The Gallery @ Noho Commons is adequate example of the apathetic attitude of a management company and that of Los Angeles officials that pride themselves on regulatory enforcement for the affordable housing dilemma that we a plagued with.
The building has effectively had tenants that have complained, petitioning for change on the serious issues such as:
1) Onsite residential management that would actually be on the premises 24/7.
2) Effective pest control and the eradication of rodents and trash accumulation.
3) The systematic code enforcement program (SCEP) fees being charged without proper registration of the units.
4) Regulatory forms not provided within the leases required by the California Tax Allocation Committee (CTCAC) for the affordable housing units.
5) Rental liability insurance required for some tenants and not required for others.
6) Proper passive security measures for the facility to alleviate continual thefts throughout the premises.
The Metro Department, has by way of Fairfield Management conveniently added a waiver for perspective tenants that is attached to the lease relieving them of any liability and / or accountability regarding the Metro line.
Lastly, but certainly not least, is an unforgivable violation of the Fair Employment & Housing laws and also a severe kick in the teeth for the North Hollywood police department that has by-passed this un-seen fraud unknowingly. While the NHPD is diligently arresting the narcotic offenders and seeing to the prostitution and other related crimes of the residents within the building.
The Fairfield Properties Management has clandestinely hired personnel that despite the exhaustingly thorough background checks they tout; have committed crimes against the applicants they have considered for the units.
Here is the scam scenario-
Fairfield leasing agents have been found to purport running a credit check on a perspective applicant only to indicate everbally that the credit is not substantial enough to allow for a move in.
After this is indicated the applicant desperate for a unit is contacted again on a private line and is told that they can still get a unit but the leasing agent will have to collect an additional varied $ amount usually ranging from $100 on up and this will allow the perspective applicant to have access to another individuals credit score that will be used to boost their eligibility for the unit.
There is a verbal affirmation or implication that the other individual is solid and that this additional amount is just an un-refundable amount required by the so-called solid person allowing their credit to be utilized. The applicant unknowingly puts faith in the leasing agent to do his/her job in an ethical fashion - and doesnt realize that this additional amount will not be recorded as part of the application process or that the leasing agent is NOT DOING THEM A FAVOR by way of a friend. The applicant sometimes not privy to California laws are taken in by unscrupulous leasing agents not audited by Fairfield.
The applicant is then told later after a pretense of running the credit of the other individual - that unfortunately they could not provide a supporting credit leg as a second on the lease, but the leasing agent will now take a larger deposit to get them in or they might be able to provide a co-signer of their own.
Fascinating isnt it! There is evidence to support these findings and warrant an investigation on the part of both Fair Housing and the District Attorneys office, however when the building tenants began to report these findings the bureaucratic red-tape as usual pushed a roll in front of such a profound finding and is allowing the inappropriate theft of applicants monies (esp. Minority-targeted fraud and the applicant discrimination process) to continue. The credit report fee and the application fees that prospective tenants are required to pay for any unit in the The Gallery @ Noho Commons should be uniform/equal and fair to all those involved. Fairfield Properties, with the promise of by-passing a procedural step and/or credit score to achieve full occupancy at any cost; continues to scam citizens. Are they not subject to federal and state mandated laws and protective measures? Additionally, why are some tenants allowed to pay monetary amounts to receive preferential treatment outside of the lease?
Rules and regulations have been avoided and abused by Fairfield Management as well as the state agencies that are set up to assist individuals when these management companies default in their obligation to the tenant. The Department of Building and Safety and the (Los Angeles Housing Department) is responsible for negating their duty to provide an up and running, diligent database for all the complaints received from this particular facility in the areas of: Maintenance, regulation of fees, pest control, fire safety, nuisance abatement, implied warranty of habitability and many more irregularities.
When a state has more than 68% of their residents as renters and law abiding constituents; there should be more advocacy in order to eradicate the abuse of such a rapidly increasing community of individuals with little or no representation.
0 comments