Is Landlord UDR's Injunction Against CA Journalist Unconstitutional?
Posted in the Costa Mesa Forum
#1 Sep 13, 2012
U.S. Supreme Court to Consider CA Consumer Fraud by Landlord UDR, the CA State Bar & DRE
On September 24, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court Will Consider a CA Journalist's Petition for Relief from Injunctions That Prevented Her From Warning CA Tenants and Consumers About Fraud Against Them; Thousands Deprived of Warnings Were Defrauded.
The Court will consider two state court injunctions issued against Baldwin in 2009 to prevent her from publishing reports and organizing unified petitions for redress on behalf of:
1. California consumers in foreclosure vulnerable to unlawful loan modification business practices of attorney members of the State Bar; realtor/mortgage members of the DRE; and officials from both who failed to intervene to prevent said fraud by its members; and
2. California tenants unaware of the illegal clauses contained in the California residential lease agreements of UDR, Inc.
The Court will also consider Baldwin's plea for restitution to consumers and tenants defrauded because the state court injunctions deprived them of her warnings.
The second petition for redress championed by Baldwin was on behalf of the California tenants of UDR, Inc. Baldwin announced her intention to spearhead a unified petition for redress in the form of a class action lawsuit against UDR, Inc. This lawsuit was to include intentional fraud by UDR against its tenants since UDR entered the California marketplace in 2004.
The violations of California law that formed the causes of action against UDR included:
a. early lease termination penalties as liquidated damages in violation of California Civil Code §1671;
b. excessive late fees in violation of California Civil Code §3302,§1671, and California Court of Appeal precedent;
c. illegal profits from a ratio utility billing system in violation of California Public Utilities Commission regulations prohibiting non-utilities from “selling” energy and water; and
d. illegally defers on-premises injury liability to its tenants via “hold harmless” clauses in violation of California Civil Code §1668.
e.… among many others.
UDR earns thirty-two percent (32%) of its revenue from its California portfolio as a direct result of the aforementioned fraud. It then uses this revenue to its advantage to (a) fund the growth of the balance of its national portfolio; (b) meet its obligation as a REIT to distribute 90% of its taxable income back to investors; and (c) directly benefits though a significant reduction in corporate taxes.
To read the entire press release and all supporting documents, go to PR Log at: http://www.prlog.org/11970244-us-supreme-cour...
Add your comments below
|YouTube video downloader?||13 hr||FayeDevel||1|
|***Santa Ana Music Forum***||19 hr||texas pete||9|
|Add a word drop a word (Nov '11)||Mon||Misty Fitch||66|
|Vagos motorcycle club targeted in Southern Cali... (Mar '06)||Sun||Jojo||4,816|
|Judge says Santa Ana 'mental captive' rape, kid...||Sun||ky man||1|
|Driver high on drugs sentenced for murdering OC...||Sun||ky man||1|
|shots fired today 5:30 am so coast plaza area f... (Apr '10)||Sat||Are||3|
Find what you want!
Search Costa Mesa Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC