Re: Here is exactly what they sent me

Re: Here is exactly what they sent me by Tabi (WV) on July 4, 2012 @04:22

Regarding the sister (names removed):

Dear Landlord:

Indeed, we are aware of significant increases nationwide; and we realize rising costs would eventually necessitate a rent increase. We are fortunate to be in good standing with an ideal landlord who endeavored to accommodate us in a clean and pleasant rental unit. You were willing to work with us if we were willing to make an effort to work with you. Tenant/landlord reform can begin to change for the better with one person reaching out to make a difference. We appreciate the reasonable notice; and we will comply accordingly. See below conditions and/or adjustments for your review and consideration before we sign and return the Residential Lease Agreement:

5. USE of OCCUPANCY OF PROPERTY:
Currently, we have three persons living in Leased Premises—the third person being, "the sister". In early 2011, Sister planned to visit us. She and Current Tenant planned to unify and improve their healthcare and work on various projects pending. However, Sister lost her apartment in Houston—due to failing health. She was worse off than we realize when she transitioned to Morgantown in December 2011. Wendell is undergoing intensive and extensive healthcare at Milan Puskar Healthright Community clinic. Before and after hurricane Katrina, Wendell has been a productive and law-abiding citizen. We are grateful to have been given the challenge and opportunity to help Wendell pick up the pieces and rebuild her new life. Meanwhile, Current Tenant experienced a setback. She may need reconstructive surgery on her ankle—every 18 months—if the cortisone injection doesn’t relieve her chronic pain. The on-going process has been slow; however we remain optimistic. We hope you can extend the courtesy—use of occupancy of property—to Wendell on her road to recovery. We thank you in advance for your cooperation. A 2012 update will be forthcoming detailing Wendell’s on-going progress. During the Dominion Post interview, the reporter requested a follow-up to hear Sister's observations of Morgantown. We hope to acknowledge persons, businesses and agencies that rallied together to assist us in our time of need.

[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: Here is exactly what they sent me by NY-LL on July 4, 2012 @05:55	[ Reply ]

Federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. งง 3601 to 3631 West Virginia Fair Housing Act, W.Va. Code งง 5-11A-1 to 5-11A-20 The FFHA requires an accommodation only if a person suffers from a “handicap,” which is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, such as the ability to work, walk, talk, see, or hear. 42 U.S.C. ง 3602(h); and 29 C.F.R. ง 1630.2(i). Second, only accommodations that are “reasonable” are required. “[S]ome accommodations may not be reasonable under the circumstances[.]” Bronk, 54 F.3d at 429. “The requirement of reasonable accommodation does not entail an obligation to do everything humanly possible to accommodate a disabled person; cost (to the defendant) and benefit (to the plaintiff) merit consideration as well.” Id. (footnote and citations omitted). Third, the FFHA requires the accommodation to be “necessary.” “[T]he concept of necessity requires at a minimum the showing that the desired accommodation will affirmatively enhance a disabled plaintiff’s quality of life by ameliorating the effects of the disability.” Id. The necessity element “requires the demonstration of a direct linkage between the proposed accommodation and the ‘equal opportunity’ to be provided to the handicapped person. This requirement has attributes of a causation requirement.” Bryant Woods Inn, 124 F.3d at 604. Further, the equal opportunity requirement means that the FFHA “does not require accommodations that increase a benefit to a handicapped person above that provided to a nonhandicapped person with respect to matters unrelated to the handicap.” Id. Finally, “[t]he plaintiff bears the burden of proving each of these . . . elements by a preponderance of the evidence.” Id., 124 F.3d at 604. http://www.state.wv.us/wvsca/docs/fall01/29644.pdf

Re: Here is exactly what they sent me by Bryan (Ia) on July 4, 2012 @11:07	[ Reply ]

That is an obvious negotiation and is not request for an accommodation. Within this letter is thin threat to report you to the media if you do not comply. Deny the request. Since this issue has given you second thoughts about renewing the lease, send them a notice you are withdrawing the offer and their current M2M tenancy will be terminated at the end of the next rental period. (Provide the actual date)