Landlords who try to sneak a home sale past tenants…

[DWCAP]

[quote=uneven]Like I said, we don’t know the agreement or the circumstances for either party. If it’s month to month, then it is 30 day notice for both sides. If its a longer term, then there is legal recourse available if either party breaks the agreement. I’m sorry if it sounds callous, but if you have a month to month agreement, but assume you’ll be there forever is both naive and irresponsible. Renters don’t tend to care about leaving a LL with a vacancy for months (although I’ve had some very nice ones that have helped find new people)

My threat of litigation may have no merit,but if you willfully and maliciously attempt to interfere with someone’s right to conduct business , its against the law. One could say “I was only informing him of public information” but the real question is “why?” If you’ve highlighted things and otherwise made it seem that there is some wrong doing going on with the intent to enrage a tenant or encourage them to take action against the LL, then it’s malicious. That was my point.

My 2 cents, in this market, a tenant’s hardships (having to find a new place) is much more desirable then a LL hardship. But I’m not going to take sides. My whole point is we do not have info and can not throw anyone under a bus. And it’s not right to interfere in this, by assuming the tenant is little red riding hood.

I’m not too worked up… I just get this way sometimes =) I’ve been on both sides of this for the last several years as a tenant and a land lord. It’s just there’s always 2 sides to things.[/quote]

I dont know what you call ‘taking sides’, but bring up the threat the litigation against someone for posting public information sure meets my definition of ‘taking sides’. Nor can I believe that the revilation of PUBLIC information to all parties is ‘throwing someone under the bus’. As you said over and over again, we dont know the full story. Who is to say that the LL isnt in a long term lease, and trying to screw the tenant? It is your assumption about a month-month lease. We dont know. So your assumption is no better than anyone elses.

If the LL had any reasonable expectation of privacy, they would have attempted to conduct a private sale without making any information public.

Now if someone had inside information, (like a private sale)and it was disclosed, that is another story.

BTW, how the frak are they gonna show the property, or have it inspected, without the tenant knowing? Legally they have to give notice dont they?

[8bitnintendo]

[quote=pabloesqobar]I’m sure 8bit’s heart was in the right place – but he likely just committed a federal offense. No biggee, since there isn’t a bunch of mailbox police roaming around. Not a risk I would’ve taken, tho.[/quote]
Turns out you are right! I just learned about the “Mailbox monopoly”. I should head down to the post office and tell them what I did. Gosh, I hope they don’t prosecute.

If this ever happens again, I guess I’ll know to knock on the door and talk to the tenant, or leave a flyer on the doorstep. Thanks!

[8bitnintendo]

[quote=pabloesqobar]I’m sure 8bit’s heart was in the right place – but he likely just committed a federal offense. No biggee, since there isn’t a bunch of mailbox police roaming around. Not a risk I would’ve taken, tho.[/quote]
Turns out you are right! I just learned about the “Mailbox monopoly”. I should head down to the post office and tell them what I did. Gosh, I hope they don’t prosecute.

If this ever happens again, I guess I’ll know to knock on the door and talk to the tenant, or leave a flyer on the doorstep. Thanks!

[8bitnintendo]

[quote=pabloesqobar]I’m sure 8bit’s heart was in the right place – but he likely just committed a federal offense. No biggee, since there isn’t a bunch of mailbox police roaming around. Not a risk I would’ve taken, tho.[/quote]
Turns out you are right! I just learned about the “Mailbox monopoly”. I should head down to the post office and tell them what I did. Gosh, I hope they don’t prosecute.

If this ever happens again, I guess I’ll know to knock on the door and talk to the tenant, or leave a flyer on the doorstep. Thanks!

[8bitnintendo]

[quote=pabloesqobar]I’m sure 8bit’s heart was in the right place – but he likely just committed a federal offense. No biggee, since there isn’t a bunch of mailbox police roaming around. Not a risk I would’ve taken, tho.[/quote]
Turns out you are right! I just learned about the “Mailbox monopoly”. I should head down to the post office and tell them what I did. Gosh, I hope they don’t prosecute.

If this ever happens again, I guess I’ll know to knock on the door and talk to the tenant, or leave a flyer on the doorstep. Thanks!

[8bitnintendo]

[quote=pabloesqobar]I’m sure 8bit’s heart was in the right place – but he likely just committed a federal offense. No biggee, since there isn’t a bunch of mailbox police roaming around. Not a risk I would’ve taken, tho.[/quote]
Turns out you are right! I just learned about the “Mailbox monopoly”. I should head down to the post office and tell them what I did. Gosh, I hope they don’t prosecute.

If this ever happens again, I guess I’ll know to knock on the door and talk to the tenant, or leave a flyer on the doorstep. Thanks!

[PCinSD]

Here ya go, 8bit:

http://www.lplists.com/mail-off.htm

Like it or not, you broke a federal law. Nothing to get worked up about. No one here is going to nark on you. Go forth and sin no more.

Just so you know, revealing information is not the point and not the gist of the cause of action. It’s the intent behind your actions. Might be a stretch to say it rises to the level of tortious interference w/business or contractual relations – but there’s a chance it could.

My point about the tenant being a deadbeat is simply that we can’t jump to conclusions about who the bad actor is. I understand the evil landlord can evict. Not the point at all.

[PCinSD]

Here ya go, 8bit:

http://www.lplists.com/mail-off.htm

Like it or not, you broke a federal law. Nothing to get worked up about. No one here is going to nark on you. Go forth and sin no more.

Just so you know, revealing information is not the point and not the gist of the cause of action. It’s the intent behind your actions. Might be a stretch to say it rises to the level of tortious interference w/business or contractual relations – but there’s a chance it could.

My point about the tenant being a deadbeat is simply that we can’t jump to conclusions about who the bad actor is. I understand the evil landlord can evict. Not the point at all.

[PCinSD]

Here ya go, 8bit:

http://www.lplists.com/mail-off.htm

Like it or not, you broke a federal law. Nothing to get worked up about. No one here is going to nark on you. Go forth and sin no more.

Just so you know, revealing information is not the point and not the gist of the cause of action. It’s the intent behind your actions. Might be a stretch to say it rises to the level of tortious interference w/business or contractual relations – but there’s a chance it could.

My point about the tenant being a deadbeat is simply that we can’t jump to conclusions about who the bad actor is. I understand the evil landlord can evict. Not the point at all.

[PCinSD]

Here ya go, 8bit:

http://www.lplists.com/mail-off.htm

Like it or not, you broke a federal law. Nothing to get worked up about. No one here is going to nark on you. Go forth and sin no more.

Just so you know, revealing information is not the point and not the gist of the cause of action. It’s the intent behind your actions. Might be a stretch to say it rises to the level of tortious interference w/business or contractual relations – but there’s a chance it could.

My point about the tenant being a deadbeat is simply that we can’t jump to conclusions about who the bad actor is. I understand the evil landlord can evict. Not the point at all.

[PCinSD]

Here ya go, 8bit:

http://www.lplists.com/mail-off.htm

Like it or not, you broke a federal law. Nothing to get worked up about. No one here is going to nark on you. Go forth and sin no more.

Just so you know, revealing information is not the point and not the gist of the cause of action. It’s the intent behind your actions. Might be a stretch to say it rises to the level of tortious interference w/business or contractual relations – but there’s a chance it could.

My point about the tenant being a deadbeat is simply that we can’t jump to conclusions about who the bad actor is. I understand the evil landlord can evict. Not the point at all.

[PCinSD]

Heh, ya beat me to it. Nevermind.

[PCinSD]

Heh, ya beat me to it. Nevermind.

[PCinSD]

Heh, ya beat me to it. Nevermind.

[PCinSD]

Heh, ya beat me to it. Nevermind.

[Author]

Posts