ALERT: SYSTEMATIC CODE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (SCEP) SHOULD BE CALLED "SCAM"
It's called "Systematic Code Enforcement Program" (SCEP), but it should be called "SCAM".
A law in effect in LA regarding systematic inspection of apartment units, even if the property owner doesn't want it.
Under this "systematic inspection" process, the pueblos have been complaining about harrasment of owners (and tenants, including the elderly and families with babies).
The Fourth Amendment says you can't go into someone's living quarters without probable cause -- if tenant doesn't want you to. If denied entry, they get an "administrative warrant" (used for meat packing plants and industrial inspections) -- NOT FOR INSPECTING PEOPLE'S HOMES!
Now, tenants have the right to call for a "complaint-based inspection" -- BUT NOT SYSTEMATIC FORCING OF UNREQUESTED (NON COMPLAINT-BASED) INSPECTIONS...ON THE REALEST, DOUGH!
And oh no...once they harrass their way into the property, they start tacking on all these demands; until you can't comply; then...YOU LOSE, CARL MILLER...and they take your property and build a pet project, those shady community harrassing and land robbing thieves.
contact: zumadogg@gmail.com (310) 928-7544
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 5/24/2007 08:47:00 AM
14 Comments:
This used to have another name where they checked that the BUILDING WAS SAFE FOR OCCUPANCY.
They checked wall, heaters, water heaters, water supply and electic code requirements. It was in garbanza a few years ago. You dont have to let them in, they can ask to be allowed, but you can stiff refuse unless THE OWNER GIVES THEM PERMISSION under the guise of safety.
"...the pueblos..." that was RICH, baby! Zuma samplin' CRA lingo. Great great job.
Let's burn down the city, right?
Don't let those evil inspectors come in to see if things are safe for occupancy, and let's keep the cops and fire folks out as well, because, they might red tag us.
So, when yuo dial 9-1-1, who do you expect to come to your aid?
Zuma Dogg or his girlfriend, Matt?
11:55am,
Re-read the story. I said it's cool for "complaint-based inspections."
What is NOT cool, is using this as an abusive way to harrass owners (and tenants) and keep tacking on sh*t, till you can't comply. I'm talking about ABUSE, not the spirit in which this 1996 law was created.
But I know...the City has NEVER done anything under the terms of "fraud, waste and abuse". Just 100% picture perfect representation of the constituents...MY BAD!
You want the fire folks to wait for "complaint-based" inspections before telling people to clear their yards in fire areas?
You want them to wait for "complaint-based" inspections before inspecting for health hazards in the restaurants in which we eat?
You are not entitled to make your own laws or rules. They all exist for a reason, and if they are to be changed, the Legislature, the Governor, The Mayor or the Council can do it.
We don't need an out of work gadfly running around telling us how to govern. America operates under a rule of law, and if you don't like the laws, then try to change them. Legally.
But if you fail to comply, don't complain when you get your ticket pulled. Or worse.
12:50pm,
I know who this is...the same moron. And yes, you are one. Again, weak-ass, fautly logic and zero reading comprehension. You suffer from two (2) neurological-communicative problems: "Filtering" and "distorting" and I'm sure it affects you in all areas of life.
You will read an entire article, or listen to an entire conversation, and only take "one part" out of it, and "filter out" the rest. Then you "distort" it, which is a way of taking things out of context, and changing the meaning entirely.
It causes frustration...hence the inferior minded comments from a "filter and distorter."
PBS has a kids blog you may enjoy, and I suggest you find out more about NLP (neuro-logistic programming). (The "Art" of communication)
SCEP needs to be repealed.
Rather than "inspecting" every single apartment in the city every year -- and charging people who own property for the privilege -- government should focus instead on situations where someone has an actual complaint.
This happens a lot in CD14. People have complained to Sleazy Huizy numerous times just like illegal vending but he sits and does nothing. People are complaining that illegals who rent or buys a home and then moves in 5 families have been converting their garages into made up apts. Then the electrical is wrong and can cause fires. They build without proper permits. Code enforcement are mean and aggressive. Comply with the law but we all know illegals don't want to comply with the law.
To comply with the law we would have to arrest the Mayor, the Council, the Governor, the House and the Senate. None of them comply with the law about deporting ILLEGIAL ALIENS. Only 8 states have documentation requiements to work. California is not one...or Arizona, Nevada, Texas, New Mexico....no wonder we have so many.
My property owner tells me these city inspectors cite / harass tenants for chickenshit; "excessive clutter", more than 3 cats, and the city has even evicted people against the landlords wishes.
I see no reason to invite the .gov in under those circumstances. Before they get a warrant, the city dings the prop owner with a $200 fine for un accessible units.
I have yet to decide how far I'm going to fight this, or not. Fucking un-welcome drama brought to my door is all this nazi program amounts to.
anonymous constitutional genius..
If the fire dept observes a cluttered yard / fire hazard, they have CAUSE to ask it to be cleared. That is reasonable.
And the cops & fire 'folks" can come in, as long as they have CAUSE.. they can't walk into your privacy because they feel like it.
And, uh, when you dial 9-11.. that gives them, can you guess??.. it's called "cause", reasonable at that.
"America operates under a rule of law".. lol, that's rich given the criminal nature of Washington DC, Scooter Libby sure had the rule of law come down hard on his crimes eh? When the Sec Gen of the UN called our war in Iraq "illegal", oh boy did the rule of law put a stop to that... snore..
The rule of law only applies to those without the right friends, the rest of us little people just have to take the city assfucking with a smile.
What nobody seems to be talking about is the fact that this inspection of my "private dwelling" is unconstitutional in two ways.
1. Illegal Search - They, LAHD, are demanding access to your "home" without a warrant or probable cause. Remember - no complaints need be filed by tenants to be included in the SCEP program.
2. Equal Inclusion Under The Law - Because apartment buildings built after a certain date (I believe 1985)are not included in the SCEP program.
This is another example of neo-socialism in Los Angeles and another way for the housing developers lobby to put small business owner out of business.
A more appropriate program would be to only inspect buildings where complaints have been received. Then levy the necessary fees to pay for THAT program to the building owner - NOT THE TENANTS.
As a building owner with 8 units, I have 3 tenants that do not want their dwellings inspected and none of my tenants have complaints.
When I wrote to the ACLU regarding this matter I was sent a form letter and summarily pushed aside. Is there no group of attorneys or association that is willing to fight this?
I will continue to gather legal documentation on this program and continue to seek legal counsel on this issue. No luck so far. I wish I could afford to drop the needed $100k to start a class action lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles.
In closing, I believe that a tenant should be able to refuse inspection, unless compliance is required under the rental agreement they signed.
This program is wrong and unconstitutional. It's just another way to create pointless jobs and collect unnecessary fees from landlords and tenants alike.
What's next - the Nazis won't let us smoke outside our homes. It's on the LA City Counsel's plate now and could be put into affect by July 1st, 2009. What other part of our lives do they want to control next. Liberal - NO! Socialist - YES! This is not communist Russia. This is the USA and we are no longer free.
Hi, I'm glad to find this blog. Here's my story.
I sued the LAHD/City of L.A. in small claims court because inspector John Savko invaded my home on Aug. 13, 2007. The judge decided against me, but I can sue once each year for the maximum in small claims and I reminded the attorney for the LAHD of that little fact. Since L.A. Municipal Code Sec. 49.5.5., a Governmental Ethics Ordinace forbidding improper performance of City duties, was broken, I filed a complaint with the City Ethics Commission. No action was taken. While I'm at it, CA Civil Code Sections 52.1. (prohibiting attempts to interfere with enjoyment of rights) and 52.3 (prohibiting a pattern or practice that deprives any person of rights) were also violated.
It is important to participate in societal processes especially when it affects us in our homes.
The LAHD's threats of eviction are based on L.A. Municipal Code Sec. 151.09. which authorizes eviction if "The tenant has refused the landlord reasonable access to the unit for the purpose of inspection as required by the lease or by law ..." I never signed a lease, so that brings us to the law - L.A. Muni Code Sec. 161.601. which specifically guarantees the right to refuse.
If you did sign a rental agreement, you're still protected by the Constitution and the LAHD's own rules. After writing to Chief Inspector Scott McGill, I was sent a copy of the LAHD's policies and procedures. It states:
Inspectors will not enter a dwelling unit or common area against the will of the occupant or the owner and the Inspector will not enter a dwelling unit without an adult being present.
End of story. Check out the video of my standoff by Googling: SCEP Inspection Video. Thank you.
SCEP inspections are illegal and unconstitutional if the TENANT refuses the inspection.
See supreme court case Camera vs Municipal Court, 1967
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/387/523/case.html
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home