Alleged squatters say they paid rent

The 100 block of Vallejo's C Street was nice and quiet -- until what some neighbors say are squatters moved into a bank-owned home there. Full Story
First Prev
of 6
Next Last
TRASH TALKING

Vallejo, CA

#1 Dec 23, 2009
This sounds like a complete scam to me. Ask the rentors to show proof that their $5000.00 was deposited, and by whom? I bet they all just caught onto rumors of what have been happening and said hey, let pretend that we are renters that got taken advantage of. No one would put down a $5000 deposit to rent a rat trap like they are living in, there are plenty of other places to live which would be cheaper, this sounnd like a bunch of bull. Its easy to get a rental agreement and fake up the information, have them show proof of who cashed their check.
MyTown

Vallejo, CA

#2 Dec 23, 2009
As usual the department that is charged with issues like this doesn't have a clue on how to deal with it. Over the past year Shakoor Grantham has had more excuses than solutions to problems that come to light in this paper. When will someone look into her ability to supervise a department?

She constantly whines about not enough staffing. Look around you, lady the entire city is having to more with less and are able to do so. Perhaps it's the leadership that is lacking. Perhaps it's easier to look to the heavens while excusing the failings of your department.
It's the same old mantra..."give me more money and I'll be able to do what you ask." There is no money, DO SOMETHING, anything and just keep plugging along. All you offer is agreement that this is a huge problem, but you don't have enough staff...or money... to do the job.

Perhaps, just perhaps...you should retire and maybe a recent retiree will come back and be ble to do the job...you can't seem to do.

Enough with the excuses.
Wanglow

United States

#3 Dec 23, 2009
Agreed; Grantham is exactly what's wrong about our union-controlled, left wing "liberal" city government. There are a multitude of code violations all over town and although our local charter provides clear and enforceable remedys for all these problems (loitering, trash, illegally parked cars, sub-standard or unpermitted work)this department head does very little except pass the blame onto the city attorney or excuses HERSELF due to lack of staff. If these PUBLIC employees refuse to do their job then our mayor and council has to step in and appoint someone who will. The Municipal code clearly provides that this sort of activity to be stopped by tagging the property and prohibiting it's illegal use, period. These scammers must be removed and LOCKED OUT immediately or we should not have to pay another tax dollar to support this useless and wasteful agency. I may have to run for Mayor if this crap doesn't stop.
Muy Town Too

United States

#4 Dec 23, 2009
Hey let them be there not hurting no body, do you not want them there because there BLACK??RACIST!!

Since: Jun 09

Walnut Creek, CA

#6 Dec 23, 2009
Wanglow wrote:
Agreed; Grantham is exactly what's wrong about our union-controlled, left wing "liberal" city government. There are a multitude of code violations all over town and although our local charter provides clear and enforceable remedys for all these problems (loitering, trash, illegally parked cars, sub-standard or unpermitted work)this department head does very little except pass the blame onto the city attorney or excuses HERSELF due to lack of staff. If these PUBLIC employees refuse to do their job then our mayor and council has to step in and appoint someone who will. The Municipal code clearly provides that this sort of activity to be stopped by tagging the property and prohibiting it's illegal use, period. These scammers must be removed and LOCKED OUT immediately or we should not have to pay another tax dollar to support this useless and wasteful agency. I may have to run for Mayor if this crap doesn't stop.
Run Wanglow Run! You can P!SS off the holly rollers and the gay floks all at the same time.
CHRISSY

Berkeley, CA

#7 Dec 23, 2009
Wanglow wrote:
Agreed; Grantham is exactly what's wrong about our union-controlled, left wing "liberal" city government. There are a multitude of code violations all over town and although our local charter provides clear and enforceable remedys for all these problems (loitering, trash, illegally parked cars, sub-standard or unpermitted work)this department head does very little except pass the blame onto the city attorney or excuses HERSELF due to lack of staff. If these PUBLIC employees refuse to do their job then our mayor and council has to step in and appoint someone who will. The Municipal code clearly provides that this sort of activity to be stopped by tagging the property and prohibiting it's illegal use, period. These scammers must be removed and LOCKED OUT immediately or we should not have to pay another tax dollar to support this useless and wasteful agency. I may have to run for Mayor if this crap doesn't stop.
SO WE AGREE THEN THE OWNERS ARE THE ACCOUNTABLE PARTY....NO??????SOUNDS LIKE THE CITY SHOULD START THERE ...WHAT IS THAT POSESSION AND 9/10 OF THE LAW THING ...??? DID U VOTE YET ???http://bestofthebaytv.com/v iew/783
Carlitos Way

Pleasanton, CA

#8 Dec 23, 2009
When you allow a segment of our population to exist without personal responsibility by sending them rent, checks, foodstamps, and bus passes while they sit on their porch all day, you create a society that cant compete with the rest of us. Dont let the man keep you down....
GlitterDome

San Rafael, CA

#10 Dec 23, 2009
Vallejo’s code enforcement is a joke and has always been a joke!!!! I work in an office that receives code violations; such as noise ordinances, peeing in public, loitering and drinking in public, and we refer these violations to the lower court to process the FINES!. I believe some of these individuals who are loitering and drinking in front of businesses are probably already on probation. If Code Enforcement worked along with law enforcement (the police and the probation enforcement departments) similar to San Rafael, these misfits wouldn’t be out on the streets. A city can enforce any ordinance; for example, the Happy Frogs ( an indoor playground for children), Vallejo should pass a no-loitering, alcohol-free and drug-free ordinance within a couple hundred feet of an establishment b/c it’s a place where children meet. This would rid some of those misfits hanging around the Town House and that stupid mini mart on the corner. When Vallejo cleans up its image then it will attract businesses.
CHRISSY

Berkeley, CA

#11 Dec 23, 2009
GlitterDome wrote:
Vallejo’s code enforcement is a joke and has always been a joke!!!! I work in an office that receives code violations; such as noise ordinances, peeing in public, loitering and drinking in public, and we refer these violations to the lower court to process the FINES!. I believe some of these individuals who are loitering and drinking in front of businesses are probably already on probation. If Code Enforcement worked along with law enforcement (the police and the probation enforcement departments) similar to San Rafael, these misfits wouldn’t be out on the streets. A city can enforce any ordinance; for example, the Happy Frogs ( an indoor playground for children), Vallejo should pass a no-loitering, alcohol-free and drug-free ordinance within a couple hundred feet of an establishment b/c it’s a place where children meet. This would rid some of those misfits hanging around the Town House and that stupid mini mart on the corner. When Vallejo cleans up its image then it will attract businesses.
MERRY CHRISTMAS GLITTER DOME....WISHING YOU WELL ;)
Really

San Leandro, CA

#12 Dec 23, 2009
More of the Obama(D) freeloaders?
C Streeter

Petaluma, CA

#13 Dec 23, 2009
Muy Town Too wrote:
Hey let them be there not hurting no body, do you not want them there because there BLACK??RACIST!!
There's only one black guy living there. The rest are a bunch of white trash. So quit with the racist crap.

BTW, I'd love to know how this guy goes to school, since only one of them owns a car and goes to work sporadically. The rest of them, when they go out, ride around in a beat up old Winnebago.

One more thing, I think this guy should file a complaint with his Architecture/Interior Design/med school/law school, whatever he's attending. His education has failed him. What kind of idiot would send a $5,000 check to a PO Box in Nevada!? Yah, right! Such BS!!

The C Street neighborhood doesn't want these people around because based on what we know. They are living here illegally, and therefore, that makes them people who have no respect for neither the law nor personal property.

No thanks. Not in our neighborhood!

P.S. And to the person who said they are living in a rat trap. By no means is this house a rat trap. It's actually one of the nicer homes on the block.
C Streeter

Petaluma, CA

#14 Dec 23, 2009
Woops. Didn't mean to post that twice. Bad board etiquette. My apologies.
CHRISSY

Berkeley, CA

#15 Dec 23, 2009
C Streeter wrote:
<quoted text>
There's only one black guy living there. The rest are a bunch of white trash. So quit with the racist crap.
BTW, I'd love to know how this guy goes to school, since only one of them owns a car and goes to work sporadically. The rest of them, when they go out, ride around in a beat up old Winnebago.
One more thing, I think this guy should file a complaint with his Architecture/Interior Design/med school/law school, whatever he's attending. His education has failed him. What kind of idiot would send a $5,000 check to a PO Box in Nevada!? Yah, right! Such BS!!
The C Street neighborhood doesn't want these people around because based on what we know. They are living here illegally, and therefore, that makes them people who have no respect for neither the law nor personal property.
No thanks. Not in our neighborhood!
P.S. And to the person who said they are living in a rat trap. By no means is this house a rat trap. It's actually one of the nicer homes on the block.
HEY C STREETER ANSWER THIS ARE THEY THE ONLY ONES ON THE BLOCK WHO HAVE VIOLATED THE LAW....I AM WILLING TO BET THAT IN THE PRIVACY OF EVEN C STREET HOMES NO EVERYONE IS LAW ABIDING.....ARE U WILLING TO BET THE OPPOSITE???? AND COULD U VOTE
Dats Right

Lafayette, CA

#17 Dec 23, 2009
Rat trap -- nice house, it doesn't matter. Once the PG&E is turned on the squatter becomes a legal tenant, and eviction is the only way to get rid of them.

A similar problem happened in the Heritage District. When the Sheriff threw the squatters out, they left behind 3 different types of bullets all of which were hollow point. Additionally, some of the squatters moved directly from San Quentin into that house.

People let the legal process take care of the squatters. Don't engage the squatters as you don't have a clue as to what type of person you're dealing with.
Walk a Mile

Vallejo, CA

#18 Dec 23, 2009
Muy Town Too wrote:
Hey let them be there not hurting no body, do you not want them there because there BLACK??RACIST!!
The neighbors are of all colors, religions, and ethnicities on that block. It's not about racism, it's about breaking the social and legal codes that we all agree to live by as citizens of this country.
Concerned

Sonoma, CA

#19 Dec 23, 2009
What I am concerned about is if the city council allows the code enforcement department to pass such an ordinance,then they are only a step or two from being able to cite you(the home owner)when and if you don't cut your grass or haul away your tree trimmings as fast as they would like.Lets look for ways to help the situation not weigh it down with fines or citations
CHRISSY

Berkeley, CA

#20 Dec 23, 2009
Walk a Mile wrote:
<quoted text>
The neighbors are of all colors, religions, and ethnicities on that block. It's not about racism, it's about breaking the social and legal codes that we all agree to live by as citizens of this country.
AND AS A CIVIL SOCIETY THERE IS STRUCTURE IN PLACE TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES IS THERE NOT???? TO ADVOCATE MORE ENFORCEMENT OF THESE LAW IS KEY...IF WE ARE TO GAIN ANY GROUND .....SPEAKING OF GAINING GROUND ...DID U VOTE....PLEASE SUPPORT THE CAUSE :)
Pepper

Petaluma, CA

#21 Dec 23, 2009
CHRISSY wrote:
<quoted text>
HEY C STREETER ANSWER THIS ARE THEY THE ONLY ONES ON THE BLOCK WHO HAVE VIOLATED THE LAW....I AM WILLING TO BET THAT IN THE PRIVACY OF EVEN C STREET HOMES NO EVERYONE IS LAW ABIDING.....ARE U WILLING TO BET THE OPPOSITE???? AND COULD U VOTE
CHRISSY--IT SEEMS YOUR CAPS LOCK IS STUCK!!

You missed the point. It's not about what's unknown. It's about what's known. The point is the neighbors, the police, the bank, the realtor, code enforcement, and now even the squatters know they are breaking the law. Yet, the squatters remain in the house, indigent and confrontational. If other known illegal activity was going on in the neighborhood it would be reported.
CHRISSY

Berkeley, CA

#22 Dec 23, 2009
Pepper wrote:
<quoted text>
CHRISSY--IT SEEMS YOUR CAPS LOCK IS STUCK!!
You missed the point. It's not about what's unknown. It's about what's known. The point is the neighbors, the police, the bank, the realtor, code enforcement, and now even the squatters know they are breaking the law. Yet, the squatters remain in the house, indigent and confrontational. If other known illegal activity was going on in the neighborhood it would be reported.
NOT STUCK FRIEND....BUT THANKS....
I DIDNT MISS THE POINT IS JUST HAVE ANOTHER ANGLE.....IF THE POLICE AND THE BANK AND CODE ENFORCEMENT ARE ON IT THEN I AM SURE IT WILL BE DEALT WITH ....BUT THESE THINGS TAKE TIME ...OBVIOUSLY THEY HAVE SOME REASON WHY THEY ARE STILL THERE.....???? WHAT DO U THINK THAT IS ???? NOT ALL ACTIVITY IS IS KNOWN I LIVED ON B STREET FOR NEARLY A DECADE I KNOW THOSE HILLS HAVE EYEZ :) OH AND WOULD YOU BE CONFRONTATIONAL I THE ROLES WHERE REVERSED ????
C Streeter

Petaluma, CA

#23 Dec 23, 2009
CHRISSY wrote:
<quoted text>
HEY C STREETER ANSWER THIS ARE THEY THE ONLY ONES ON THE BLOCK WHO HAVE VIOLATED THE LAW....I AM WILLING TO BET THAT IN THE PRIVACY OF EVEN C STREET HOMES NO EVERYONE IS LAW ABIDING.....ARE U WILLING TO BET THE OPPOSITE???? AND COULD U VOTE
Well, Chrissy, you take the gold star for the dumbest argument of the day. Congratulations. I'm trying to wrap my head around how one could compare those who work hard to pay their rent or mortgage, to those who illegally occupy a property. See Chrissy, we didn't have to do any investigative work to figure out whether they are law abiding citizens or not.

And could "U" vote? Really, Chrissy? So is it your paranoid assumption that all people are innate lawbreakers? Or did I strike a chord with that "white trash" comment?

I think my quota of arguing with stupid people has been filled for the day. Thank you for that. I'm done.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bank of New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Paulson Distances Himself From A.I.G. Payments (Jan '10) Dec 10 Swedenforever 13
5 Things to Know About Big Banks, the Federal R... Nov 30 Andarz Abedini 5
The Real Deal-Real Estate update Nov 19 Mikelintro 2
Senate Panel to Hold Hearing on Regulators' Tie... Nov '14 Le Jimbo 2
Speed read: The juiciest bits from Timothy Geit... (May '14) May '14 okimar 4
Real Estate Foreclosures 9/15/13 (Sep '13) Sep '13 A Justday 2
US DOJ Charges Sinovel With IP Theft From AMSC (Jul '13) Jul '13 Jack Kelly 1
More from around the web