mb-m10.aol.com>...
LOLOLOL...and when the fire department comes to put out the blaze caused by the
meth cooking, you can tell them they can't come in unless they have a search
warrant.....
You're pretty easily amused, aren't you?
The fire department can enter your dwelling without a warrant to put
out a fire, because a fire constitutes what's known as an "exigent
circumstance". The state is constitutionally permitted to enter ANY
private dwelling when exigent circumstances are present, such as a
fire, a victim in the midst of being assaulted, etc.
Still laughing?
|
| |
| |
|
