Colonel Obvious
1.6K posts

Colonel Obvious
@ColObviousSir
Investing, Real Estate, Economics, Law and Politics

BREAKING - A 92-page report by the California State Auditor has found that over $70 billion in taxpayer funds have been lost, including $2.5 billion in SNAP fraud, $24 billion on fighting homelessness, and $18 billion for a high-speed rail where not a single track has been laid.


Tiger’s first full swing back… 170 MPH BALL SPEED, 270 CARRY WITH THE 3-WOOD. SO UNBELIEVABLY BACK.


Will California Democrats be forced to vote for a Republican gubernatorial candidate? Restore San Diego founder @amyforsandiego says California Democrats are facing a disaster scenario as two Republicans lead in gubernatorial polling—potentially forcing Democrats to pick a Republican in the state’s two-candidate general election. “This is a NIGHTMARE for Democrats and it's a wonderful dream for Republicans that the top two candidates, according to a poll by the Democrats themselves, Steve Hilton is in number one and Chad Bianco is number two.” Watch The Matt Gaetz Show on YouTube TV Today!






"Female bodies are just as strong and fast and capable as male bodies." - State Senator Lindsay Williams in PA today If this were the case, why were women's sports created in the first place? They just say words and expect us to nod along.


“The weapon that has done the most for the conquest of Europe, for its colonization by Africa, for its Islamization, for the destruction of Europeans in Europe, for genocide by substitution, more than family reunification, more than widespread nocence, more than the migratory submersion itself, is the accusation of racism. It has paralyzed three hundred million people and made them accept the unacceptable, the worst that could happen to them: their own annihilation, their erasure as a civilization.” [March 25, 2019]








Do you want to know why rent is so expensive in LA? Why the application process takes so long? Why landlords want so much info from you? Here is a recent story: A family was referred to me for their eviction case. They were heading to a jury trial in one month and didn't have a lawyer, yet. They did all the paperwork and filing themselves, in-house to save on legal fees. And surprisingly, they did a great job. They filed the paperwork with LAHD. Gave proper notice to the tenants. I reviewed their paperwork and it was better quality than 90% of other eviction lawyers. I didn't see any viable way to dismiss the case on a technicality. As long as they were properly represented in trial, the family was going to win the eviction. They did everything by the book. Followed all the local rules. Gave all the necessary notices. The family told me the judge ordered the parties to mediate at the first court appearance. The family attended the mediation in court without a lawyer. The tenant was provided a lawyer by the city, for free. At the mediation the lawyer for the tenants offered this settlement: 1. 4 months to vacate the property 2. Cash to leave, paid upfront 3. Waiver of all owed rent 4. Sealed record They rejected the offer, of course. Why would they accept this? The family then asked me a great question. "What is our best case scenario with you in trial?" Based on my review, I gave them my most realistic estimate of the best case scenario in trial: 1. Both parties announce ready at the next trial date (1 month away) and trial takes 3 days. We win the trial. 2. Sheriff locks out the tenant 75 days after the trial. 3. about 110 days to possession. 4. Gave them an estimate cost for fees/prep time. 5. No viable collection of back rent, tenants had no assets. Obviously, this was the best case scenario. It could be worse. Trial can be delayed. While I was confident we are going to win, juries are unpredictable. This is where we had a surreal moment of collective clarity. The settlement offer they rejected is basically their best case scenario if they win the trial. This was not a coincidence. The attorney for the tenants asked for pretty much the same amount I quoted them for my fees. The lawyer for the tenants knew the family had to hire a lawyer for a jury trial. The lawyer knows it takes the sheriff 2-3 months to lockout after a judgment. The lawyer knows it's hard (and expensive) to collect against tenants with no assets. State and local government created a system in which cases take forever to litigate, eviction laws are extremely complex and technical, easy to dismiss cases, only one side has to pay a lawyer, and worst of all, possession enforcement takes 60-90 days instead of 5. And it's all getting worse. The leverage for the tenants is systemic. It's by design. Why would the tenants make any other offer? The landlords are left with no real options but a shitty settlement. There are no real choice. Even when you do everything right, you still lose. Tenants don't pay rent during evictions. They had no viable way to win the trial. There were no habitability issues. The landlords posted all the notices. Never raised the rent. Didn't retaliate. The landlords did everything right. And the tenants still win. The mother looked at me and asked "our base case in trial is the same as the shitty settlement offer? Are you telling me we should have taken the offer we rejected?" I didn't know how to respond.



Rents dropping across the country…







