-------
LANDLORD ANNA KIHAGI FORCED TO PAY $2.5 MILLION AFTER CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO UNFAIRLY CHANGED THE LAW DURING HER PENDING CASE
 |
| Real Estate Investor Ann Kihagi |
Nationwide -- "Government should never be allowed to play tricks with laws
as this would completely endanger our American legal system. Yet the
City of San Francisco's behavior is very suspect in this regard - the
city changed a key law during a pending case that allowed it to win key
aspects and millions" asserts Anna Kihagi.
The timing of their sudden change in law makes it suspicious that the intent was to sabotage Ms. Anna Kihagi's defense. She had already won a critical motion in March 2016, and the rulings in that case and smart arguments made by her solo Vietnamese attorney must have confounded the City's five attorneys.
By the time the City filed its case, the alleged "violations" had either already been resolved or were created by tenants' City-inspired efforts to flood the DBI; tenants even bragged that these complaints didn't matter but were being made to harass Ms. Kihagi.
Judge Angela Bradstreet therefore imposed over $2.5 million in fees for supposed violations that had "already been abated" not to mention they were fighting about failing to get permits to remodel kitchens and bathrooms similar to what 80% of other landlords do, and of course, no cases are filed against those other landlords.
Article On Anna Kihagi Continues After Sponsor's Message Below...
Farmers Pizza
Please Support Our Ad Sponsors Who Make This Community News Blog Possible. And Don't Forget To Tell Them You Saw Their Ad in The Scoop!
Farmers Pizza
Article On Anna Kihagi Continues Below...
This is the same as if you got a "fix it ticket" and fixed the car and paid the penalty, only to have the DMV decide afterwards that they want to file a case in court to take away your license. Any American would feel targeted by this.
Just as in the hypothetical DMV scenario, the City of San Francisco came after Ms. Kihagi - even though 24 of the 31 notices of violation (NOVs) had already been "officially abated" by the time the City's case was filed - all because they didn't like that this successful black business owner enforced contractual legal rights in leases. The only outstanding issues were those facetiously filed.
Prior to Judge Bradstreet's involvement, the presiding judge questioned the need for relief when only ONE Violation remained, in March of 2016. The violations that had been abated through the DBI's administrative process were "gone" and could not be the subject of a second abatement action in a civil suit by the City.
After the City realized that they could lose their case, in June 2016 the city authorized a change in law. The City argues that "...the municipal codes on their face make clear that the City Attorney has the authority to initiate a lawsuit to prove code violations and recover penalties regardless of what action DBI has taken."
In their appeal, the City therefore quoted from the recently renovated Building Code:
"102A.8 Remedies are Non-Exclusive.
Notwithstanding the provisions.. the City Attorney may institute civil proceedings for injunctive and monetary relief, including civil penalties, against a building owner for violations of the Municipal Code under any circumstances, without regard to whether a complaint has been filed or the building Official has issued a NOV or Administrative Order."
The City failed to mention, however, the infancy of the law: It was passed by the Board of Supervisors and certified by the Clerk on November 15, 2016; approved by the Mayor on November 22, 2016; and made effective January 1, 2017.
The City submitted no legislative history for the amendment, and was likely reaction to Kihagi's case. The city was trying to undertake a "second abatement action." Yet like most statutory amendments, this amendment was not retroactive. Rather, the City's behavior proved Defendants' own argument - that the law in effect at the time allowed the City two paths to abatement, administrative and judicial, but the City could not double-dip with already abated NOVs.
Outrageously, the Court of Appeal did not care about anything except the amendment's existence. Did a barely-timely and underhanded change help an already over-powerful government win? Is this justice?
Americans: If you believe this was unfair, please share and tweet this article. Laws can change when informed and passionate citizens call out abusive injustices.
For more information on Anna Kihagi & West 18th Properties, visit www.annekihagisf.com or follow her on Twitter @annekihagi1
Sponsor's Messages Below
Enjoy A Tasty Meal At The New Burger King In
St. Albans, New York
Experience This Modern, Spacious, And Affordable Place To Eat. For More Info Click Here
Give The Gift Of Beautiful And Affordable Photo Realistic Or Ethnic Art For The Holidays
World Class Sophisticated Art Can Portray Your Love This Holiday Season - Discover Exceptional Black Art, Get Exclusive Custom Framing, and Receive Expert Photography from Renowned Local Artist Click Here
Beautify Your Home and Accentuate Your Life - Discover Exceptional Black Art, Get Exclusive Custom Framing, and Receive Expert Photography from Renowned Local Artist Click Here
Checkout Similar Articles Below
Posted by community events coordinator, Nzinga Lonstein Austin, is a prolific blogger who writes on the entertainment industry and issues for people with developmental and physical challenges.She is presently in high school looking to have a career in video, film, and media. You can see more of her entertainment writing on Lonstein Movies.
About the Southeast Queens Scoop - is the premier website and only publication offering daily news and updates on the events, culture, issues, and is dedicated to the business and economic development in this largely black historic community.
Since you are here think about this please. Do You Want The Southeast Queens Scoop To Continue To Promote Empowering News and Events largely ignored by the corporate owned mainstream media in our area?
Since most local businesses don't have large ad budgets then please consider donating to ensure we can continue our media efforts. We appreciate all contributions ($5, $10, $15, $20, +) no amount is too small. Please donate now below or read more on donations.
No comments:
Post a Comment