HOW DO OWNERS SPELL L-A-W S-U-I-T? SENATE BILL NO. 127!
Another Legislative Bill That Will Subject Owners to Litigation After it passes
Copyright 2007 by Donie Vanitzian
May 22, 2007
This author asks WHERE ARE THE PENALTIES AGAINST MANAGEMENT COMPANIES AND BOARDS? WHAT’S THE PENALTY FOR BREAKING THE LAWS THAT THESE LEGISLATORS ARE PASSING?
OPEN QUESTION to Senator Sheila Kuehl from readers to my Los Angeles Times (co-authored) COLUMN: Will YOU be there when I am forced to litigate my rights using THIS BAD BILL THAT YOU THINK IS SOOOOOOO WONDERFUL!?
If Senator Sheila Kuehl’s Senate Bill 127 passes, it will subject innocent buyers, sellers, owners and real estate salespersons to LITIGATION AND LIABILITY.
This author phoned Ms. Kuehl's offices for several days. At one office, I was told: The Senator is not here. You will have to speak with someone else.
+Will the Senator EVER be there?
We're not allowed to answer that.
+Can I make an appointment to speak with the Senator, I live in her district.
I'm afraid the Senator's calendar is booked up several months in advance, and you would have to speak with her scheduling person.
+Is that person there?
No. Is there anything else I can do for you?
+Yes, can you give me to someone else?
The person you need to speak to is "___." She's at a meeting can you call back in an hour?
+I called back.
That person is still at a meeting. Call back in 1/2 hour.
+I called back.
That person just stepped away from his/her desk. Call back in 15 minutes.
+I called back.
That person will be back in 10 minutes, call back in 10 minutes.
+I called back.
That person just went to lunch, you will have to call back after 2.pm.
+I called back.
That person just went into another meeting, would you like to leave a voice mail.
+I called back.
That person is on another line, you can hold if you want.
+I was on hold until she got back to me and said, "This person will be on the phone for a while you'll have to leave a voice mail." I asked, can someone ELSE help me?
The person said, "No, that is the ONLY person who knows what you are talking about and handles THAT."
+I called back.
That person is busy right now, what is it EXACTLY that you WANT?
+I called back.
That person has left for the day.
+I said, in a painfully polite voice, "I followed your directions patiently for the entire day. Do you have any suggestions as to what I should do next to be able to speak with someone in your office?"
The person who had answered the phone told me, "I don't have to take that from you" and hung up.
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES:
"Existing law requires"
"Existing law requires"
"Existing law requires"
"Existing law requires"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*Which "existing laws" is the Senator referring to AND WHAT do they "require"?
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
"involving an agent"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*Managing Agent?
*Real Estate Agent?
*Buyers Representative Agent?
*Seller’s Representative Agent?
*Trustee Agent?
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
"be made as soon as practicable"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*WHAT? does THAT MEAN to a person who is stuck in Escrow with the Escrow Time-Clock ticking?
*WHAT does THAT MEAN to a seller who is being sabotaged by their board and management company using all available legal means and the association’s money to thwart an otherwise viable sale?
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
"to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*HUH? What is the LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE of "IF" requested?
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
"owner within 10 days of the mailing OR delivery of the request, as specified"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*Say WHAT? I certainly hope that the Senator will be there during that failed, uh, err, I mean, disastrous, uh, err, I mean, S-A-B-O-T-A-G-E-D escrow transaction when the buyer and seller have no alternative other than to SUE each other.
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
"bill would require, in the case of a sale of real property, or a sale or a lease with an option to purchase of a mobilehome or manufactured home involving an agent, that the disclosures described above be made as soon as practicable"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*Does the bill "REQUIRE" it or "not"???
*WHAT does "would require" mean?
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
*Check this language out in Sheila Kuehl’s Senate Bill:
*"REQUIRES" . . . "AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*Where’s the ENFORCEMENT in THAT?
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
"The bill would require, in the case of a sale of a separate interest in a common interest development, that the necessary disclosures be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title but no later than 10 calendar days after the execution of the purchase agreement to purchase title to the separate interest OR execution of a real property sales contract"
KILL SENATE BILL NO. 127 OPPONENTS SAY:
*It apparently is not enough for Senator Kuehl to muck up the laws forcing US to live by them, NOW, she has the opportunity to not only tie our hands in the "disclosure" arena, BUT, screws it up further by these additional CONTINGENCIES on SALES AND PURCHASES.
*How many people out there have a bleeeeping CLUE, WHAT "AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE" MEANS?
*How many owners will be able to win a court case against their Ass. with the words "ASS SOON AS PRACTICABLE?""
KUEHL’S SB127 BILL STATES
The bill would require an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed by that owner within 7 days of the mailing OR delivery of the request.
NOT ONE OWNER WILL BE ABLE TO ENFORCE CODE SECTION IN ITS ENTIRETY.
IT IS, IN FACT, IN THIS AUTHOR’S OPINION: IPSO FACTO UNENFORCEABLE.
THE BUYER NEEDS **IT** BEFORE THEY SIGN THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT!
HERE’S A COPY OF THE BAD SENATE BILL NUMBER 127 BY SENATOR KUEHL
SB 127, as amended, Kuehl. Property transfers: disclosures.
[[Disclosures? Huh? Anybody catch that?]]
Existing law requires certain transferors of real property, mobilehomes, manufactured homes, and separate interests in common interest developments to make specified disclosures to transferees as part of their respective transactions. These disclosures concern characteristics affecting the property and hazards to which the property may be subject. Existing law requires, in the case of a sale of real property, that these disclosures be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title. In the case of a sale or a lease with an option to purchase of a mobilehome or manufactured home involving an agent, [WHAT "AGENT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??] existing law requires these disclosures [which disclosures!?] be made as soon as practicable, [what does THAT mean?!] but no later than the close of escrow. In the case of a transfer of a separate interest in a common interest development, existing law requires that the disclosures be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title to the separate interest or [[[OR WHAT?] execution of a real property sales contract. Existing law requires an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed [[HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO GET THAT INFORMATION? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?] by that owner within 10 days of the mailing or [[[OR WHAT?]delivery of the request, as specified. [[[WHAT’S THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF EACH OF THESE WORDS!!!]
This bill would require, in the case of a sale of real property, or a sale or a lease with an option to purchase of a mobilehome or manufactured home involving an agent, that the disclosures described above be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title but no later than 10 calendar days after the execution of the purchase agreement. The bill would require, in the case of a sale of a separate interest in a common interest development, that the necessary disclosures be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title but no later than 10 calendar days after the execution of the purchase agreement to purchase title to the separate interest or execution of a real property sales contract. The bill would require an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed by that owner within 7 days of the mailing or delivery of the request. [ Ohhhhh, I see! you mean SOMEONE has to COMPLY with THIS?]
DISCLOSURES???? OF WHAT?!
YOU’VE GOT TO BE JOKING.
GET A GRIP PEOPLE, OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE PAYING FOR THIS NONSENSE!!!!!
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The Gray Panthers are on record as SUPPORTING A BAD BAD BAD BAD BILL: Senate Bill Number 948. SHAME ON YOU. Where the heck are you getting your information from?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
Coming off a most improbable but successful campaign to defeat SB 670 author and HOA advocate Vanitizian thanks supporters making a connection between the quality of legislation being passed in Sacramento, and the quality of life in most homeowners...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
The number one rule in the Australian Aviation Magazine?s list of Flight Rules is the one about airplane take off and landing: Every takeoff is optional, Every landing is mandatory!It is safe to say that most travelers know that takeoffs and
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
When we received our copy of the report that the California Association of Realtors (CAR) used to Sponsor and help draft transfer fees, we were confused. Given that Vanitzian has become an icon in Sacrament (some say a thorn in the legislature's side),...
How to Communicate with the CZ Master Association (and other HOAs)
Recently a CotoBuzz contributor received a stupid lawyer letter stating that the CZ Master Association board would no longer accept his requests via email.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 Assessments. The monthly fees for the home paid in full for nearly 20 years ago is only $183 a month. Brother tried to pay the money but the board would not accept it.
My brother lost his home in Coldwater North Cooperative, Inc because he is mentally ill and didn't know he had to pay $540 in dues. My mother left her home to us to protect my brother. The monthly fees for the home she paid in full for nearly 20 years...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment