4 kahn

Richmond communicated with me like her favorite long-lost niece and clearly indicates her favoritism of me over the other applicants for the condo she was leasing.

In these emails, Richmond indicates she would like me to take move into the condo early (August 15 instead of September 1) with some type of reduced fee/days I wouldn’t have to pay for. My responses clearly express my concern over moving in early due to the way my pay periods at the office were lining up with the dates she was discussing – I wasn’t prepared to move at the time, but was being forced to (my lease was up on the duplex I was in and the owner had sold the building to people planning to tear it down and replace it with rows of townhouses, so I had 30 days to move). My pay periods were on the opposite of the majority of other people’s – instead of being paid on the 1st and 15th, I would get paid on the last day of the in-between weeks, which in August was August 17, where Richmond was insisting I move in on August 15.

I was very happy to be able to gather the money needed for Richmond to feel comfortable with me moving into the unit, and on August 11 I wrote Richmond a personal check (her indicated preference) for $1,350 ($500 deposit, $850 prorated rent). Richmond gave me the keys to the unit and other areas and had brought two copies of the lease, each one a copy for us to sign and then be able to retain a copy of the lease signed by both of us as she didn’t have access to a copy machine. We both signed both leases separately and kept one of them. Richmond post-dated the lease and our signatures as September 1. She insisted we not perform a walk-through, waving her hand and insisting everything was fine. She told me that the required lead paint information could be found online, but she did nothing to address the fire regulation obligations a landlord has (and maybe other things – I haven’t had a chance to look into this yet). Of interest was upon dispute, I looked more closely at the lease and saw terminology in the “Lease Payments” section stating that monthly payments were to be in the amount of $0.00. Any attorneys I showed this to, and even the show cause hearing judge, agreed that, on its face, the lease states $0.00 is the amount of monthly rent. It states: “Tenant shall pay to Landlord monthly installments of $0.00 per month, payable in advance on the first day of each month, for a total lease payment of $1,700…”

Initial Rent Payment is Returned to Richmond as Non-Sufficient Funds

According to the statement Richmond provides as an exhibit to her complaint, notice that my $1,350 check had been returned for not sufficient funds was provided by her bank on August 17. However, I was not alerted to any issue with the payment until Richmond sent me a text on August 26. I immediately responded offering every way possible that I could think of to remedy the situation immediately. Out of all the solutions I offered, all except the solution she chose would have remedied the not sufficient funds situation that very day, but for some reason, Richmond requested that I mail her another personal check to her personal address in Kirkland. I put another $1,350 check in the mail the next day, August 27.

The Caucasian woman was the one making the scene – she was yelling loudly for the entirety of her “visit.” She told my boyfriend he was trespassing, not allowed to be on the property, and she could have him arrested. She yelled at him, “If you don’t live here, you are trespassing on MY property!!! I could have you arrested!!! Do you wanna go to jail?!” About 1.5 minutes of this interaction my daughter and I both recorded separately

Once the yelling woman noticed I was attempting to discreetly record her and her friend in uniform, she pulled out a tablet and began to pretend to or actually start taking pictures of things in the place randomly with an evil grin. This didn’t last long, though, and she darted in my daughter’s room to take pictures of my 14 year old child suffering a massive anxiety attack in her bed because of what was happening. When she was done taking pictures of my daughter

Tenant Police Report re Unlawful Trespass

I called 911 to file a police report. The officers taking the report tried to convince me that the unlawful trespass must have been performed by a disgruntled condo owner who had been away for a while and subletted their unit to someone who, in turn, sublet the unit to me. I showed the officers the video I took of the woman yelling and their tone changed a bit. They told me the case would be assigned to a detective. *****I did follow-up calls re this investigation. It sounds like no investigation was performed and the case was closed, even though I called the detective to inform him that I knew the names of the people who had trespassed and harassed, bullied and threatened myself and my family because the main “bully” had admitted entry with the blessing of her “sister,” the landlord, on the day I made the police report.

Three Types of Eviction Notices Served

Over the next week, I was (what seems to be) randomly served with three different types of eviction notices.

The first document was served on August 30 at 6:32 p.m. (but dated August 29) by posting on my front door. A copy was mailed to me with a postmark of August 31. It contained two different 3-day notices:

1. Three Day Notice to Pay Rent or Surrender Premises RCW 59.12.030(3); and

2. Three Day Notice to Surrender Premises for Permitting and Committing Waste and Nuisance RCW 59.12.030(5).

The rent notice demanded payment in the amount of $1412 (an amount that has confused me, as well as most people who have looked at it, including the show cause hearing Judge).

The second document/third notice was served via process server on September 1 (but dated August 31), of which I willingly accepted service for. A copy was mailed to me with a postmark of September 6. The third notice was a 10-day Notice to Comply with Conditions of Lease with the following language:

3. The Lease prohibits pets other than one cat; prohibits smoking; allows for only one occupant; and required maintenance of the premises. You have violated these sections by having other pets; smoking; allowing another occupant; and failing to maintain the premises.

The issues with this lease were also addressed by me in my answer and affirmative defenses to the complaint as follows:

(a) “The Lease prohibits other than one cat…” The lease indicates no pets. “Pets” are defined in King County, Washington by King County Code 11.04.020(T) as follows: “”Pet” means a dog or a cat or any other animal required to be licensed by this chapter. “Dog,” “cat” and “pet” may be used interchangeably.” According to King County Code, birds, in particular these tiny parrot birds who don’t and can’t roam the house due to not being able to fly, are not recognized as a “pet” as they are not required to have licensing. Therefore, parrots are not legally defined as pets in King County and should not be viewed or treated as such. (Of note: The CL advertisement for this condo indicated a cat/small pets allowed. In addition, on my rental application I indicated that I owned a cat and would be bringing a small pet with me when I moved in.)

(b) “[P]rohibits smoking…” Hernandez does not regularly smoke cigarettes and she has not smoked in or around the premises, i

(c) “ [A]llows for only one occupant…” Defendant is the only adult occupant of this condominium unit. Which is irrelevant because upon review of the lease, you will note that there is no provision regarding the number of occupants living in the condo.