The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014 03 25 Public Hearing 502.3 WS-1 . ,� , Code Enforcement Division ios POLICE �a�� Case Number: 13-0029771 Location : 1017 Walnut Creek Cove Owner: CitiMortgage, Inc. Violation: IPMC 108.1.3 (Structure Unfit for Human Occupancy) Date of Service: March 7, 2014 Inspector - B. West ; .5 ,� , � Code Enforcement Division POLICE HOWL • The original complaint that the exterior walls on this house were cracked and large portions had fallen off was received in March of 2013 . • The case was heard by code board and was found to be in violation. The owners then contacted me advising they were in process of making repairs and had a contract with a builder 'to replace the exterior facing and repair the patio support. They asked for time to make repairs. • Those repairs were never made and the owners eventually stopped communicating with me in. The house was set for auction but was not sold and the deed remained in the name of the original owners. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE 1. ria�ios ► • In August 2013 it came to my attention that CitiMortgage Inc. was now listed as owner. • Between September and October 2013, I spoke with two representatives of CitiMortgage who insisted that the bank intended to make repairs and asked for time to accomplish this. I agreed to 30 days. Repairs were not made and subsequent calls to CitiMortgage representatives went unreturned. • On November 1 , 2013 a city inspector determined the house to be unsafe for human occupancy and posted a notice advising that permits and engineering plans were required before repairs could begin. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE ria�ios ► • Notice of Code Violation was mailed to CitiMortgage homeowners on November 5, 2013 giving them 10 days to correct the violation. According to the USPS, it was received and signed for on November 12, 2013 . There was no response to this or to phone messages I left. • Records show that on December 3, 2013, Code Officer Christi Flannigan responded to a complaint that work was being done on the house without proper permits. She reported making contact with a contractor who said he did not know about the notice posted by the building inspector and that she ordered If to cease work until the proper permits had been obtained. ; .5P , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE ria�ios ► • The case was set for Code Board Hearing on Jan 28, 2014 but, for administrative reasons, was pulled from that agenda to be reset at a later date. • On the evening of the hearing I met with an attorney representing CitiMortgage in the lobby of City Hall. She told me that permits had been applied for but the city had denied them. I told her I would check on the status of those permits. • I told her that I needed to see significant progress from CitiMortgage in making these repairs or I would have t0 schedule the case for code board hearing. She advised she understood and took my contact information. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE v HOWL • On Jan 29, 2014, I received a phone message from a Mr. Tas Smith advising he was assigned to resolve this case. • I made several attempts to contact Mr. Smith on Jan 29 and again on Jan 31 . Although I left numerous voice mail messages, I never received a call back from Mr. Smith • I also received an email on Jan 29 from a Chris Abercrombie identifying himself as the attorney assigned to this case and providing his contact information. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE v 110101 ► • On Jan 31 , 2014, I replied to Mr. Abercrombie' s email advising him of my unsuccessful attempts to contact Mr Smith and that it was urgent that I speak to someone in person to find out what their proposed time table might be for making repairs. • I further advised that I had checked with the city permitting department in reference to the permits I was told had been denied and found that the city has not denied any permits, that, in fact, there was no record of any permit request being submitted to the city. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE v 110101 ► • On Feb 2, 2014, having received no reply from Mr. Abercrombie and stilll unable to contact Mr Smith, I sent Mr. Abercrombie a second email detailing the situation with the property and advising him that I needed to know what CitiMortgage' s plans were going forward. • I advised him this was an urgent matter and I needed to speak with someone who could provide answers to the questions I had asked previously. ; .5 ,� , � Code Enforcement Division ' LIES HOWL • I provided Mr Abercrombie with contact information for city building officials and the Permitting department and repeated my contact information, including giving him my personal work schedule and cell phone number. • To date I have received no response to this email. ; .5 ,� , � Code Enforcement Division POLICE v 1101611 ► • On Feb 4, 2014, I received an email from a P. Yolanda Brown who identified herself as a "Final Title Coordinator" and employed by a firm called Morris Hardwick Schnieder, representing CtiMortgage. • Ms Brown provided me the same contact information for Mr. Tas Smith and the email addresses for approximately nine other individuals, any one of whom, she said, I could contact about the property. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division POLICE v HOWL • I replied that same day, advising Ms Brown that I had not received a call back from Mr. Smith despite repeated attempts. I advised her that I would be going forward with a Code Board hearing. To date I have received no reply to this email either. • In the interim, I discovered I was using an incorrect IPMC section number. I mailed a revised notice of code violation on February 26 which was received and signed for on March 10. • Notice of Code Board hearing was mailed on March 10, 2014. ; .5 ,� , � Code Enforcement Division POLICE HOWL V • No permits have been issued and no further work has been done on the house. • My numerous attempts to communicate with CitiMortgage and obtain information as to their plans for correcting these violations have resulted in my being constantly referred to other individuals none of whom provided any information on the plans to make repairs. • As of this date there has been no further communication from Mr. Abercrombie, Ms. Brown, Mr. Smith or anyone else with CitiMortgage, other than to acknowledge receipt of the notification of this hearing. ; .5 ,� , s Code Enforcement Division ii POLICE v W z s z� ek C 4 (7,4e- _ - I N`mb' 1 i iii PR m _ ' II I . . . , ..._ ,r____.___ lid a 1 ...,,..0„ ... .414 - mum inn. E . , ,...4u- --1,- i� 111 }, _ , _ ____ _ _ _ , ..„ ._..... Rear wall and chimney (taken 02-25-14) .,,,,p snr ,, � Code Enforcement Division iilis- LICE t .. . , 1 .1 . -A\ \ :\ I ' , . . ; t, ..„ A'' i 1 h i,5. µ ir' r` :A F ...____t• . . ......: , ,• �yt� Yet 1 tv.- I I i + ,k{ . 11\ Pho taken 02-25-14 s/.5 ,) , c Code Enforcement Division POU€F 11011,101 iy .. � _miiiiiserF - .• -- - - :t I 1 L i"iO4 h ±-; ' ',..- ,r joKe-fr • . "°. .,iotrito.- - Cig Picture taken 02-25-14 ; Code Enforcement Division POU€F 11011,101 ice 4? r � b Picture taken 03-11-14 Code Enforcement Division POU€F v 11011,101 4 10 /'n 10/ \4111\ Picture taken 03..-11-14 ; .5 ,p.,,, � Code Enforrcement Division POU€F v 11011,101 ► 4,11 . } 1 ill 4: . • . : . -ter- _ Picture taken 03-11-14 ; .5 ,� , � Code Enforcement Division POLICE v 1101611 ► I recommend CitiMorgage be given 30 days to obtain the proper permits and make all repairs necessary to correct the violation, and submit to any and all inspections required by city building officials. If the owners are subsequently found in non-compliance, I recommend a fine of $250.00 per day retroactive to November 1 , 2013 .