The Shrine

...because I've had some problems with my apartment and it is about to boil over into me just getting more fucking pissed.

I live in a historic district in Saint Louis City (Soulard to be exact). This region of town is known for boozing late into the night and debauchery on Mardi Gras.

Two things I knew coming in when I signed the lease back in August but...I've lived in South City all of my life so I know it is not as nice and comfy as County living with all of your "Lawn must be kept like this, picket fences must be pearl in color or brighter NO CREAM, and most importantly keep the THUGS out." but there are a couple of things I want/need to make my landlord aware of.

1) The apartment <I>constantly</I> smells of stale/old/ just down-right fucking nasty Cigarettes.

When I first moved in and even when I came by to visit the place before deciding on moving in I had thought that the smell was from the previous tenants (two mid-twenties girls). So I left the windows open in the apartment for a few weeks in a (feeble) attempt to fumigate it. Now, I've worked in a bar for 6 years, I've come home smelling like a bar but all it took was a nice shower to get that stank off of me. THIS HITS ME LIKE A TON OF BRICKS EACH TIME I WALK IN THE DOOR AT 5PM!!! I can smell it as I type this right now. I live on the second and third floor of the apartment building/town house. An old woman lives directly below me. She must smoke like a fucking chimney because she looks like Mary Fuckin Poppins if she had a two pack a day habit. My clothing stinks of cigarettes somedays. Everything in the 2nd floor closet (coats, jackets) smell like I lived at a bar. The half-bath wreaks of Parliments and on nice days <B>IT GETS FUCKING WORSE</B> because she opens up her windows and continues to smoke so all that smoke comes up into the air and gets blown STRAIGHT into my apartment.

Let me tell you, I love my apartment. I love where I live. The rent is a little on the low side for a two bedroom 1.5 bath. I'm walking distance from at minimum 20 different bars/clubs. I'm 5 minutes from work, 10 minutes from Mom and Dads repsective homes and 7 minutes from the retirement community my grandmother resides at and 15 from my girlfriend's place (she lives with her mom, no overnights for those of you who would say just stay at her place, uh-uh not gonna happen). (Not to mention but 2 blocks away from the Mardi Gras parade route as well).

My question to you all is this. Do I go to my Landlord and let them know that the tenant below me is making my life unpleasant and that I would like my rent to be reduced since
1) My friends/girlfriend refuse to visit because of the odor.
2) Family members have asked if I do smoke because my clothing wreaks of it constantly.
3) My eyes/mouth/throat are constantly dry from the poor air quality within my residence.

That is item number one.

Number two is this...

Their are birds that have infiltrated the exterior wall outside the third floor east bedroom window and have made a nest there. I've let my landlord know about this and I keep the window open (now) on a regular basis since it is so nice out and I want to keep my energy bills down. I am afraid that one day these creatures will either attack the screen window and enter the bedroom and rest of the apartment or that they will burrow through the existing drywall and enter the apartment that way. Mind you, I know this is in a difficult spot since it is on the third floor above the gutters but I hear the damn things moving around at all hours of the night and cannot sleep past the sun rising because the fuckers come and go like johns at a crack house. I'm half tempted to stick the paintball gun down there and just start shooting but I think their is a law against that.

And third, the reason why this has come to a boiling point for me, some fucking degenerate from the apartment complex behind mine decided to take a rock from the parking pad that is designated for my complexs' usage and etch his first initial into the hood of my car on the passenger side.

Thankfully I'm going to sell the car but now the little prick probably just reduced the trade-in value by $200 because there is now a big fucking "E" on the hood of my car.

If I see that prick, he's getting the paintball gun treatment as well, then a face full of gravel.

So, I pay $750 a month for my apartment, which I thought was fair at the time. My lease is up at the end of august. I really <I>really</I> would like to stay here because of the following.

1) Location Location Location
2) Price
3) City Living
4) Basement Storage (FUCKING TONS OF IT)
5) Don't want to move till I have enough $$$ for a house

To make a long story short (editor - To fucking late)is it to much to ask of my landlord to have my rent reduced by...say $25 a month to cover <I>at minimum</I> the smoking/health issues since these were not disclosed/known prior to move in?

Heh, $750? That's really fucking expensive in my city. I pay $1K a month on my house.

Anyway, for starters:

Illinois Landlord/Tenant laws

Not that you need to go that far, but you should know your rights. Furthermore, there are a couple of things to note:

1. The landlord must keep the rental unit fit to live in.
2. The landlord must keep the rental unit in compliance with state and local health and housing codes.

So, there's possible health violations with the smoke entering your apt. After all, people are allowed to smoke within the confines of their living quarters, but that smoke must not be able to pollution the living quarters of others. (It's probably a ventilation issue that s/he hasn't fixed yet.)

I would start with a semi-friendly letter about the issue. Explain most of what you explained here: you initially knew about the smoke, but did not know it was a permanent condition; you really like the location/price/etc., but these issues are really hampering your quality of living in the apt; etc. Don't request the reduction in rent. (If you get the $25/mo reduction, it doesn't really solve anything and it's not worth it IMO.) Just explain that you would like to s/he to figure out a way to fix these problems. Date the letter, make a copy, and file it away in a folder.

If nothing improves within a month or so, call a health inspector. Get his written opinion, and if he agrees that it's a health hazard, sent the results (make copies, of course) to your landlord with a letter explaining that you are serious about maintaining a healthy living quarters, with a 30-day deadline. That might piss off the landlord, but it's too fucking bad at this point (you tried to play nice), and the landlord cannot legally evict you out of revenge.

Remember, your choices aren't to tolerate it or move out. You can force the landlord to fix the things under his/her control, even if it takes some effort on the landlord's part. At the very least, the landlord could install a HEPA filter in your apt at the landlord's cost, though, again, it sounds like a problem with the ventilation itself. The birds are less of a legal issue, unfortunately, but lumping that in with the smoking issue will bring that into the front-burner of things that the landlord needs to take care of. It could even be a legal issue, since it's a pest problem that hasn't been taken care of. (It got into the wall because there are fucking holes in the wall/ceiling/whatever. Also, the gutters can be cleaned out and gutter guards installed, so that they don't nest up there.)

Anyway, just trying to get a gauge for how much of an asshole the landlord really is, and don't be afraid to play hardball if you need to. (I've dealt with an asshole landlord before, so it pays to know your rights.)

SineSwiper wrote:Heh, $750? That's really fucking expensive in my city. I pay $1K a month on my house.

Anyway, for starters:

Illinois Landlord/Tenant laws

Not that you need to go that far, but you should know your rights. Furthermore, there are a couple of things to note:

1. The landlord must keep the rental unit fit to live in.
2. The landlord must keep the rental unit in compliance with state and local health and housing codes.

So, there's possible health violations with the smoke entering your apt. After all, people are allowed to smoke within the confines of their living quarters, but that smoke must not be able to pollution the living quarters of others. (It's probably a ventilation issue that s/he hasn't fixed yet.)

I would start with a semi-friendly letter about the issue. Explain most of what you explained here: you initially knew about the smoke, but did not know it was a permanent condition; you really like the location/price/etc., but these issues are really hampering your quality of living in the apt; etc. Don't request the reduction in rent. (If you get the $25/mo reduction, it doesn't really solve anything and it's not worth it IMO.) Just explain that you would like to s/he to figure out a way to fix these problems. Date the letter, make a copy, and file it away in a folder.

If nothing improves within a month or so, call a health inspector. Get his written opinion, and if he agrees that it's a health hazard, sent the results (make copies, of course) to your landlord with a letter explaining that you are serious about maintaining a healthy living quarters, with a 30-day deadline. That might piss off the landlord, but it's too fucking bad at this point (you tried to play nice), and the landlord cannot legally evict you out of revenge.

Remember, your choices aren't to tolerate it or move out. You can force the landlord to fix the things under his/her control, even if it takes some effort on the landlord's part. At the very least, the landlord could install a HEPA filter in your apt at the landlord's cost, though, again, it sounds like a problem with the ventilation itself. The birds are less of a legal issue, unfortunately, but lumping that in with the smoking issue will bring that into the front-burner of things that the landlord needs to take care of. It could even be a legal issue, since it's a pest problem that hasn't been taken care of. (It got into the wall because there are fucking holes in the wall/ceiling/whatever. Also, the gutters can be cleaned out and gutter guards installed, so that they don't nest up there.)

Anyway, just trying to get a gauge for how much of an asshole the landlord really is, and don't be afraid to play hardball if you need to. (I've dealt with an asshole landlord before, so it pays to know your rights.)

The landlord isn't really all that bad. It is a company that owns a lot of houses around the area. I think if I send them a letter voicing my concerns that they'll take care of it. Hell, before I moved in I asked about the basement storage which the doors to the basement were just flimsy plywood with a latch and no lock. By the time I moved in they had new doors and a lock and keys to access the basement. They call before they come over to change the air filter in the furnace, usually I'm at work. Not to much else really.

remember that your landlord hates smokers too. She's destroying the apartment she's in with the smoke AND making others around her move out. I would assume, since you said your landlord is pretty good, that if you made them aware of the situation they would take care of it as best they could. Landlords hate giving out to smokers to begin with (and many have rules against it) but when other tenants start complaining then they've got the motivation to do something about it. I've heard in the past where they'll upgrade the ventilation in the room to better suck out the smoke so it doesn't linger so long, or go even further and shore up the insulation so it can't sneak through cracks in the ceiling/wall/door/etc.

Either that or wait for her to die of cancer.

Tessian wrote:Either that or wait for her to die of cancer.

That seems likely given the amount of smoke that is causing the problem.

SineSwiper wrote:

Tessian wrote:Either that or wait for her to die of cancer.

That seems likely given the amount of smoke that is causing the problem.

Yeah, every day when I walk in from work it is seriously like a brick wall.

I think it is the ventilation systems in the bathroom because the upstairs one now smells the same. Add in the heat and humidity from the shower and it can get pretty bad.

Here is a draft of the letter I am going to send, anyone think I need to add anything?

[redacted] Management:

I am the tenant that resides at [Redacted] on the 2nd and 3rd floors. I've been living at the location since the 27th of August, 2007. I am writing you this letter in an effort to resolve the issue I am having with the apartment. When I first moved into the apartment there was a noticeable scent of cigarette smoke that lingered in the unit. I personally do not smoke, though I do have friends that have visited that do but I force them to do so outside on the deck or on the patio. At first I thought this was from the previous tenants and thought that opening the windows for a couple of weeks would air out the smell. Over the winter months I had to keep the windows closed. When I would arrive home from work, most days I was greeted by the scent of cigarette smoke in the apartment. Some times it was very overpowering.

There are three distinct areas in the apartment that smell of smoke, both the upstairs and downstairs bathrooms and the closet on the 2nd floor where I keep my coats and jackets. Not to mention also my eyes, throat and mouth are constantly dry and scratchy from breathing in the stale air. Others who have visited the apartment have also noticed the smell of smoke. I would like to know if there is anything you could possibly do to help alleviate this obvious health risk inside my unit. I do enjoy my apartment very much because of the location and price but I am considering moving if nothing can be done.

Also, there are birds that I believe have found a hole near the front bedroom on the 3rd floor and have been nesting there near the window. I hear them in the wall/gutters constantly as I have to keep the window open in order for fresh air to get into the apartment.

Please contact me by phone number or e-mail if you have any questions. Thank you.

Sounds good.

I do enjoy my apartment very much because of the location and price but I am considering moving if nothing can be done.

I'd take out the "because of the location and price" part, but otherwise good. Might also want to throw in a part there where you say that friends and family refuse to visit because of the stench. No landlord wants to hear that people avoid their property- they could all be potential future tenants. I know I recommend my place to everyone, except most don't feel it's worth the price (I will be paying $989/month for a single... and no shit Sine, but these days renting's a safer bet than buying and I don't have the savings for a down payment)

Just curious, but is this not something you could go TALK to your landlord about? Whenever I've had a problem in my apartment I've either called up the office or mentioned it when I went to drop off rent. Letter just seems it could be too easily ignored or forgotten about.

Tessian wrote:

I do enjoy my apartment very much because of the location and price but I am considering moving if nothing can be done.

I'd take out the "because of the location and price" part, but otherwise good. Might also want to throw in a part there where you say that friends and family refuse to visit because of the stench. No landlord wants to hear that people avoid their property- they could all be potential future tenants. I know I recommend my place to everyone, except most don't feel it's worth the price (I will be paying $989/month for a single... and no shit Sine, but these days renting's a safer bet than buying and I don't have the savings for a down payment)

Just curious, but is this not something you could go TALK to your landlord about? Whenever I've had a problem in my apartment I've either called up the office or mentioned it when I went to drop off rent. Letter just seems it could be too easily ignored or forgotten about.

I'd rather they get this in writing than going up there. That way I have documentation when it (hopefully won't be) time to get the health inspector involved.

Today has been a bad day. Eyes have been dry all day. Took out my contacts. I'm sitting like 4 inches away from the screen. My nose and eyes both burn.

The smell started again in the afternoon and has progressively gotten worse throughout the apartment. I feel dirty.

Yeah, documentation is definately a good thing.

SineSwiper wrote: Anyway, just trying to get a gauge for how much of an asshole the landlord really is, and don't be afraid to play hardball if you need to. (I've dealt with an asshole landlord before, so it pays to know your rights.)

As a landlord, I'd serve you notice (for playing "hardball"). Either because "the work required would make the unit uninhabitable" if I owned the whole building or because "I am considering selling the unit". Then I'd nickel and dime you on the security deposit in every legal manner possible.

Know your rights all you want...frankly, tenants have way MORE rights than landlords (evicting tenants for non-payment/etc can take months)...but if you choose to be an asshole about it, the landlord can screw you back easily as well.

I fucking hate dickhead tenants.

I fucking hate dickhead landlords that don't fix their shit and don't follow the fucking laws.

Also, you couldn't serve me a cheese sandwich, bitch.

SineSwiper wrote:I fucking hate dickhead landlords that don't fix their shit and don't follow the fucking laws.

Also, you couldn't serve me a cheese sandwich, bitch.

Guess what, your landlord already royally "served" you when he snagged you into padding his bank account every month...Thank god for the plebs, lol.

....

Encouraging him to play 'hardball' is fine and dandy, I'm just pointing out he can be screwed back (and should be) if he follows your advice. Smokey smells aren't going to kill him, nor is a nest outside - he retains the choice to stay or leave (assuming the landlord doesn't "fix" it).

I mean suggesting calling in health inspectors and such...geeze, what a dick. And fyi slick, unless your local smoking laws are fucked up, private residences are still exempt from such interference....thus the landlord ain't breaking any laws.

kali o. wrote:

SineSwiper wrote:I fucking hate dickhead landlords that don't fix their shit and don't follow the fucking laws.

Also, you couldn't serve me a cheese sandwich, bitch.

Guess what, your landlord already royally "served" you when he snagged you into padding his bank account every month...Thank god for the plebs, lol.

....

Encouraging him to play 'hardball' is fine and dandy, I'm just pointing out he can be screwed back (and should be) if he follows your advice. Smokey smells aren't going to kill him, nor is a nest outside - he retains the choice to stay or leave (assuming the landlord doesn't "fix" it).

I mean suggesting calling in health inspectors and such...geeze, what a dick. And fyi slick, unless your local smoking laws are fucked up, private residences are still exempt from such interference....thus the landlord ain't breaking any laws.

I'm pretty sure it isn't a "private" residence if it is a rental.

Imakeholesinu wrote:
I'm pretty sure it isn't a "private" residence if it is a rental.

It is, it's not a public place or business or government property, I assure you.

The reality is, many rentals (especially homes and older buildings) share the same heating systems, vents, outdoor space, electrical, plumbing and more. Smells (like smoke) are going to pass from unit to unit, in the common walkways, etc - and you can't do anything about that in a lot of the structures.

You are faced with a simple solution in most cases - choose a smoke-free rental or a smoke-friendly one. It's a courtesy when a landlord offers smoking rentals (like pet-friendly rentals, it's not in their best interests)...I'm sure finding a smoke-free rental won't be an issue.

kali o. wrote:Encouraging him to play 'hardball' is fine and dandy, I'm just pointing out he can be screwed back (and should be) if he follows your advice. Smokey smells aren't going to kill him, nor is a nest outside - he retains the choice to stay or leave (assuming the landlord doesn't "fix" it).

Are you trolling or what? This isn't smoky smells. It's fucking up his eyes and making his mouth dry. It's a goddamn health hazard, and the landlord is REQUIRED to fucking fix it! I'm just encouraging him to be nice first, but if it's a bigger issue to start bring in the feds. If it comes to that:

The landlord can't evict him.
The landlord can't retaliate by shutting off utilities or not continue to do his job.

IE, the landlord can't do shit, and will be forced to fix the problem, like it should have been done when it was first reported. Of course, this is all on the assumption that the landlord is going to go that far, and the impression I get is that the landlord would be happy to help out with the issues. That's good.

kali o. wrote:The reality is, many rentals (especially homes and older buildings) share the same heating systems, vents, outdoor space, electrical, plumbing and more. Smells (like smoke) are going to pass from unit to unit, in the common walkways, etc - and you can't do anything about that in a lot of the structures.

Please. Proper HEPA filters can be installed in the ventilation system. Hell, regular filters can be installed or cleaned. (Filters should be changed out or cleaned every 6 months.) Ventilation systems should NOT allow most smells and particulates to pass from one enclosed room to another.

Common hallways are a different manner, but we're not talking about making the place completely smoke free. (Smokers may open their door to the hallway, etc., so it's not like you can prevent that.)

kali o. wrote:It is, it's not a public place or business or government property, I assure you.

No, but like places of work, it's property that is governed to be safe and non-hazardous by state laws. When it comes down to it, it's the landlord's property, but it's the tenant's home. Both are protected.

Motherfucking assholes like YOU are the reason why the renter's laws are spelled out the way they are! Because the renter is giving you all of that cash, you should do your part to make sure that the place is in good shape and livable. You guys act like you have no money to get shit fixed.

Not to say that there isn't a fair share of asshole tenants, but there's certainly an equal percentage of asshole landlords out there.

kali o. wrote:

Imakeholesinu wrote:
I'm pretty sure it isn't a "private" residence if it is a rental.

It is, it's not a public place or business or government property, I assure you.

The reality is, many rentals (especially homes and older buildings) share the same heating systems, vents, outdoor space, electrical, plumbing and more. Smells (like smoke) are going to pass from unit to unit, in the common walkways, etc - and you can't do anything about that in a lot of the structures.

You are faced with a simple solution in most cases - choose a smoke-free rental or a smoke-friendly one. It's a courtesy when a landlord offers smoking rentals (like pet-friendly rentals, it's not in their best interests)...I'm sure finding a smoke-free rental won't be an issue.

I have my own furnace located in the unit. I have my own water heater and gas line in the basement.

I'm sure I could find a smoke-free rental also but I really don't want to move.

Imakeholesinu wrote: I have my own furnace located in the unit. I have my own water heater and gas line in the basement.

I'm sure I could find a smoke-free rental also but I really don't want to move.

Then you have a self-contained unit and chances are it's a structural issue causing the smoke entry (through the walls). Sounds like a big job, I'm betting. Ultimately, if it's really bugging you, you are going to be better off moving.

It's a goddamn health hazard, and the landlord is REQUIRED to fucking fix it!

Sine, you stupid pleb, so is pet dander and pet urine smells - but guess what? That doesn't apply to private residences and for good fucking reason - it's assumed adults are competent enough to CHOOSE whether to live in pet/smoking friendly building OR not. Quit talking about LAWS you have no fucking clue about OR reference your local fucked up smoking legislation.

The landlord can't evict him.
The landlord can't retaliate by shutting off utilities or not continue to do his job.

This isn't related to Barret's problem, but YES I CAN. I just have to reason stuff in a legal way. There are loopholes in everything you ignorant know-it-all.

No, but like places of work, it's property that is governed to be safe and non-hazardous by state laws. When it comes down to it, it's the landlord's property, but it's the tenant's home. Both are protected.

Motherfucking assholes like YOU are the reason why the renter's laws are spelled out the way they are! Because the renter is giving you all of that cash, you should do your part to make sure that the place is in good shape and livable. You guys act like you have no money to get shit fixed.

Not to say that there isn't a fair share of asshole tenants, but there's certainly an equal percentage of asshole landlords out there.

Reference this local law that applies smoke free environment in a smoke-friendly private residence. Seriously, link me now or shut the fuck up you dumb shit. I am telling you how shit works where I am - get that through your fat fucking head.

God damn I HATE fucking tenants.

Kali is so angry...

Then again, he/she/it is named after a Hindu Goddess of FUCKING BAT-SHIT CRAZY MURDER DANCING so I suppose it shouldn't be too surprising.

If the smoke affects your quality of life significantly, then consider moving.

It's not just the location and price that are keeping you there, but also the fact that moving is such a huge fucking hassle. Doing the search, finding a place, the logistics of moving. Everyone hates doing it. But you have to think in terms of quality of life.

I say this because I bet there's little your landlord can or will do.

kali o. wrote:Sine, you stupid pleb, so is pet dander and pet urine smells - but guess what? That doesn't apply to private residences and for good fucking reason - it's assumed adults are competent enough to CHOOSE whether to live in pet/smoking friendly building OR not. Quit talking about LAWS you have no fucking clue about OR reference your local fucked up smoking legislation.

One, pet dander/urine isn't even in the same category as secondhand smoke. Cities aren't in a frenzy to ban pet urine.

Two, I was quoting Illinois legislation, which is the state that he lives in. I've read through my own state's legislation a long time ago.

Three, quite frankly, I don't agree with the fucked up smoking bans being passed around here. Segregation between smokers/non-smokers was fine with restaurants, and banning bars from smoking (which our excellent mayor has done here) is fucking insane. Bar employees choose to work in a bar, where smoking is simply part of the job. It's like shouting discrimination because a woman can't be Santa Claus. And patrons, even if they are exposed to the smoke, are only there for a while. (Secondhand smoke is a problem only with long term exposure, despite what some zealots might say.)

Apartment complexes are different. Smoking segregation is rare among complexes, and the exposure is long term. Saying that there's nothing that anybody can do about it and the only choice is to move is like saying that there's nothing that anybody can do if radon exposure is found in the place. Bullshit. It's a health hazard, and exposure should be minimized, if not stopped all together.

kali o. wrote:This isn't related to Barret's problem, but YES I CAN. I just have to reason stuff in a legal way. There are loopholes in everything you ignorant know-it-all.

Bullshit. Please quote me these loopholes. You can use your own state/country laws if you want. (If you're a landlord, you should be fluent in the laws, anyway.) Landlord/tenant law is pretty airtight in most states, and I imagine it's the same in Canada. It's not like they make 500 page documents for these bills.

Oh, and if you plan on quoting Illinois law on how that works, I would recommend that you give the Illinois Retaliatory Eviction Act a read. (Don't worry; it's really short.)

kali o. wrote:Reference this local law that applies smoke free environment in a smoke-friendly private residence. Seriously, link me now or shut the fuck up you dumb shit. I am telling you how shit works where I am - get that through your fat fucking head.

The Smoke Free Illinois Act states the following:

The Law wrote:Section 15. Smoking in public places, places of employment, and governmental vehicles prohibited. No person shall smoke in a public place or in any place of employment or within 15 feet of any entrance to a public place or place of employment. No
person may smoke in any vehicle owned, leased, or operated by the State or a political subdivision of the State. Smoking is prohibited in indoor public places and workplaces unless specifically exempted by Section 35 of this Act.

(Not to say that I agree with this law...)

Though the definition of "public place" excludes "private residences", the definition of "private residences" says "the part of a structure used as a dwelling" and arguably would not include the public hallways going into the apartment. (The common definition of apartment usually is only defined as the actual room used for rental, not the whole building.)

However, this is a new law and that exact definition might be on shakey ground. That's why we have the clause in the Illinois Landlord and Tenant Act that I quoted early about health hazards. A health inspector can inspect the apartment, and if the inspector declares that the smoke poses as a serious health risk, the landlord legally MUST fix the problem.

Again, we're quoting all of these legal matters, but really we're just hoping that the landlord will fix the issue without legal recourse. I'm just saying that if it really comes to blows, Barret has a legal leg to stand on. If the landlord really becomes a prick that doesn't fix the problem, and Barret doesn't want the burden of legal action, he can always move away from the health hazard, but I would suggest that the option be a last resort.

kali o. wrote:God damn I HATE fucking tenants.

And this is why you make a terrible landlord.

Landlords that don't care about their tenants enough to make their life hell are scum, and are better off taking jobs in the stock market or some other field where they can fuck over a different class of people.

Sorry sine, I live in MO. Though I can throw a rock over the muddy mississippi and hit the east side.

Christ, it's right on the border of Illinois. Thought it was in IL. Oh well.

MO only has individual city smoking bans, and St. Louis isn't one of them. However, like every first-world country/state, health risks/inspections are part of the law, as is the prevention of retaliatory evictions.

SineSwiper wrote:Christ, it's right on the border of Illinois. Thought it was in IL. Oh well.

MO only has individual city smoking bans, and St. Louis isn't one of them. However, like every first-world country/state, health risks/inspections are part of the law, as is the prevention of retaliatory evictions.

The letter has been written, hopefully I'll hear back from them tomorrow.

Sine, good job not doing what I asked...yet pretending you still did it. Smoke in these circumstances IS NOT A HEALTH HAZARD AS IT DOESNT APPLY TO PRIVATE RESIDENCES. Did the caps help you out? You can not link me to such because there is no law pertaining to it (in most areas, most likely yours as well). Have you managed to snake that through your brain yet?

As for:

Bullshit. Please quote me these loopholes. You can use your own state/country laws if you want.

I gave you valid reasons/examples in my first post in this thread. I can think up many, many more. All a landlord needs is valid reasoning in a number of potential areas. I could also list off dozens of ways a tenant can royally fuck over a landlord. I know more than you, end of story. I honestly don't know what we are arguing about at the moment...

Also, I'm glad we see eye-to-eye on the idiocy behind smoking bans...it's an utter shame you are oblivious to your hypocrisy over the same topic in a different area. Adults can make adult choices about where to work, where to party AND where to live.

PS - Barret, don't mean to derail your thread, good luck

Smoking bans have gone too far... if a business / property owner decides to ban then fine, but if they wish to allow it then that's fine too. As long as your choice to smoke does not degrade my quality of life at home or work then it should be allowed. By home or work I mean this: unless in either case someone's smoking makes it difficult for me to spend time at home or work then it's fine. Obviously both is within reason-- you can't work as a bartender and not expect some smoke. But, your choice to smoke should not make it almost impossible for me to spend time in my apartment/house. I should not have to move because of it, either, as is in Barret's case.

Tessian wrote:Smoking bans have gone too far... if a business / property owner decides to ban then fine, but if they wish to allow it then that's fine too. As long as your choice to smoke does not degrade my quality of life at home or work then it should be allowed. By home or work I mean this: unless in either case someone's smoking makes it difficult for me to spend time at home or work then it's fine. Obviously both is within reason-- you can't work as a bartender and not expect some smoke. But, your choice to smoke should not make it almost impossible for me to spend time in my apartment/house. I should not have to move because of it, either, as is in Barret's case.

$20 says I end up moving. And if that is the case that they can do nothing about the smell then I will ask them to terminate my lease early once I have found another apartment.

Goodness, can no topic here be free of some kind of long-winded debate?

kali o. wrote:Sine, good job not doing what I asked...yet pretending you still did it. Smoke in these circumstances IS NOT A HEALTH HAZARD AS IT DOESNT APPLY TO PRIVATE RESIDENCES. Did the caps help you out?

Well, that's up to the health inspector, now is it? If the health inspector declares strawberry jam a health hazard, then the landlord MUST remove all traces of strawberry jam from the apartment. Good job completely ignoring the issue of health inspectors. I won't bother putting it in all caps.

Like Tessian said, it's fine and perfectly legal to smoke in your own apartment. The issue here is when that smoke interferes with the PRIVATE RESIDENCE of another. You legally have the right to a healthy apartment. Again, you clearly aren't paying attention here, so I'll make sure that only repeat myself on these few things, so there's nothing else to distract you.

kali o. wrote:I gave you valid reasons/examples in my first post in this thread. I can think up many, many more. All a landlord needs is valid reasoning in a number of potential areas.

What you said was:

As a landlord, I'd serve you notice (for playing "hardball"). Either because "the work required would make the unit uninhabitable" if I owned the whole building or because "I am considering selling the unit". Then I'd nickel and dime you on the security deposit in every legal manner possible.

In the first case, the landlord, depending on the state, would be required to provide a temporary apartment. In the 2nd case, I would ask to provide paperwork on the sale of the unit. Otherwise, I would consider it a retaliatory eviction and send a "cease and desist notice for retaliatory eviction notices" if it continues.

A landlord cannot legally throw our a tenant. Only a sheriff can remove a tenant from their apartment, only if the eviction has been approved by the court of law -AND- has given the tenant 14 days to vacate the premises.

Yes, the landlord can nickel and dime on security deposits, but if the apartment is nice & clean with no defects, and pictures are taken of the whole place before the tenant leaves, then the landlord has less of a leg to stand on.

kali o. wrote:Also, I'm glad we see eye-to-eye on the idiocy behind smoking bans...it's an utter shame you are oblivious to your hypocrisy over the same topic in a different area. Adults can make adult choices about where to work, where to party AND where to live.

Look, I draw the line on health hazards where you live and where you work. Bars are an exception because they were built for smokers and drinkers. But, just to say that adults should make the choice to move out because secondhand smoke is posing a health hazard for the tenant is just as preposterous as asking somebody to tolerate it or leave because of radon leakage.

We have laws in place to protect the workplace and home from health hazards for a reason. If an employer doesn't provide ear protection for a jack hammer operator, the choice isn't tolerate it or leave. If a landlord refuses to fix structural damage that make the apartment unlivable, the choice isn't tolerate it or leave. If somebody sells a house that the home inspector declares has mold damage, the choice isn't take it or leave it.

These laws are in place so that widespread violations don't give people no choice at all.

Imakeholesinu wrote:$20 says I end up moving. And if that is the case that they can do nothing about the smell then I will ask them to terminate my lease early once I have found another apartment.

Bah, they can at least provide an internal HEPA filter device if they don't want to bother with trying to fix all of the holes in the wall. And if you do decide to move out, don't let them charge you an early termination fee. It's a health risk, and the least they can do is waive that.

RentCavalier wrote:Goodness, can no topic here be free of some kind of long-winded debate?

Welcome to the Shrine.

Sine,

I don't anticipate they would charge me. If they do end up doing so I will bitch. I'm giving them 1-2 business days to respond, then I'll call to follow up. I believe that is fair right?

RentCavalier wrote:Goodness, can no topic here be free of some kind of long-winded debate?

Dear Lord, no! Not conversation and construction arguments! RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!!!!

Sine, you are an especially dense idiot, so this is my last reply to you on this:

Well, that's up to the health inspector, now is it?

No, it isn't. They don't have the authority. What part of "not a health hazard" are you not getting? I don't give a shit if you think it's a health hazard, I am telling you it is NOT something that can be acted on. Your own links show that.

Like Tessian said, it's fine and perfectly legal to smoke in your own apartment. The issue here is when that smoke interferes with the PRIVATE RESIDENCE of another. You legally have the right to a healthy apartment. Again, you clearly aren't paying attention here, so I'll make sure that only repeat myself on these few things, so there's nothing else to distract you.

Repeating yourself seems to constitute making a point in your mind. Hey tubby ninny, private residence is the definition of the landlords property and use (PS - that includes "common area" like hallways, which aren't defined as "public" as you tried to imply in another post btw) - a tenant is NOT legally entitled for it to be smoke-free...again, as your OWN links even support.

In the first case, the landlord, depending on the state, would be required to provide a temporary apartment. In the 2nd case, I would ask to provide paperwork on the sale of the unit.

1) No, the landlord isn't required to do anything of the sort. Ample notice is all that is required.
2) You aren't entitled to any paperwork. And fyi, a listing contract costs me nothing and it easy to obtain - I can simply change my mind shortly after.

You don't know everything Sine...in fact, you know incredibly little. If you weren't such a stubborn moron, maybe you'd learn something.

I don't anticipate they would charge me. If they do end up doing so I will bitch. I'm giving them 1-2 business days to respond, then I'll call to follow up. I believe that is fair right?

I wouldn't charge you...I highly doubt they would either. But, for the sake of arguement...you said yourself the smoke smell was there when you moved in and first viewed the unit. So nothing has changed. That isn't valid cause to break a lease.

kali o. wrote:

I don't anticipate they would charge me. If they do end up doing so I will bitch. I'm giving them 1-2 business days to respond, then I'll call to follow up. I believe that is fair right?

I wouldn't charge you...I highly doubt they would either. But, for the sake of arguement...you said yourself the smoke smell was there when you moved in and first viewed the unit. So nothing has changed. That isn't valid cause to break a lease.

The smell wasn't there when I first viewed the unit. Of course the two girls who were living there prior to me were still there and I didn't smell anything but girls. It started after I moved in but thought it was from the previous tenants so I thought if I just kept the windows open it would air itself out.

Imakeholesinu wrote:I don't anticipate they would charge me. If they do end up doing so I will bitch. I'm giving them 1-2 business days to respond, then I'll call to follow up. I believe that is fair right?

Depends on the mode of transport. If you're waiting on snail mail, give it time to get there. If it's email or you simply dropped it off at the office, yeah, a few business days is fair.

SineSwiper wrote:

Imakeholesinu wrote:I don't anticipate they would charge me. If they do end up doing so I will bitch. I'm giving them 1-2 business days to respond, then I'll call to follow up. I believe that is fair right?

Depends on the mode of transport. If you're waiting on snail mail, give it time to get there. If it's email or you simply dropped it off at the office, yeah, a few business days is fair.

Yeah I dropped it off with the rent yesterday. I was half expecting a call today. If I don't get one tomorrow I'll follow up Wed.

kali o. wrote:No, it isn't. They don't have the authority. What part of "not a health hazard" are you not getting? I don't give a shit if you think it's a health hazard, I am telling you it is NOT something that can be acted on. Your own links show that.

We're kinda at this "yes you are/no you aren't" degraded form of arguing, so I'll ask for you a burden of proof: Where exactly does it say that a Department of Health inspector doesn't have the right to declare something a health hazard? The DoH is the sole authority on what could be considered a "health hazard".

In terms of the laws in place for both smoking and apartments, it's true that there is no law outlawing smoking from within the home. The smoking bans provide exceptions for these cases. However, that's not the same thing as protection. Smokers and smoking are by no means protected, either. Smoking isn't a right.

The only case of the law that would say anything on the manner of private residences is that a tenant has the right to an apartment protected from "health hazards". The term "health hazards" here is purposely not defined in the confines of most landlord/tenant law. (In Missouri law, health hazards are lumped in there with "housing code" violations.) Therefore, it would be up to a representative of the official governing body that declares health violations to determine whether secondhand smoke in the apartment constitutes as a health hazard, or "housing code" violation.

This is purposely done because if new health hazards besides mold, radon, etc. were discovered, there wouldn't need to be a rush from every state congress to add that hazard into the landlord/tenant laws. So, again, smoking in the home is exempt from virtually every smoking ban, but that doesn't mean that smoking is protected as a right.

kali o. wrote:Repeating yourself seems to constitute making a point in your mind. Hey tubby ninny, private residence is the definition of the landlords property and use (PS - that includes "common area" like hallways, which aren't defined as "public" as you tried to imply in another post btw) - a tenant is NOT legally entitled for it to be smoke-free...again, as your OWN links even support.

Actually, just because a person owns a building, does not mean that the building is automatically a "private residence". For example, most smoking bans including restaurants, bars, work places, etc. Therefore, even though somebody owns a building, and it's privately owned, it's still considered to be a "public area" as defined specifically by those anti-smoking laws.

Therefore, since the common area is open to the public for people to roam around, and is not specifically defined as a "private residence" (which only includes apartments themselves), it could potentially be victim to anti-smoking bans. Though, for that interpretation of the law to be completely valid, you'd have to have a good case and judge's ruling on that one.

kali o. wrote:1) No, the landlord isn't required to do anything of the sort. Ample notice is all that is required.

Okay, granted, but it must be approved by a court, and the court may decide that the tenants either be allowed to relocate to a different apartment in the same complex or a different apartment.

Again, you cannot throw out a tenant without a court order.

kali o. wrote:2) You aren't entitled to any paperwork. And fyi, a listing contract costs me nothing and it easy to obtain - I can simply change my mind shortly after.

That still does not change the fact that you cannot throw out a tenant without a court order. And, if it was proven that only one person received a eviction notice due to a sale of the building, you would be in violation of the law (retaliatory eviction), and in deep shit in court.

kali o. wrote:You don't know everything Sine...in fact, you know incredibly little. If you weren't such a stubborn moron, maybe you'd learn something.

Well, you know, this conversation is telling. So far, I've pointed out laws from several states on several different manners. I'm just a guy with an Internet connection.

You're a landlord. You should be fluent in how landlord/tenant law works. However, I've seen you produce no such evidence that anything you say is correct. For all I know, the shit you're trying to "teach" me is in violation of your own laws. Are you saying that you're a landlord and you haven't even read your own landlord laws for your country/state?

Sine your post is too long... but I'll try to bridge some gaps here.

I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure that a Health Inspector can't just decide something's a health risk because they feel like it. I'm sure there are plenty of protocols and procedures and rules they have to follow where it's spelled out when and if something can be ruled as such.

That being said, Kali is arguing that having a smoky apartment is not something that can be classified as a health risk. There is no statute that says an apartment is not livable if the tenant below you smokes a lot and makes the place generally unpleasant to live in.

Continue

Tessian wrote:Sine your post is too long... but I'll try to bridge some gaps here.

I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure that a Health Inspector can't just decide something's a health risk because they feel like it. I'm sure there are plenty of protocols and procedures and rules they have to follow where it's spelled out when and if something can be ruled as such.

That being said, Kali is arguing that having a smoky apartment is not something that can be classified as a health risk. There is no statute that says an apartment is not livable if the tenant below you smokes a lot and makes the place generally unpleasant to live in.

Continue

Like he himself said, Sine is just a stupid know-it-all with a net connection and a bad case of 'I-cant-fucking-read'. I could repeat that the suggested degree of discretionary power does not lie with code inspectors (for what? a NINTH time?), I could explaining zoning laws/classification, I could define what private residence actually means, I could point out that that most residential tenancy disputes are not handled through a court but a council/representative (including evictions - when it gets to court, someone is seeking damages), I could notice that he once again failed to read (my original evictions examples were purposefully two seperate scenarios...learn to fucking read douchebag), etc. etc.

But why bother? So he can reply with another long drawn out post that is 99% filled with either erroneous information or just stupid shit that isn't relevant? Fuck him, some people deserve to remain ignorant.

kali o. wrote:I could also list off dozens of ways a tenant can royally fuck over a landlord

Please do so. They may prove useful in the future. Y'know, if you don't mind helping out a "pleb".

Why bother? He's never read the law on his own job. I'm tired of arguing when he's not going to bother with intelligent replies without any proof.

Black Lotus wrote:

kali o. wrote:I could also list off dozens of ways a tenant can royally fuck over a landlord

Please do so. They may prove useful in the future. Y'know, if you don't mind helping out a "pleb".

The Tenant Act in Ontario is geared towards the tenant, not the landlord. You basically have to burn down the house before you face any repurcussions (or rent increases)

Black Lotus wrote:

kali o. wrote:I could also list off dozens of ways a tenant can royally fuck over a landlord

Please do so. They may prove useful in the future. Y'know, if you don't mind helping out a "pleb".

"It would be dangerous to let the peasants have access to literature...we must keep them ignorant."

SineSwiper wrote:Why bother? He's never read the law on his own job. I'm tired of arguing when he's not going to bother with intelligent replies without any proof.

Here you go you fucking idiot:

http://www.smokefreehousing.ca

You can read up that site these little crybabies made up, it'll answer many of your stupid questions and correct a bunch of your assbackwards assumptions, so I don't have to waste my time and patience.

I googled for you...I shouldn't have to, as YOU are the moron entering this topic trying to correct me on shit I have 10+ years experience in. Stupid ignorant asshole.

SineSwiper wrote:Why bother? He's never read the law on his own job. I'm tired of arguing when he's not going to bother with intelligent replies without any proof.

Seriously Sine? You're THAT delusional these days??

Kali is an actual landlord with first hand knowledge and experience pertaining to all the laws and regulations pertaining to renting property. You, on the the other hand, don't know shit about the subject and think you know do because you googled some laws which you then misinterpreted... who do you think looks more credible right now?

Seriously, all your arguments are either a) misinterpretations of the laws you wiki'ed, or b) conjectures you made up based on your own opinion of how things should be.

I don't disagree with the points you were trying to make, but I can still easily tell your argument is flawed and wrong.

(Man I'm glad I own my own home.)

Tessian wrote:Kali is an actual landlord with first hand knowledge and experience pertaining to all the laws and regulations pertaining to renting property. You, on the the other hand, don't know shit about the subject and think you know do because you googled some laws which you then misinterpreted... who do you think looks more credible right now?

Gee, I have a legal argument with a landlord. I provide legal proof, and the landlord doesn't. Who looks more credible now?

Tessian wrote:Seriously, all your arguments are either a) misinterpretations of the laws you wiki'ed, or b) conjectures you made up based on your own opinion of how things should be.

I didn't "wiki" the laws. I read the official laws on the state congressional web sites. And no, I didn't "misinterpret" the laws either. Definitions and wording are exacting in nature on these laws, and I have pointed these out in previous posts.

Tessian wrote:I don't disagree with the points you were trying to make, but I can still easily tell your argument is flawed and wrong.

Prove it. Jesus, this is what I've been saying for several posts now. I'm wrong and I'm an idiot, but I guess you don't want to actually provide any proof to why I'm wrong.

Fuck, I spend several hours reading through laws from several states and having pointless arguments just to help out a friend, and I'm rewarded with 5-minute thoughtless answers. That's the last fucking time I'm going to spend any time debating anything.

SineSwiper wrote: Fuck, I spend several hours reading through laws from several states and having pointless arguments just to help out a friend, and I'm rewarded with 5-minute thoughtless answers. That's the last fucking time I'm going to spend any time debating anything.

That's not what you did/were doing. You were googling to argue with me, about a subject you are frankly ignorant about. I'll break it down once, in the simplest english I can muster, and you can either accept it as the way it is, sulk off or argue to a brick wall (I don't care).

- Private residences are exempt from anti-smoking legislation. All residential property is 'private residence' and "rules" (for lack of a better term) are at the sole discretion of the landlord (the exception to this is strata and co-op property, where they are usually operated under a council authority and subject to slightly different local laws. It should be noted that there is ZERO successful legal precident, to the best of my knowledge, for extending strata/co-op council smoking bylaws within the confines of a private unit, excluding portions under common property designation).

- Health code as it relates to housing is part of specific legilation [usually termed Public Health Act] - which is seperate from, for example, anti-smoking laws(which is why you should stop trying to merge the two in your head). Sanitation, pest control and air quality would be the specific areas that would relate to any tenancy issues. For CO2 levels to be at a level that are considered dangerous enough to warrant violation, the unit would literally need to be ON FIRE or the landlord would be providing a unit that is reliant on faulty interior ventilation ONLY (ie: no windows).

- All other "smoking" disagreements between landlord and tenant would likely be a matter of contract law and interpretation. The landlord is the sole decision maker as to whether his property allows smoking, pets, etc. This only relates to residential property (I thought this was a given, but you apparently seem confused as to the topic at hand), because commercial property falls under alternative sets of local laws, permits and zoning.

Sine, I'm sure there are subjects you know a lot about and I know nothing about. I hope one day we breach such a topic, and I get to google and interpret paragraphs and paragraphs of info incorrectly, spit it your face as 'proof' and put you in a position to either waste my time correcting all my erroneous assumptions or simply call me a fuckface - it'll let you appreciate just how annoying you are sometimes.

Well, that was the first time you attempted to bring some legal reasoning into the argument. Of course, at this point, I'm completely tired of arguing, and realizing that I just wasted several hours on some pointless bullshit.

SineSwiper wrote:Well, that was the first time you attempted to bring some legal reasoning into the argument. Of course, at this point, I'm completely tired of arguing, and realizing that I just wasted several hours on some pointless bullshit.

Pretty sure everything we post here is pointless bullshit and wasted time...besides, maybe you actually learned something (probably not).

And I offered no more legal reasoning than any of my other posts...it's probably because I used -. -'s have a way of making any position seem more official. Like:

Sine, through out this thread you have shown:

- a decided lack reading skill
- a stubborness to alter an incorrect assumption or standpoint
- hypocrisy
- that you are often simply a verbose ninny

See?