Blacklisting Settlement

[NYHawk]

link

[HardKnocks]

I haven't been able to ascertain if we all get our listings deleted if this thing is successful. I'd rather have that than the hundred bucks.

Or do we just get to have the results listed? That wouldn't really help much. The fact that you're there at all is enough for most LLs to deny you an apartment. I want OFF that stupid blacklist because I didn't do a thing wrong!!

[Aubergine]

Plaintiffs' counsel in White has said that expungement of the reporting agency's records would have been impossible to win at trial. So it is important to note that the settlement agreement provides for expungement in some cases, at least:

"if the consumer provides FAS with a letter from the Petitioner-Landlord or a court order, decision or finding in which it is stated that the case was devoid of merit, brought in error or the like, FAS will expunge that case from its database and not report such case in the future."

(Settlement Agreement, page 12.)

I have no idea what kind of decision or finding "the like" is supposed to cover, but one would hope that FAS will not want to go to the mat to deny expungement requests that arguably meet these somewhat vague criteria.

[HardKnocks]

But it doesn't always appear in court records when a case has no merit. If the LL's lawyers, in your little hallway pow-wow before you see the judge, realize the error of their ways and discontinue the case, you just end up signing a stip and that's it. There's nothing to prove you were railroaded! It's not like they present you with a Hallmark Card saying "Sorry we dragged you into court for no reason..." afterwards!!

I'd be willing to bet that most of us have no proof, in writing or otherwise, that we never should have been in housing court to begin with.

[TenantNet]

Bleary, I think you have an excellent point. Many of these landlords bring tenants to court for trumped-up reasons, and if/when tenants show up (so they can't get a default) or if they have copies of checks, I've seen many of these cases simply discontinued with a stip. If these cases are getting reported, then the LL's malfeasance could revisit them in the future, even if there was no merit to the claim. There should be some clarification on this, or effort to require FAS to expunge records without actual proof of guilt or liability.

[Anna]

There are serious problems w/ the way most HC judges & their staff handle cases such as Bleary's. They 'discontinue' them instead of 'dismissing' them. A dismissal in the courts computer should result in First Amer or any other blacklisted removing the entire record (because a court agreed that the case had no merit, whether due what the courts call 'technicalities' (bad service, no service, invalid predicate notice, wrong party suing T, etc) or because the whole cause of action lacked merit ('no such cause of action exists in law') such as suing for having one roommate. I know of one T who was sued 3 times in 2 years, all totally meritless; only one was dismissed...

Another problem w/ this aspect of tne settlement is that most Ts who withhold rent to get repairs do get the repairs done. Sometimes they even get an abatement. This is usally thru a settlement where the T grants a 'judgment of possession' to LL and often agrees to pay the arrears before the LL has completed the repairs. So the HC computer shows 'judgment for LL', when the truth is T got what he wanted/needed.

[Anna]

New objections to settlement:

1. $100 per person?:
SHOULD BE $$$ per lawsuit. and s/b more than $100/per.
Or a lot more: person w/ 3 evictions has paid more than $300 in 'application fees' only to be denied again and again and again...

2. give FAR the last 4 digits of social security number? are they kidding (3x T has very rare name, or at least very rare spelling variation of name, last 4 digits will ID him to the world...)? even Fisrt Amer doesn't have Ts SS#'s: they have the HC INDEX NUMBER: that's what Ts should be required to provide to 'expunge' the record.

link to TN's blacklist post:
http://www.tenant.net/.WWW/ubbgraphics/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001719

[Anna]

Two more objections to this settlement.

1. Jiggett's tenants:
If memory serves, in order to be granted Jiggett's benefits (increase from paltry rental assistance below actual rent by welfore to meet actual rent of Ts w/dependent children), Ts (mostly women) must first be sued for eviction... hardly a reflection on Ts or their LLs.

2. 9/11 survivors:
If memory serves, in order to collect post-9/11 FEMA rental assistance, Ts had to first be SUED (or at least be served a notice demanding rent), then meet the other application requirements. To their disgrace, some LLs thru their lawyers, said many times IN OPEN COURT that they refused to wait for the unpaid rent until the FEMA decision on the Ts' apllication came thru. To their credit, most judges found ways to prevent these LLs from leaving Resolution Part and heading over to Trial Part... and/or granted extensions of the stips until after the FEMA money came in...

really bad 9/11 case: T told LL in Dec 2001 that the job he lost in the towers on 9/11 would not be replaced & he was running short of funds & would LL please accept partial payments until he got a new job? (CO reinstated only about 1/2 the jobs lost, due to their loss of clients). LL then proceeded to issue Rent Demands every single month; T borrowed $$ & paid before LL filed Petition, every month. LL file Petition in April, AFTER receiving payment for April. You guessed it: this case was discontinued, not dismissed. ps: FEMA $$ came thru 3rd week of May.

<small>[ April 14, 2006, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: Anna ]</small>

[Anna]

sorry: double-posted...

<small>[ April 14, 2006, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Anna ]</small>

[HardKnocks]

People like me (taken to HC for supposed non-payment 3 months AFTER having moved out, when I had assigned my lease and LL had new tenant before I even moved out), are in that stupid database because a totally meritless case was filed--in the WRONG COURT, no less.

My case was "discontinued," I signed a stip saying I wouldn't attempt to get my deposit back (I had left it for my last month). What will happen to me? My LL was 100% in the wrong and didn't even argue that--even with Borah representing. But I have no official proof of that. And I've been unable to rent a RS apt. since.

And a hundred bucks doesn't help me at all. Keep your hundred bucks. I want off that list because I don't belong there. It's not right that an index number blackens your name for good; guilty simply because you were accused. The case doesn't have to be proven or even argued! In what other area of law is this acceptable?

[TenantNet]

You can certainly take it up with the attorney on the class-action matter. His name is listed on the notice.

My understanding of the way class action matters work is that a class is defined, i.e., all tenants who experienced x, y and z. When and if a settlement is proposed -- often to avoid years of litigation and appeals -- then no liability is admitted, the members of the class have the opportunity to share in the proceeds, which may not be that much. Of course the attorneys get a chunk and one can argue it's appropriate or not.

I haven't read all of this one, but in general with class actions, an individual may share in the proceeds, or decline to do so and still retain the right to sue as an individual.

So here (whether or not it's fair), I would think that any individual tenant has the right to sue to have the name removed from the list. Whther or not that would prove to be an impossible thing to do, I don't know. This CA suit may have put in place the legal groundwork for that though.

[Anna]

Originally posted by TenantNet:
I haven't read all of this one, but in general with class actions, an individual may share in the proceeds, or decline to do so and still retain the right to sue as an individual.

Yes, individuals can opt-out: the deadline to do so is 5/16.

see 'important dates' on both the official webside & the copy posted here on TNForum.

here it is again.

Important Dates

5/16/06 - Proof of Claim Form must be received by the Claims Administrator postmarked no later than May 16, 2006

5/16/06 - Any request for exclusion from the class must be received by the claims administrator postmarked no later than May 16, 2006.

5/16/06 - Claimants who wish to object to the settlement must file with the court and serve on counsel for the parties a written statement objecting to the settlement and a written notice of intention to appear at the Fairness Hearing and object no later than June 16, 2006.

6/16/06 – The Fairness Hearing will be held at the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007-1312.

[HardKnocks]

I have moved again since my ordeal (which was 3 years ago), so I didn't even get a notice telling me I am part of the the class. I only read about it here. I know I have to fill out the form to be included, right?

Anna, you know Jamie Fishman, don't you? Can you bring up some of these issues to him?

[Anna]

Originally posted by Bleary-eyed tenant:
I didn't even get a notice telling me I am part of the the class. I only read about it here. I know I have to fill out the form to be included, right?

Anna, you know Jamie Fishman, don't you? Can you bring up some of these issues to him?

1. In a class-action settlement that involves potentially 3,500,000 tenants in NYC, it is unlikely that FAR would agree to notify each individual T who was sued (over 300,000 per year for the past ten years in NYC). Typically, FAR would be required to publish the notice. Read the docs to learn the specifics. Indeed, it has been in various media over the past month.

2. Why not email this thread to Fishman yourself?
see that envelope just above left of the body of the thread???
get Jamie's email from the banner ads across the top of page... or from their website: http://tenantslaw.net/

[HardKnocks]

OK, Anna, I have emailed it.