Demand v2

Demand v2

REDACTED

I am writing to bring to your immediate attention a serious violation of my rights as a resident at REDACTED. This issue pertains to an illegal lockout executed by the homeowner [REDACTED].

Background:

As lodgers at this address, we have invested considerable time and effort into enhancing the property. My primary residence is in San Francisco, and I have been utilizing Our general assistance to get by during this time. Alongside me, my business partner and I, both lodgers at the property, undertook extensive renovations in the loft of the homeowner’s condo. We added ¾-inch sheets stacked with green glue in between, adjusted the stairs to correct the height variance (which cannot exceed 3/8 of an inch between steps), and made other improvements. I have been a lodger in his place since June 13th after being academically disqualified.

Despite breaking my phone in December and being without it, I meticulously documented all work and interactions on paper and scanned these records. We have extensive proof and documentation, including emails, sketches, models, floor plans, and a recommendation letter from the homeowner who vouched for me. He even gifted me $1,000 for the work, stating that this was only a portion of what he owed. He mentioned that because I initiated the project, he was not obligated to pay me, but he would do so as if he had initiated it, at his standard rate of $100 per 6 hours, including holiday and health. He paid me $140 for caulking his tub but did not pay for the other work. He ultimately gifted $1,000, which I split with my business partner, as he was following my lead and had keys to the place given by the owner, who referred to him as a household member.

In addition to the renovations, we developed a podcast and a GBT that utilizes second-person narrative and dissects conflict to find resolution, significantly improving our communications.

Recent Developments:

When I was readmitted into school and notified [REDACTED], he had issues with almost every line in my poem and then assaulted me. He choked me, and I hit him in the face with the roses I got myself to celebrate my readmission. This led to me calling the police, filing a report, and leaving the premises for my safety. He demanded the keys back the next day, but I did not return them due to fear. Since he was going on a trip on the 20th, I expected to have access to the property in his absence, but upon returning home, I found the locks changed.

The homeowner has decided to go ahead and lie about the situation and has changed the locks. This is after providing keys to my business partner, acknowledging that his assistance was essential and considering him a part of the household. Now, the homeowner falsely accuses me of being a manipulator and a con artist. He stated, “I would just say you assaulted me. I’m just going to say you assaulted me,” and further threatened to make my life very hard financially, emotionally, and physically.

Absence of Homeowner:

[REDACTED] has left the country and is not expected to return until August 5th. This absence directly affects the resolution of the current lockout situation.

Police Reports:

  • A police report was filed on July 11th documenting the assault.
  • A subsequent report was filed on July 22nd regarding the illegal lockout detailing the unlawful actions taken against me.

Documentation and Evidence:

I have meticulously documented all interactions, property improvements, and incidents of assault. This comprehensive documentation provides a robust foundation for any necessary legal actions.

Despite the absence of a formal lease, established residency and verbal agreements with [REDACTED] grant me specific inhabitant rights. The unilateral change of locks without notices or cause is both unethical and a violation of my rights.

Immediate Request:

I am requesting the immediate reinstatement of my access to the property. Should this request not be fulfilled within 72 hours, I will be compelled to escalate this matter by releasing the documented evidence to the public and legal authorities. While I am seeking an amicable resolution, the severity of the lockout and assault necessitates further action to protect my rights and safety.

Next Steps:

Given the gravity of this situation and [REDACTED]’s absence, I urge the HOA to take immediate action to rectify the illegal lockout and restore my access to the property. Your prompt intervention is essential not only for my welfare but also for maintaining the integrity of our community.

Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I remain hopeful for a swift and just resolution that acknowledges the seriousness of this situation and restores my access to the home I have diligently maintained and improved.

Sincerely,

[REDACTED]

Written with StackEdit.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding and Supporting a Friend in Crisis: Analyzing a Message from Santos

--- --- Understanding and Supporting a Friend in Crisis: Analyzing a Message from Santos Introduction When someone we care about is going through a difficult time, understanding and supporting them can be challenging. In this blog post, we’ll analyze a series of messages from Santos, who is experiencing intense emotional struggles. By dissecting the content and emotions conveyed, we can better understand how to offer meaningful support and foster a stronger, more empathetic connection. Analysis of Santos’s Messages Expectation of Engagement and Depth Santos feels their content has depth and density that deserves thorough consideration. They are frustrated with Person A’s lack of engagement, which they see as dismissive and inadequate. Feeling Manipulated and Unsupported Santos believes there has been a deliberate effort to portray them as unstable and feels that Person A has aligned with this manipulation. This perception of betrayal exacerbates their sense of isolation and m...
Read more

Formatted_Consolidated_Complaint.md

Formatted_Consolidated_Complaint.md SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Santos Ivan Retana and Timothy Patrick Terry, Plaintiffs v. David Brubaker, Defendant Case No. [CASE NUMBER] CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR RESTRAINING ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, Santos Ivan Retana and Timothy Patrick Terry, bring this consolidated complaint against Defendant, David Brubaker, alleging multiple causes of action and seeking a restraining order. In support thereof, Plaintiffs state as follows: II. PARTIES Plaintiffs: Santos Ivan Retana, residing at 436 Dwight Street, San Francisco, CA 94134, and Timothy Patrick Terry, residing at 258 Dorland St #2, San Francisco, CA 94114. Defendant: David Brubaker, residing at 211 S Fremont St, Unit 304, San Mateo, CA 94401. III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 395 and 526. Venue is proper in this County as th...
Read more

Conclusion

--- --- Legal Analysis of California Civil Code 789.3c: Illegal Lockouts, Eviction Procedures for Lodgers, and Associated Civil Torts Introduction Overview of California Civil Code 789.3c Definition and scope Importance in protecting tenant rights Purpose of the Research Focus on potential motions and legal provisions related to 789.3c Examination of restitution and punitive damages Emphasis on ensuring justice and solidarity in San Mateo, inspired by David Rueger’s principles Structure of the Paper Breakdown of key sections Section 1: Understanding California Civil Code 789.3c Text of the Statute Full text of Civil Code 789.3c Legislative intent behind the statute Historical Background Evolution of landlord-tenant laws in California Significant amendments and case law shaping 789.3c Key Provisions and Interpretations Definitions of “lodger” and “landlord” Specific protections against illegal lockouts Legal remedies available under the s...
Read more