Harassment in Columbus

MWSY, thank you for the reminder, I completely forgot that the exemption was regarding a licensee. Good catch.

However I must argue the landlord part. That applies only to month to month and week to week basis. Anyone within a lease must have valid reasons.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Hareuhal said:

MWSY, thank you for the reminder, I completely forgot that the exemption was regarding a licensee. Good catch.

However I must argue the landlord part. That applies only to month to month and week to week basis. Anyone within a lease must have valid reasons.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking. I have to admit though, I don't know Ohio rental laws.

You'll notice that I said "depending on how the lease is written".

Check ORC 5321 (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/5321).

No where does it say that I can't put a 30-day termination notice in a 6-month or 12-month lease. To make it 'fair', you put in the same clause for the tenant. That way, they can also terminate with a 30-day notice. The only difference is that you specify the tenant is still responsible for payment of the remaining lease amount.

This fairness helps that instrument hold up in court, too. They didn't HAVE to agree to the terms and sign the lease, right? And I DID have all lessees initial each separate clause as we went through their lease before they signed at the bottom.

It's a GREAT idea to read your lease thoroughly...

Ask the guy with over 500 empty 40-ounce beer bottles and 4 overflowing cat litter boxes in his former apartment how he knows this.

Man, that was NASTY!

I didn't get to talk to Kody anymore this evening. I'll try to touch base with him tomorrow. I want him to see if he recognizes the deputy in the picture from Amy Wickes facebook timeline.

I would not call a lease that allows the landlord to terminate a lease with no consequence to him, but allows the tenant to terminate it only with a huge monetary consequence, "fair."

The lease I had in Fairborn did not allow either party out until the six months was up. After that, we went month-by-month. 30 days was all that was required after the six months was up. That was "fair."

samkent said:

You don't have it loaded. So you are not using it for self defence.
That means it political. That's fine to a point.

Click to expand...

Kody carried a loaded magazine with him, but did not have it inserted into the firearm. He was unaware that you were allowed to carry the rifle fully loaded. I informed him that he could, and he was surprised. I personally wouldn't carry my defensive firearm without one in the chamber, so I wanted to make sure he knew his rights. He was appreciative. Maybe he will start carrying it loaded now.

MyWifeSaidYes said:

Ask the guy with over 500 empty 40-ounce beer bottles and 4 overflowing cat litter boxes in his former apartment how he knows this.

Man, that was NASTY!

Click to expand...

You still need to have reasonable reason to terminate. You can terminate this fellows due to the unsanitary conditions as laid out in the ORC.

Tenant Obligations: http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/5321.05

However, to be fair it also states

(D) This section does not apply to a termination based on the breach of a condition of a rental agreement or the breach of a duty and obligation imposed by law, except that it does apply to a breach of the obligation imposed upon a tenant by division (A)(9) of section*5321.05*of the Revised Code.

But even that isn't much of an answer.

My lease actually says that they can enter my apartment at any time they want, however, legally they are not allowed to, which is why they always provide 24 hour notice.:


(8) Except in the case of emergency or if it is impracticable to do so, give the tenant reasonable notice of the landlord's intent to enter and enter only at reasonable times. Twenty-four hours is presumed to be a reasonable notice in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Now college dorms are different..

5321.031 College or university student tenant rental agreements.

A college or university may terminate a rental agreement with a student tenant prior to the expiration of the term of the agreement and require that the student vacate the dwelling unit only when the termination follows a hearing in which it was determined by the college or university that the student violated a term of the rental agreement or violated the college's or university's code of conduct or other policies and procedures. The hearing must be preceded by a written notice to the student, must include a right to be heard, and must otherwise comply with the college's or university's procedures for disciplinary hearings. The written rental agreement must specify the conditions under which the rental agreement may be terminated and specify the college's or university's notice and hearing procedures that will be followed in making a determination under this section.


Now, being that we are talking about second amendment stuff...his landlord cannot evict him based on that. If his lease says "you may not have guns while living here", or anything to that affect......that part of the lease violates Ohio law. You must adhere to all state and federal laws and well as all "reasonable and fair terms of the lease".

Eviction for doing what the state and federal government says is OK is not legal, because that section of the lease would be deemed unreasonable and unfair, as it violates your rights.


Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Personally I'd be more worried about the landlord issue than the police issue. It actually sounds like the police don't care so really it's just a neighbor issue. I'm also not sure how an OC AR-15 walk helps his cause. If anything, neighbors will just complain more and eventually the landlord (no matter how pro-gun) will get tired of it and file for eviction or just not renew the lease terms. I'd find out more info from the landlord before anything is planned further, but that's just my two cents unless Kody has another place to live.

Eviction for doing what the state and federal government says is OK is not legal, because that section of the lease would be deemed unreasonable and unfair, as it violates your rights.

Click to expand...

The reason for eviction is ALWAYS non payment of rent. The landlord can (and I have) refused rent from tennants. Then when you get before the judge (normally referee) the 'cause' for eviction becomes 'non payment'.
It makes no difference why the landlord refused the rent.
The converse is also true. Just like I found out the hard way. You cannot evict for reasons other than non payment.
I had a tennant who broke out windows and refused to pay for them. When we were before the judge he asked me "Did you accept the rent?". I had to say yes. The judge said then you accepted him breaking windows. "Eviction dismissed"

The root reason for eviction is always non payment.
All the leases I've seen has clauses the let the landlord dump the tennant.
In the real world the fininacial portions leases are impossible to enforce. The judge may tell the tennant he has to pay back rent but just try to collect it.

While I may have sounded harsh to the young man. I was just trying to inform him that his actions may have unintended consequences.
Just look at the Navy shooter. No charges were filed when he fired into the ceiling but that was the final reason used to discharge him from the Navy.

Put yourself in the position of a hiring manager.
Two perspective hires. One with a spotless background. The other with a dismissed charge of inducing panic involving a gun.
Who are you going to hire? Especially these days.

It goes beyond standing up for your states rights. Your states rights mean little when you can't feed or house yourself.

It sounds like you are saying that you can evict anyone by simply refusing the rent and then crying non-payment of rent to the judge. Is that what you are saying? If you are, I'm gonna call BS and ask for some cites!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Could this be the individual you are referring to? I still could not locate the Facebook page.

http://www.abc6onyourside.com/share...-6-your-side-champions-amy-wickes-26154.shtml

https://www.facebook.com/amy.wickes.1/posts/4137643250379 (interesting story and comments)

Franklin County Court search has an "Amy Wickes" of Tremont in Upper Arlington charged/indicted with Theft and Misuse-Credit Cards (felonies) in 1997.

If this happens to be the same person, I can understand the resentment against guns. This reminds me of the anti-gun protestor Jerome McCorry outside of Bill Goodmans at Hara Arena. A convicted rapist protesting the 2A rights of law-abiding citizens

Hypocrisy

@Eye

No, you can't. While some landlords may have employed this tactic....the landlord has to provide evidence for why he would refuse rent..and that has to be something which breaks the law and lease....

To clarify..it has to be something which violates sections of Tenant Obligations in the ORC...or a LEGAL term in the lease.

Which as I stated...the landlord can have the lease say "We have the right to enter your apartment at any moment with no notice..."..but that violates Landlord Obligations/Reasonable Access..so they actually can't.

" 5321.06 Terms and conditions of rental agreement.

A landlord and a tenant may include in a rental agreement any terms and conditions, including any term relating to rent, the duration of an agreement, and any other provisions governing the rights and obligations of the parties that are not inconsistent with or prohibited by Chapter 5321. of the Revised Code or ***any other rule of law.***"



Again..can't evict for constitutional rights..

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Easiest method is wait till the lease is up and refuse to renew a long term lease putting the subject on month to month payments and then just increase his rent 25% then evict for non-payment or he will leave on his own. There are many ways to get rid of renters.

Yes but that is once the lease has already expired. If the lease is still active, and the tenant has not violated the legal terms of the lease, then the landlord has no legal power to evict them.

Of course, we all know that just because something is the law does not mean the court will uphold it..but that's a different case.

Any landlord who employs different tactics is a landlord I'll be happy to never pay rent to.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

It sounds like you are saying that you can evict anyone by simply refusing the rent and then crying non-payment of rent to the judge. Is that what you are saying? If you are, I'm gonna call BS and ask for some cites!

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I cannot give you any cites, I was a landlord in the early 90's for about 4 years. It was the worst 4 years of my life.
I had three buildings and a total of 13 units.
Fortunately I had a partner who had been in the business for two years before me.
In my third year I had 24 evictions between us. We had eviction down to a science. We accepted no excuses for late rent unless you had been with us for at least one full year.
Granted these were not high end buildings but neither were the tenants.
Somehow these were all the fault of the landlord:
Broken windows
Toys flushed down the toilet
Food left on the stove scorching the cabinets
A months worth of diapers thrown in the closet
Interior doors that vanish
I could go on but it's ruining the taste of my bourbon.

Unless the rules have changed we could refuse the rent FOR ANY REASON on the first of the month. Then have it empty, painted and listed in the paper the first of the next month (excluding February).
It's not BS. It's not a nice business. You have to know the laws in your area and follow a stone cold program down to the day.
Yes we were required to serve them with a three day notice to pay rent or quit (quit was the legal term used by our courts). But that does not mean we had to accept it.
Those tenants that showed up for court were in for a surprise.

I stick to my point to the OP.
Yes you have the legal right to walk around with a rifle slung over your shoulder. And I support your right to do so.
But being right and being smart do not always go hand in hand.

All it talks in one stupid officer to put a blemish on your record. Even if the charges are dropped.
And if that blemish mentions 'gun' you are screwed on a background check for a job.
I doubt anyone on here would dispute me on that point.

As a renter that had a landlord that refused payment I would go down to the court house and set up a payment for rent with them.

To resolve the speculation about leases, let's consider the fact that some folks sign a one-year lease, but those leases are rarely renewed annually. After a year, the carry-over is based on the rent payment period, usually monthly. That means that either party can terminate the month-to-month lease with 30 days notice. No reason required.

Back on topic.

When I spoke with Kody, I also explained that he could carry loaded. I did advise him against chambering a round if he were going to sling the rifle across his back. He doesn't need someone coming up from behind and attempting to fire the rifle...and succeeding.

There are some folks out there that believe that a loaded magazine inserted into a firearm, but with no round chambered, means the firearm is unloaded. Under Ohio law, that doesn't fly. It's loaded.

I also explained that he was doing nothing wrong by carrying his magazine in his hand, either.

I have been too busy to continue the conversation, but Ms. Wickes did fly off the handle at me and called 'firearm lovers' 'unstable'.

Kody, I wish you the best in getting this resolved.

All the former property managers/landlords- you missed one: Fair Housing Act. USHUD Pays close attention to FHA violations.

Werz said:

To resolve the speculation about leases, let's consider the fact that some folks sign a one-year lease, but those leases are rarely renewed annually. After a year, the carry-over is based on the rent payment period, usually monthly. That means that either party can terminate the month-to-month lease with 30 days notice. No reason required.

Click to expand...

That is precisely the situation I was in (except that the initial lease period was 6 mo.).

My problem is that we have someone in this thread saying that, even during the lease period, the landlord can simply refuse the payment of rent for any reason whatsoever, then cry to the court about non-payment of rent by the tenant, and start eviction. IANAL, but I call BS. Is it BS, or can a landlord legally play this dishonest game?