In this week’s transcribed podcast, attorney Dennis Block and Co-Host Zachary Lawrence of Parkside Property Management, discuss the law involving Landlord Tenant issues.
Below is the complete podcast as well as the transcription. In this episode they talk about:
1. Privacy issues in recording conversation.
2. Discrimination Issues
3. Comfort animals -Rooster
4. Costa Hawkins Law
5. Pet Deposits
6. Grounds to deny or accept an applicant.
Full Transcript Below:
Zachary: [00:00:00] And every one of this is a live ah. what are we calling this Dennis screencast, broadcast.
Dennis: [00:00:05] I would say it’s a live video pod cast.
Zachary: [00:00:08] The live video podcast of the landlord tenant radio show this is the first time you folks will be hearing this both on audio and video. I’m not sure that you would prefer me on video rather than just the audio. Having said that it’s always a pleasure to be here. And today is May the 4th 2017. I’m here with my friend and mentor and eviction expert Dennis block. Dennis how are you.
Zachary: [00:00:34] Zach I am doing great. And you know what. For the first time the audience is actually getting to see what you look like.
Dennis: [00:00:43] Is that good news or bad?
Zachary: [00:00:43] I’m going to tell the audience a little story about how I know that Zackham Street doesn’t want to know this. I don’t want to know about Section 8. No listen I met Zach. Zach he said be my baby sitter of it and. But in any event we have become friends later in life and Zach of course is the premier property management company of Parkside one two three and we have this podcast that hopefully we’re going to be doing at least a couple of times a month and we go over questions and answers dealing with landlord tenant issues.
Zachary: [00:01:18] Absolutely. OK so let’s get right to it by the way welcome everybody to the first live landlord tenant radio podcast Dennis. You’re lovely and very knowledgeable associate we’re not. We’re discussing issues of privacy. And tell me Dennis if you’re a landlord if you have a conversation with your tenant. Tell me under what circumstances you may record that conversation and use it in a proceeding for an unlawful detainer.
Dennis: [00:01:49] Well under California law you are allowed to record in conversation but the person must know that you’re recording them.
Zachary: [00:01:56] Stop right there. Now where is there an expectation of privacy and where is there not for example you you’re the landlord on the tenant. And we’re in the common area on the property by the garage public public property.
Zachary: [00:02:09] OK. And we have a conversation and something that I say in the tenant is very valuable to you to use. And are you proceeding. Can you use that or are you.
Dennis: [00:02:19] Well I certainly can tell the conversation in the legal proceedings with regard to what conversation we had with the issue is that there’s a specific California law that says that you’re not allowed to surreptitiously record somebody. And it’s considered a felony.
Zachary: [00:02:36] OK. Forgive me Dennis. What does that might be in California law. So are you saying that there is an expectation of privacy on public property in California.
Dennis: [00:02:47] There might not be an expectation of privacy on public property like if you’re in a restaurant or you’re walking on the street and someone overhears the conversation of two people intending to rob a bank. But the answer is dealing with what the law states and the law clearly states that you’re not allowed to surreptitiously record somebody can you relay the conversation of course. But in terms of recording the conversation the person has to know that you are doing that act regardless of if it’s on public property or private property no matter where.
Dennis: [00:03:23] That’s California law my good friend.
Zachary: [00:03:25] OK. OK Dennis. Moving right along. We receive a rent check in the month of April. For May rent for a tenant. And there was a little note attached that said. Please hang on to this check until May the 1st. You will not be negotiable until that time. What is the landlord’s duty so far as either a hole in that check or b sending it back.
Dennis: [00:03:53] Of course the landlord could send it back but I don’t know of any business reason why the landlord just wouldn’t hold the check until May 1st.
Zachary: [00:04:00] He doesn’t want to be responsible for someone else’s non-negotiable check.
Dennis: [00:04:05] That’s why you interrupted me. I my is I am freaking out I’m going to have this podcast if you interrupt you ok.
Zachary: [00:04:12] I stand corrected. Go ahead please. Just kidding.
Dennis: [00:04:15] But in any event of course the landlord has the right to send it back because it is a non negotiable instrument and that it is postdated. But again I don’t see you ask me this question when I was driving home.
Dennis: [00:04:28] You called because you’re always asking for advice even when we’re not doing that. Thank you for the plug ins. Well you know least we should get legal information. But the bottom line is is that there is no reason practical reason why the Lamour just can’t hold onto the check and deposit it on a first.
Zachary: [00:04:44] But my question was in your instant you’re a lawyer you have a hard time getting gifts you. It is a duty for the landlord to hold that check.
Dennis: [00:04:53] The landlord has a right to return the check to the tenant and to tell the tenant to send me a check when I have the ability to cash it.
Zachary: [00:05:02] OK I’ll take that as a note that the landlord has no duty to hold a check that is not negotiable and post dated. Do I have my facts straight. You do have your facts straight.
Zachary: [00:05:13] OK. Thank you very much. OK. All right Dennis you write a very very informative question and answers article in each month’s apartment owners association magazine. It looks like this ladies and gentlemen yes they know what a magazine looks like. I mean you know I mean if there were a centerfold you can hold it up but just don’t put the front for the magazine.
Dennis: [00:05:34] We have a camera now. So I was figuring I would show them something I’m looking at you go and show them.
Zachary: [00:05:40] Show them to show that the magazine.
Dennis: [00:05:42] This is the apartment owners association magazine and I do write a monthly column and doing it now for over 25 years and it’s the questions and answer column and everybody gets a lot of enjoyment out of that because you do learn a lot about landlord tenant law and it’s on page 36 by the way this month.
Zachary: [00:06:00] Now Dennis we are going to get to that. OK. But I want to play you something. What are your bite. That was used by a city councilman named Pierre Lopez who is running and he’s running for city council in New York and it has to do with his platform about landlords. And again this is a New York if a candidate for New York City Council. I’d like to play this set. I’d like to play the sound bite for you and I’d like to get your reaction. Here we go. This is my right here. [inaudible.
Dennis: [00:07:18] A good. Would you like me to comment. That’s why I play. It’s pure racism. What else could it be. It’s person that is denigrating a group of people. And I don’t even think it’s worth commenting on.
Zachary: [00:07:36] OK well if your question is now the time when language such as that. Might be for lack of a better word appropriate. And again you know let’s be candid with each other Dennis I know that you’re a big Donald Trump fan and he did get the ball rolling by denigrating Mexicans denigrating people from the Middle East denigrating women. And I believe this is relevant. Are we in a climate any a political climate right now where basically it’s OK to be racist.
Dennis: [00:08:12] First of all I vehemently disagree with your categorization of Donald Trump he didn’t do any of those items so that you kind of sense that Donald Trump did not.
Zachary: [00:08:22] Place a ban on Muslims.
Dennis: [00:08:24] He did not he did not.
Dennis: [00:08:27] He placed a ban on people coming from certain countries and there are 30 or 40 countries that are predominantly Muslim and those weren’t on the list. But I really think that we’re getting far afield for a Fenmore tenant there. QUESTION So let’s move on to the question of my good friend.
Zachary: [00:08:44] OK thank you very much. OK. Question number one why won’t Danise answer any of my questions. Question number two the world has just come in saying this is a question from the Q When he called for. The world has just become insane. I allowed it tended to have a daughter when she moved into the unit. She has now presented me with a note from a doctor the note states that due to her emotional state she needs two cats and an additional dog as well.
Dennis: [00:09:18] The law is insane. Politicians pass these laws but with little thought that. The people who they are passing them for are going to abuse the situation and make up anything and have a doctor write any note that they need in order for their need to have an animal. Last week we took in a case where a tenant got a letter from a doctor. Saying that she needed an emotional comfort animal and the Comfort Animal ready her ex-husband. No I did not know wasn’t her ex-husband. It was a rooster or rooster. This was in the city of Chino. I’m currently doing this eviction case or rooster’s domesticated animals. You wonder how well the you the doctor wrote this note and actually you’ll see this as a question and answer in the next month’s issue in the magazine. But the doctor wrote a note saying that she has an emotional need to have a rooster. Now in the city of Chino it is against the law of barnyard animals.
Dennis: [00:10:27] So we immediately wrote a notice to the tenant telling her to get rid of the rooster or that we were going to bring a lawsuit and that this wasn’t considered to be a reasonable accommodation. It’s an unreasonable accommodation because you can’t ask somebody to break the law. But you’re going to see where these doctors will say yes the person needs three dogs and three cats which is the maximum that you can have at least in the L.A. County. And the landlord is powerless to act. Once a medical professional I use that term very loosely a medical professional gives permission or gives a prescription that their patient needs this type of comfort.
Dennis: [00:11:10] Basically the way it is now is that any tenant in any building regardless of the policy of the building of no pet building can now have any kind of domesticated pet that they want. And it’s very unfortunate it’s very unclear what it is it’s a trampling of the rights of property owners which is what this country is based on. And our politicians really need to go back and Riego these types of laws.
Zachary: [00:11:37] Dennis. Help me out here in the city of Chino. You said that the rooster is not permitted. Is that correct.
Dennis: [00:11:45] It’s probably many many Francesco’s it’s considered a barnyard animal. OK so you are serving this tenant with a three day notice to a performer quit. Yes to get rid of the ropes. OK have they gotten rid of the rooster. They have not in this lawsuit is over. OK fine. Now you told me many times on this broadcast now I know they didn’t get rid of the rooster because every morning the neighbors hear a cock a doodle do. There you go. Right. OK. That might be the husband. OK. So then you’re fascinated by the six.
Zachary: [00:12:13] Thank you very much. OK. So I mean have you contacted Animal Control. I mean what other measures…
Dennis: [00:12:22] Animal control has contacted her and telling her that you better get rid of this rooster. OK. It is unpermitted She’s only the landlord. She doesn’t live there but that’s why we immediately initiated this eviction action and this tenant is going to be evicted over a rooster.
Zachary: [00:12:39] OK. But it could have been like a pig.
Zachary: [00:12:41] So right now this candidate is going to walk into court with a doctor’s note saying your honor under the American With Disabilities Act I am entitled to a comfort rooster. That’s what’s going to happen. OK. They might even bring the doctor with them. OK. What does your argument counselor.
Dennis: [00:12:59] Well again under the American Disabilities Act and also the California Disabilities Act if somebody has legitimate disability then the landlord has to allow for a reasonable accommodation. So for example if somebody needs to have a ramp built because they’re in a wheelchair the landlord is allowed, must allow the tenant at the tenants own cost to put in that ramp. That would be a reasonable accommodation. But in this situation the reasonable accommodation can’t be where you’re asking someone to break the law. The law states that you’re not allowed to have a rooster. So notwithstanding the fact that she has a disability and needs an emotional Pat that being a rooster as funny as it sounds it would not be considered a reasonable accommodation on that basis. My. We will prevail in our lawsuit.
Zachary: [00:13:47] Is this a contested action by the way. So far it is not contest but we’ll pick this up in our next broadcast really what happens if she brings the rooster to court the roost in court. I don’t know I haven’t been to court in a while. OK. Have you ever cross-examined a rooster. No I have not.
Zachary: [00:14:03] I just want to make sure. OK. OK. Question number two if a tenant decides to terminate their tenancy prior to lease expiration is there any limit as to the amount of non refundable fees that can be charged.
Dennis: [00:14:19] And the answer is No you do not have a nonrefundable fee that would not be proper. However the law does have a wonderful remedy for the landlord. So let’s take the example which is a one year lease and the tenant gives proper notice at least in his mind that he’s going to be vacating at the end of the eighth month. And that situation the landlord would then after the tenant vacates would then send the tenant a letter or a security deposit atomization letter stating that the tenant is responsible for the remaining four months of the lease unless the landlord of course relets the place to somebody else and the lender actually is under law duty down to try to use his best efforts to mitigate those losses to relet the premises to somebody else. So when your security deposit itemization you are going to deduct for four months worth of rent in addition to any cleaning charges and any unusual wear and tear to the property. So summingly the tenant will not get back any security deposit and to the extent that more money is owed, the landlord would be free to sue that tenant in small claims court. But you just can’t say in a contract. Well if you leave early then this is what the amounts are going to be. It actually has to be exactly what the terms of the lease is and put into the security deposit optimization.
Zachary: [00:15:43] Is there such a thing as a pet deposit.
Dennis: [00:15:46] Well there is no such thing as anything other than a security deposit. Under 1950 point five of the civil code specifically states that all the deposits are going to be considered a security deposit. Therefore landlord should never charge a last month’s rent. There is no necessity charge a pet deposit it’s called a security deposit and the tenant, you’re entitled to get two months rent. The reason why you wouldn’t want a pet deposit is let’s pretend you took a month’s security and a month pet deposit and then the tenant informs you that three months later I got rid of the dog and he got my security deposit you can check the place now. So the landlord now is going to be down to only holding one deposit versus a two month deposit so the law specifically states just call it a security deposit.
Zachary: [00:16:34] OK. And I want to share something with you that’s in this month’s away magazine. On August the 9th the city of Seattle passed a bill number 1 1 8 7 5 6 and it mandates landlords to force excuse me it. Yes it mandates landlords to take the first qualified applicant. In other words first in time, is first in line. Now what’s wrong with that.
Dennis: [00:17:08] Well from an economic standpoint if somebody is making four thousand dollars per month which would be sufficient versus somebody who’s making $10000 a month. You know what if I’m a businessman I’d rather have the guys making $10000 a month because I feel more assured that the person is going to pay the rent.
Zachary: [00:17:26] But Mr. Landlord I got to your office at. 9 o’clock sharp. I was the very first application that you use. I was the very first applicant that you processed for a credit and eviction report. I do qualify for this unit. Why am I not first in line?
Dennis: [00:17:45] I’m not saying that you’re not I’m saying from a landlord’s point of view if he had his druthers and he would take the best qualified applicants versus the first applicant. for example let’s say the first applicant qualifies but has a history of changing jobs versus a second person who’s worked for the school district for 15 years in that situation You know the person is never going to leave the school district job and will always have a source of income. But the law’s the law so the law states that you have to take the first qualified applicant then the landlord should create a criteria of how much rent excuse me how much money they earn in order to support the rent for the unit and other criteria dealing with the their credit worthiness. And then again the law states that you do have to take the first qualified applicant.
Zachary: [00:18:37] Are California landlords are allowed to do that could they put on Craigslist in their ad along with pictures of the unit. You must have verifiable income of monthly income of four times rent. Is that legal.
Dennis: [00:18:53] It is certainly legal. There’s nothing wrong with that. And I think it’s a smart idea because you’re going to read out a lot of people that don’t meet that criteria.
Zachary: [00:19:01] Is that a working multiplier. By the way for landlords to use whatever the rent is. Multiply it times four and that should be their monthly income.
Dennis: [00:19:09] It’s anywhere from three to four I think is a reasonable figure. Now I gave a speech at the Los Angeles Convention Center and instead of putting it in Craigslist I encourage landlords to begin the qualification for the tenant prior to even filling out an application that when the tenant calls you specifically ask the tenant. Listen my criteria here is that you have to earn at least three times the monthly rent. And if you don’t then you’re not going to be a proper applicant for my building. So you can start the qualification process right from the phone. For example if you’ve ever had a bankruptcy I’m not going to rent to you if you’ve ever been the subject of an eviction. I’m not going to rent to you. So these are all questions that are permissible to ask. Even prior to the tenant filling out an application.
Zachary: [00:20:02] OK. But if I have a rooster.
Dennis: [00:20:05] If they have a rooster I would think that the language could immediately reject OK.
Zachary: [00:20:09] There you go. OK Dennis. Assemblyman Richard Bloom of santa monica wants the repeal Costa Hawkins tell our podcast listeners what is Costa Hawkins and why this is either a good or a bad idea.
Dennis: [00:20:27] Well Costa Hawkins is one of the few state laws that actually support landlords. It does a few things. Number one it states that if a municipality has not instituted rent controlled by 1995 then that municipality is barred from starting rent control. I know for example the city of Glendale wanted to institute rent control and they were not allowed to do so. Long Beach has been making noise about starting rent control but thanks to this wonderful law Costa Hawkins it states that you cannot as a municipality Institute rent control if you didn’t already have it. One of the next things that it does is that it talks about vacancy decontrol that if a tenant voluntarily vacates a unit or if the tenant vacates through a fault of a breach of the contract that the landlord for the next tenant is allowed to raise the rent. That sounds like it should always be the case. But the wonderful city of Santa Monica which many people call the Republic of Santa Monica. And their law used to be that if a tenant vacated the unit voluntarily the landlord was still restricted in terms of how much you can go up on the rent he couldn’t even go up to a market rent. So that was another important aspect of the Costa Hawkins law. The last one is that the single family homes and condos are not subject to rent limitations even though there is a rent control jurisdiction that the property is located in.
Zachary: [00:22:09] So so in layman’s terms Dennis, if you own a single family home in the city of Los Angeles that has a zip code that is under rent control that single family home would not be subject to rent control.
Dennis: [00:22:22] That is correct. It is not subject to rent limitations you do have to.. a single former home in the city of Los Angeles is not under rent control. But let’s take a condo, a condo would be subject to the provisions of the rent stabilization ordinance for the city of Los Angeles you would have to register your unit and you would need good cause to evict. But because of the wonderful Costa Hawkins law it’s not subject to rent limitations so you’re allowed to raise the rent as much as you like you’re not limited to the 3 percent that the city is stating is the maximum that you can raise rent for this year.
Zachary: [00:22:56] OK. Help me understand the rent control and rent limitation. I understand that rent control is a cap imposed by jurisdictions which for example in the city of Los Angeles is 3 percent. What exactly is a rent limitation.
Dennis: [00:23:11] Well I think you have just slighting reversed. If you’re subject to the rent stabilization ordinance for the city of Los Angeles you must register units every year and you need to have good cause. To evict. So therefore I just can’t say I’m selling the place. Here’s a you’re on a month to month and to use a 60 day notice you need to vacate. But what what we have is with the last one is your subject to you to the provisions of how much you can raise the rent which this year is 3 percent. However if you own a condo why you are subject to rent stabilization so you was have to register units. You do have to have good cause to evict. You’re not subject to rent limitation so I can still raise the rent a thousand dollars a month if that’s what I choose to do.
Zachary: [00:24:01] Does it matter when that condo was built.
Dennis: [00:24:04] Well of course there is another exception to the rent control ordinance and that is any structure built after October 1st 1978 is not subject to rent control at all. So yes we’re talking about condos built prior to October 1st 1978 that condo is subject to the rent stabilization ordinance for the city of Los Angeles. But it is not subject to rent limitations because of Costa Hawkins So I’m glad you pointed this out. This was a bill to try to defeat Costa Hawkin’s try to revoke it. It was defeated. And this year it’s going to be up in the state legislature for revocation as of next year. We’re going to try to defeat it through the apartment associations but the problem is is that if it’s not defeated you’re going to see a lot of landlords that are stuck with now having these municipalities like Glendale like long beach which will be the first to institute rent control. my speech that I gave last week at the long beach, excuse me at the los angeles convention center warned landlords that what they should be doing right now that all of their tenants all of their tenants are at market rent that’s the only way really to protect yourself if your jurisdiction Institute’s rent control. What happened back in 1979 when the LA rent control ordinance was instituted you had many landlords that just didn’t raise the rent. They felt that they were being nice to their tenants so they had these horrific units with low rent. And then once rent control came in they were stuck with that rent and stuck with only a small percentage of increase that they could do every year. So any landlord listening to this I don’t care whether or note your properties are rent control or not rent control, if there is a possibility that yout premises might turn into a remote control unit. So what you should be doing right now is raising rents for all of your units to market value. Also right now for those jurisdictions there’s no control over good cause eviction. So if you want to have the person vacate the unit and he’s on a month to month tenancy all you need to do is serve a 30 or 60 day notice if he’s been there longer than two years. Now the reason why that’s important is let’s pretend you have a malcontent in your building. He pays the rent. He generally follows the terms of his rental agreement but every month he’s asking you to fix something every month he’s complaining. Somebody is walking in the unit and he’s complaining that it’s too much. He’s a malcontent. Well you’re going to be stuck with this person if your the jurisdiction where that building is located. Now all of a sudden has rent control. So in addition to making sure that all tenants are paying market rent. If you’ve got a malcontent in your building now’s the time to serve a notice to quit to help this person move out. You only one nice people in your building specially when rent control it.
Zachary: [00:27:02] But You can’t evict somebody for being a malcontent. Otherwise I would have been evicted in every apartment I’ve been to.
Dennis: [00:27:07] But you can if the jurisdiction where your building is located does not have rent control.
Zachary: [00:27:12] Understood. OK. So you can’t in a rent controlled jurisdiction, You can’t say you’re honor this guy is a malcontent and I don’t him in my property.
Dennis: [00:27:19] And that is correct.
Zachary: [00:27:20] OK. By the way you used that word malcontent in conversations that you and I had.
Dennis: [00:27:25] Yes but only in reference to you.
Zachary: [00:27:27] OK. Thank you. I appreciate that. How much time do we have left about anybody. A couple more minutes. OK. Dennis in the few minutes that we have left tell our listeners about the [inaudible] act. What is the [inaudible] act?
Dennis: [00:27:40] Well the [inaudible] act deals with discrimination. And it deals with arbitrary discrimination as one of its It’s it’s actually it’s a very long act but how it comes to play for landlords deals with that you can’t have arbitrary discrimination so we all know that you’re not allowed to discriminate on the basis of race religion sex marital status handicap or age.
Zachary: [00:28:03] And the acronym for that. By the way this is raw M our as our age marriage race sex religion age him.
Dennis: [00:28:12] Look at you go. Thank you man. Did he give you a JD for nothing.
Zachary: [00:28:16] Hey that’s what malcontents do.
Dennis: [00:28:18] But in any event. So the [inaudible] act delt with something called arbitrary discrimination. So let me give you an example of that. Let’s pretend that you didn’t want to have anybody in your building that had a tattoo. And tattoo quite frankly is not a [inaudible] class. Now I know for a fact that if any of my children came home with a tattoo I take them out of the house faster than they could spit. But if you’re a landlord and somebody comes and they’re plastered with tats. Technically if you try to use that as your only criteria to reject their tenancy that would be a violation of the [inaudible] act and would be considered arbitrary discrimination.
Zachary: [00:29:05] You’ve said many times on this broadcast that if you saw a prospective tenant’s car and it was a mess and it stunk and it was filthy that would be a basis for which to reject this applicant. How does that differ from having a tattoo.
Dennis: [00:29:23] It Differs greatly. Because if that’s the way that the tenant takes prospective applicant takes care of his personal property. I think it goes a long way as to how he will take care of your real property. There’s an economic reason that makes sense why I wouldn’t have that application in my property.
Zachary: [00:29:44] OK. You’re going to tell the judge in open court and ask for forgiveness. You’re right this man’s car is a mess. He makes $100000 a year. He has perfect credit. He’s a doctor. His car looks like a pigsty. And on that basis alone I and Roger this application you can say that to a judge.
Dennis: [00:30:02] That is correct I would easily say that to a judge it would not be considered arbitrary and discouraged discrimination because there is an rational belief as to why the landlord did not want that person in the unit. It was the same reason why I would recommend that landlords never take an attorney as their tenant. If you take an attorney has your tenant they’re very litigious they’re going to be sending you letters are going to be quoting code sections I don’t even know what that means.
Zachary: [00:30:28] It’s not a form of occupational discrimination.
Dennis: [00:30:32] It is not a form of discrimination that’s improper. In fact there was a case in New York that went to the New York Supreme Court that stated that it was rational for the landlord to reject the application level of an attorney. Based on the fact that it’s an economic reason that they’d be more litigious.
Zachary: [00:30:50] would You take that case if somebody called you and said I have an applicant that is suing me because I rejected him because he’s an attorney. Would you handle that case.
Dennis: [00:30:59] Well first of all I don’t normally take those kinds of cases but I have no problem taking that kind of a case and I would support that decision.
Zachary: [00:31:07] OK Dennis last less hypothetical and we’ll wrap it up. You’ve got an applicant who claims that she is a stripper. OK. And she can show you tax forms and W-9’s that indicate that she’s making a couple hundred thousand dollars a year. May you turn her down based on her occupation.
Dennis: [00:31:26] You cannot you cannot discriminate on the source of income. She’s doing a quote legal job. And on that basis then you would have to accept.
Zachary: [00:31:35] OK. All right Denni, we’re about out of time. First of all I would like to thank our lovely and talented attorney [inaudible] for helping us out with the very first podcast she’s.
Dennis: [00:31:45] Streaming video podcast.
Zachary: [00:31:50] And maybe next time we’ll get her input on some of these issues of the day. But in the meantime Dennis we’re going to wrap it up and as always tell our listeners how to take you home.
Dennis: [00:32:00] If anybody wants to reach me I got a toll free number is 1 800 77 Evict. Or you go to my Web site which evict123.com. we got all of our wonderful forms legal issues. More videos like this one and last but not least don’t forget I’ve got an app where you can listen to these podcast and the app in either of the stores is evict123.
Zachary: [00:32:25] .com. and I’m Zachery Lawrence with Parkside Property Management saying so long we’ll see you next time on the landlord tenant radio broadcast.
Dennis: [00:32:34] You’re the best Zach.