Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
37 Apt A. 1987
BOARD OF HEALTH JOHN T. JOYCE, Chairman PETER C. KENNY, M.D. Michael R. Parsons PETER J. McERLAIN, Health Agent CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH 210 MAIN STREET 01060 Tel. (4131 9X 586-5950 Ext. 214 )RDER TO CORRECT VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER II OF THE STATE SANITARY CODE "MINIM.' STANDARDS OF 7ITNESS FOR HUMAN HABITATION" AT Apt. A, 37 Holyoke Street, Northampton, MA )RDER ADDRESSED TO: Mogen V. Hermann DATE August 7, 1987 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 COPIES OF INSPECTION REPORTS ISSUED TO: Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley 37A Holyoke Street Northampton, MA 01060 This is an important legal document. It may affect your rights. You may obtain a translation of this form at: Isto e um documento legal muito importante que podera afectar os seus direitos. Podem adquirir uma tradusao deste documento de: Le suivante est un important document legal. I1 pourrait affecter vos droits. Vous pouvez- obtenir une traduction de cette forme a: Questo e un documento legale importante. Potrebbe avere effetto sui suoi diritti. Lei pub ottenere una traduzione di questo modulo a: Este es un documento legal importante. Puede que afecte sus derechos. Ud. Puede adquirir una traduccion de esta forma en: To jest wazne legalny dokument. To mole miec wpLyw na twoje uprawnienia. Mozesz uzyskac ttumaczenie tego dokumentu w ofisie: Board of Health 210 Main Street Northampton, Mass. Tel. No. (413) 586-6950 Ext. 214 • The Northampton Board of Health has inspected the premises at 37 Holyoke Street , Northampton (assessor's map 32C parcel 215 . ), for compliance with Chapter II of The State Sanitary Code. This Letter will certify that the inspections revealed violations, listed below, which are serious enough as to endanger or materially impair the health, safety, and well-being of the occupants. Under authority of Chapter and Chapter II of The State Sanitary necessary repairs or contract with a 111, Section 127 of the Mass. General Laws, Code, you are hereby ordered to begin the third party within five (5) days of the re- ceipt of this order and to make a good faith effort to substantially complete correction, within fourteen (14) days of the receipt of this order, the follow- _ ing violations: REGULATION VIOLATION REMEDY 410.500 & 410.441 (A-2) 410.351 (A) 410.501 (A-1) 410.500 410.500 bathroom window sill rotten, window screen is not tight fitting frayed wiring on ceiling light fixture in the den off of the kitchen upper left pane of glass in left front bedroom window is broken outside wooden stairway (right side of house) is weak and very skakey The following portions of the outside foundation are deteriorated: 1. brick foundation at the rear of the house has loose bricks with mortar missing 2. block foundation at right side of house has missing blocks and loose/ missing mortar repair window sill and make screen tight replace the wiring on this fixture replace the broken window provide additional support and make this stairway secure* repair/remortar entire house foundation as needed to make it secure and weathertight replace all missing bricks/blocks* *Note: The Northampton Building Inspector must approve the work done in repairing the stairway and foundation wall. Mogens V. Hermann August 7, 1987 Page 3 • If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact the Board of Health office. Thank you. Very truly yours, Peter J. McErlain Health Agent ec Certified mail P417 860 372 cc: Building Inspector ilus Walker Jr., PhD. MPH Ci,,,n.0 i r Sxersethe OA& s ' . 5° err - , V gcccca < 3aad2ea /gaea » pace h gipanv 05 .9at4 $ et; Ja naicco gicuiv. OPISO Date _ June 29. 1987 ORDER TO CORRECT VIOLATION e,Us V. er Cr %a./_." I1S II _060100 -7 NNN Owner or agent o the property located at J/ A /�v � `� Be advised that the Director of the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prev ntion Program has determined certain portions of the aforementioned residential property to be in violation of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 111, section 197 and regulations for Lead Poisoning Prevention and Control, section 460.025, and is a violation of the State Sanitary Code. This violation is de- scribed in further detail in the accompanying "Report of Inspector". Certified Mail if P 417 860 357 _ DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY . The Director further declares that the presence of the aforementioned violation presents an immediate danger of lead poisoning to one or more occupants of the premises and that this constitutes an emergency pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 111, section 198, within the meaning of the Sanitary Code, Article 1, section 5.1. ORDER YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERD TO REMEDY SAID VIOLATION WITHIN 7 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTIONS IN THE LEAD ADVISORY ACCOM- PANYING THIS ORDER. - - -Upon compliance with this order and within-7 days after its receipt, you may request a hearing with the Director as provided in State Sanitary Code, Article I, section 5.1. An instructional 414I aflet ent}stl d "Lead Advisory" is enclosed. Contact the inspector at (1 860 532 9571) or f33) SJIo-(9 fLz before abatement is initiated. REINSPECT ION A follow-up inspection will be conducted after the seven day compliance period has expired to determine whether the violation has been corrected. A safety check reinspection will be conducted during the deleading process to ensure that deleading is being done safely and that cleanup is complete. PROSECUTION h„+ If the reinspection indicates that the violation has been corrected, the Program will promptly commence a criminal prosecution against you forAfailing to comply with this order. The law provides penalties up to 5500.00 for each and every day of noncompliance. <L.: 4-7 fir T/l/lcEr/ah Inspector /1ea6HG( 4j Brad Prenney Acting Director CLPPP 10-84 ORDER Rev 1/87 37114% Cer 01 ere xecuditr& ©A Yeetnan. Jeeaiced, c /L 00d S(,Jo%ac,th 2 ge1cen n, gory 305 920,4 S0G�t A72.th, ,/ ciao Nalker Jr., Ph.D. MPH Cam minlomv Premises inspected: Date inspected: �/-?.3/$7 Follow-up inspection scheduled: On or about seven days after receipt of violation notice by the owner or agent of the premises. Date REPORT OF INSPECTOR , S7A lye le5,- Time: c2l30150i1/ VIOLATION Paint that contains lead in excess of 0.5% lead by dry weight or 1.2 mg. lead per square centimeter of surface is dangerous and unlawful (as defined in Regulations for Lead Poisoning Prevention and Control , s.460.025, as authorized by Mass. General Laws, Chapter 111, s194). The surfaces containing such paint are listed on the accompanying laboratory inspection report farm (s). The owner of the premises is required by law (MGL C. 111, s197) to remove or adequately cover these violations. This violation may endanger or materially impair the health, safety or well-being of persons occupying the premises. This violation was not caused by the occupants of the premises nor by any person (s) acting under the control of the occupants. Occupants should not be present in the dwelling unit during hours when lead paint is being removed, as a minimal precaution. OCCUPANT'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES The presence of the above violation entitles the occupants of the premises to the following statutory rights and remedies. These remedies are somewhat complex and occupants are advised to obtain assistance and/or legal advice before using any of them. (1) . Protection from retaliatory rent ncreases or evictions (MGL C. 186, s18) The owner may not increase rent or evict occupants in reprisal for their having reported a violation or suspected violation of the lead paint law. (2) Rent withholding (MGL C. 239, s8A) After the landlord has been notified of the lead paint violations, the occupants may withhold rent as long as lead paint violations remain uncorrected, provided that they are up to date in rent when they start rent withholding. To fully protect themselves against (over) CLPPP 12 - 84 Report (E) attempted evictions, occupants may need to place withheld monies in an escrow (separated savings) account. If these conditions are met, occupants may not be evicted for non-payment of rent or for any other cause which is not the fault of the occupants. However, as soon as the violation is certified as having been corrected, all withheld monies may have to be paid to the owner. (3) Right to repair and deduct (MGL C. 111, s127L) If the owner fails to begin the necessary repairs within five days after notification and to com- plete the repairs in fourteen days after notification, the occupants may use up to four months' rent otherwise due to the owner to correct the violations. Before using this remedy, occupants must find out from the inspector the date on which the owner was notified of the violation. (4) "Rent receivership" (MGL C. 111, ss 127C to 127J) The occupants and/or the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program may petition the court to allow rent to be paid into court rather than to the owner, provided that the occupant is up to date in rent. The court may then appoint a "receiver" who may spend as much of the rent money as is needed to correct the violation. (5) Abatement of rent may be awarded through a court action under recent decisions of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case, Boston Housing Authority vs. Hemingway, 293 NE2d 831, 363 Mass. 184 (1973). In such an action, the court determines the value of the premises with violations and reduces the amount of rent due. The above description of rights and remedies is brief and somewhat simplified. Again, legal assistance and advice should be sought before using any of the remedies. If you have any questions, call us at (617) 522-3700, or call your lawyer, local Legal Services' office or tenants' group. 7:4 Erlo- Inspector 'le7ep �nep6-6%st CASE CODE 1 I I H I MWR.N FOAM pg of METHOD USED NA 2 S (Poe. . Pb>0.5%) X-RAY ❑ FLUORESCENCE (Poe. = Pb>1.2 mg/cm') 1.04104 Vows.AN• I I I i I I I 1 1 1 &i410.41) i /IGIe-I I I I 1111111 o 441U0111fIej$ 1 I I I I I I I I I °"° � t" E. m . <,,,- . a , • sr Roy math OWNER'S NAME: 11118 6N�TS� V HEY 4$J MORTGAGOR NAME OWNER'S ADDRES�S/: YY7,Ail/ s^* MORTGAGOR ADO.: �/ CITY: /V4I pNh p QTY TEi.1: Ste -ab • Book No. REMARKS: Pine , Pab11 -__ e,_, mo RI a.MAMMA 1 1 1 I I f I�I I •' N mu — FLOOH1 / noon, C C A (STREET SIDE) • !CAI Ku i . . • VII i II A • A (STREET SIDE) 11111 11111 04 ws• 11111 ACIVAI OA 11 I I I I I MAIO Pb MORE THAN 0.5% OR 1.2 mg/em F IS I II111 1 NOS IIIMSOI I NO ACAS H Ill I ROOM. I 140•00414 n_ _ Ca �I l Po•DA II Ads4OC OA E ram OA O ANAL Fp. intrut OA APPACA wamT TO MI QOM It AOCAOCICO I It Ana I 04•44•11 E I Minn SIAMIO I MO sow DWAIN Min 044•13411 Koala 040/1 D MOM II 4NOCOuti C001. OSA Pe 0 MC NAB 1 INSPECTIONS INSPECTORIAOENCY Commonwealth of Massachusetts CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM 30S South SI,hawks Mahn,MA 011X -IYTfCfOM FOAM [[[ r417iI I yio[K1TIEI?T-i I- i -rl f Fr 1 --[ n l iiE_.01 1m n - -- Sall __ jounce R !.w.. _ A enemenRme SIDE SW. _ _ SaURCI ____. _ .- X x _ LEZCCM.E — o D vI mteld ry n S-F 0.v G.MyIJwM •t� Door U.lrglJeme _ . ... T.NrJE om Deaf C.s 1nWJ.mb 1o.d_.q _ ___ _� Cue. U.intlJ.mb IMf'v.0 n"°ym W.m.SIN rw•o. NM Wired GMV wane.Casty _— wum.s..l.twela,• _ wima snMJ.ears . _.. .. ._._.._._. - vuneo.w w.eo.SarM W .MNhMaY . Wmcicn- _ W'LbC. s.M wKMV�S.vnwlrm w GSM mime vnmo+vv WIM c Window s.s*t n A ._ wrna.9b - __._ .. m.a.S.M.NUian W..F. h1Lq a_____— __— Myev swwwl . __. _ .__.-_,_— ... —_. . ....... _ ... ..- mt smuAM.. PuwN C.b+_. . X — _ _. � , wnn Low., & C.Cbwco _. ._ _ . .__. _. Achy Cam .._ _. ...__..__ w W1' _ — Elevate, _ ..— — Vs Support c Jolwis eSl* UM/Trim 000.1 T M1Yn Flea Fm min X bull T: J.1 i• Run w... mammal H.mrM tall wfn Leos TAm tm• REMARKS Pb MORE THAN 0.5% OR 12 mglcm IS ILLEGAL 1J-d- -- r+ u INSPECTOR/AGENCY Commonwealth of Massachusetts CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM SOS South SI..JEIn.Ica Plain.MA MSG •WMfC9OM FORM PO s_ PI PRINT ONLY-PRESS N DOWN / l l *I eilVS 1/t R.-M/4/11 a . irgill!�Lo.LLfy2RL- gm. III LLLI I 110011 RD SO A\4W� LOVAK Wen C99 rsi flame a blacks 5 EM C Work.w _ Window C_imeH M.C.S m Window SdMIIMA. I.1 M1 bead WWmwswoon wymzeCKNKMINMKISKO ux of EmmySMWP MYp W 1 Cbsot Weft i O_.1991r9.er C RC O R , Da P00IA OC SOURCE Wei*. Apron YMM Cu np1bA14M Min Mil liii '; U �a 9.9 C..MpJ.on Coo- DvGWPJ"^> Not SV, M .491Wnro tad µw.lo.vl.Aa So.C_.y+«.5.nlm. boo.Casing J.nq wwmwvrvW,on Window Ca9Y.EI1999t91O9 YAM ow S..NLunlon. E.ISe SIWPVIM Lad Window SIMb.I 9. 9,C----I4. 99.9MS9Nha- �I- o_9W.a Pout ro th* WM SAMµl111 Moo' Coo mlv-Mb Does Door Ca-p.M1E DoorCNp.YnE SYn5 E_rnwbM Enwtr LlWnry EMC Owe(Ws* CLM.I Eta InlMb C Ifas4+pJMrO Closet Baseboirds 0_w 991.91 n = ■ �n Wow Lo.. ChB boa DO9 LFa CMPpJMtO Oxf Coot Calnplant Door Door Ca9nOwnb 9W Sam C- wb91Kn .bowl W Si Paw v CwWVfbtltAM W!M/SMMUPO9 EnwbSIWMiEQ- µWA SIVAPron µ4A4sroWYtlf91MM Ss lora E 1 1I 9Iw.IWp Wad µWm.Sfl p 1 Ws.IT4.Ygl._,09199 wmw Su'µlull Ellett 9INMro brad 0 WWII Oosel DvMIMt REMARKS Pb MORE THAN 0.5% OR 1.2 mglcm IS ILLEGAL Window 91VMm -.— =:0°69 C mA Co'—' OP ScortrAulkos Enark, nSot— 5x - Coll ro _-_ — Po.9MAp n tom ab W}.bw fsWp9nJw6l.p sect$9.99.9191 REMARKS Pb MORE THAN 0.5% OR 1.2 mglcm IS ILLEGAL ni.tas taw INSPECTO NAGEN CT CAM 604 Commonwealth of Massachusetts CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM 305 SculR SI_Anita Pkln,MA 02150 •..nrno.FORM p1 w- PRINT ONLY—PRESS DOWN .09,..'2$ ip/3 MAN 6IB•EIN•••■••• • Cole ROpu c VDE 3OURCK PI) II _� nOOY Slot SOURCE Pb 9M nom'. III-Uwe WMr UM0 W.Ig Logo. Wan o. nil f'LW Oaf d ;■j Il ••I M o_ Cow Gasp-Ant Door Mot Wit.FAIIMato Dot GeawM+O I I noon G.IrryW•G• 5 09 toor Window S.aNMUllbn. �Cash-plant Ellett SflW.1 bowl Dad C.r..t..Upper a�s0.� Cabinet..LO W —� _ `Mrdo.SVpm _ GaImISrwFee,Lew s Wly•OWGal • ..EerSIOPS W lade.G.NM WI Ions _ Floor =_ CWER n1 = E•l to pr 611VPntM be.E III,�_IIII_IN _ W4rbw SIIVAwco I- IIIIILIIII♦ —_ ■■■-a II� =11:12/21S11: �nv 55_ �■■ WYM+C_Yg ireenS¢p W.Ww S.NMU.Ma bed.S.W.IWNb.ed Lp.WMM �n11 W.Lbw$VY.Pm WM oat tiuhCenlSlrp ow CgH *NM SdMU.bM i_■ EM w E CabinetL,Lippe. ■■■_ II Wawa __ a Rill";L. �Cables Cabinets.Lower 15MFe;lwn Baud° SWAM Stringer Duns Elm Window EJIVAoron ISM YNdow CJeIQ4eI0,S40,1 —_� Glllro ___ —� wemwS.M.uMbM _—� MI —_(tent SlIVPa1YC road. sI�_ EMIII_� mice — SI.Ym LNen WYF P.Iry — — Ltm%OM LArMWWa CNl � � eW.I - i SV M u w Cig% eorSlo t WiNow$.sNMultlna E bead Bahrstirs i _ NN MM SiOnoet P'a�n� �- 55_ 5_S Cadman.Upon � elnsLowel Cabinet*. _ W.dowSIWA O, —_ ~Ow(aalo+te.a.rslom e. _ IIIIIIIIIIIII■• ..� NPn testa G+M CeneV ...-a .1. REMARKS Pb MORE THAN 0.5% OR 1.2 mg/cm IS ILLEGAL f �rP Ob LILL INSPECTOPJAOENCY case tee( Commonwealth of Massachusetts CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM 305 South SL,Jamaica Plain,MA 03130 'INSPECTION SOMA pg PRINT ONLY—PRESS DOWN Mo QNs V /-fee �u tiN W.. 44 an LIT;1 1 MTEdofim_aZ u IILL_ L - - —L ROOM NEE MOM US.. Post M^'., SOURCE == E IIpOM NEE SOU CI ti R Ads.NWMm ME*Wks.SuN MMW.N Oda toS O;u Coo,C..Y^PJ.mb Doo' G Door Casing JamR C VOW»Sla. n Mor 4.MyM.d.15to G wUndo.S.. Ions E. tenor Waling ter) Oaw m•niS Oast CaMN.nd vPadlos bead 0 WNf It: Coo CaWEJSd Dxx m Ca.-J.mb dR.SM,.pro, NW°.e_.—_ ~oz.Smeel4uSkr• Strict Ur Palle°bead N1Na CwYpNSM1.51<l wrm.S ashi.lnMOnt Enwb NlWin .bad MIME Wudaw 5W_Vm MNw CasiciNsadocfStopt M'd-.SdMUM existswHIM1obtl ~ow NNbwl Cal Q'P ~CM s.__ via SnER,lp tad GWaWdnP Ss Window SastiMulikra Elderly SI1VPs W d•1 wr Wails o DcctWl•q Cb.l Ca.wwd Cad B O Apr Pb MORE THAN 0.5% OR 1.2 mglcm T IS ILLEGAL REMARKS OW IMP 111111.4 cg I Iress CHAPTER II STATE SANITARY CODE 3 7 4 44i-s* of Occupants Apt, # I! of Dwelling Units # of Stories Occupant's Name 00112e-X-/ B F M De of Structure ne r # Habitable Rooms ii,Bedr[oommss U klQjt4444_&-t Address of Owner ,mo w �yrN Regulation iolatgs between 120o & 1400 .19Q Q 1 _../t∎ liar a a - J d, t water seat .150 A(1) and sh basin .150 A(2) f�(� ' orn tub .150 A(3) ow er or fficient cold water .350 A .500 oor 0 11 s fling .500 300 Mr .252 A .ght .280 A or B antilation Lumbing & drains .350 connection Kitchen 410.100 Regulation Violations itchen sufficient size .IQQ A(1) sink .100 A(2) Cove and oven for refrigerator ,100 A(3) pace Outlets (electrical) .251 B electrical light fixture .251 A ne .500 ails .500 eiling loor .500 (window) (mechanical) .251.6 entilation (sufficient pressures) ,350 A old water .190 lot water .500 lindows .500 )oors Screens (door & window) .551 & .552 'lumbing connection & drains .350 Living Room Regulation 8 Violations (2 or one with light) .251 B )utlets .251 A p I _h a V._ ......451- \'J A '(atj� 5"^�L Lighting Galls .500 \l .500 U 1 Ceiling Floor .500 (/ it/V-G Wl"4w4 M0 Windows .500 - .551 Screens (windows) .480 E Locks Pantry or Dining Room Regulation Violations (2 one with light) .251 B Outlets or .251 A Lighting .500 Walls .500 Ceiling Floor .500 Window .500 .551 Screens locks .480 E Viola ons Stee•in_ oom n♦ _---° ficient natural li•htin_ out ets or 1 - .250 A .251 B - .�-_. with 1 outlet .251 A Olt Is Is din•_ .500 �•�..1w�.�.�� 1 as _.� �:•aa tit• .�1n -'4. 'or .500 idows .500 -eens .551 Ir .500 there adequate Ice for occu.ant? .400 Slee.in Room #2 a i•4. fficient natural li:ht : .250 A _ num outlets or 1 .251 B r ' with outlet .251 A ght Its .500 , ' ' • .500 _ oarn .500 ��i li ndows .500 .551 re ens .500 or there adequate for occu.ant? .400 'ace Sleeping Room #3 O6 \ .250 A _� t �rtv Mr natural lighting efficient outlets or 1 .251 B wnry_ L with outlet .251 A gl� r gAm• :ht ills .500 .. ■ =_ilin- 500 ' 0' boar .500 endows .500 creens .551 .500 oor s there adequate for occupant? .400 pace Common Area & Exit (Interior area illuminated .ro.erl .253 A & B nterior indows .500 I ..♦ ��^W� .551 _� w.�, I 11.u. ?li ,creens loors .500 ;eilin: .500 Jails .500 �r rtar�ialr al W U oors itairwa s .042 onmon bathroom clean Common Area & Exit (Exterior Ghimne .151 .500 - ��� Porches .500 ' �+ 14 _� �__ �,� Foundation .500 -1 • �� Stairs .500 � i=A •M " rr %r te' Garba:e & rubbish .601 ' grid 1 • Private wa s .600 Eflef1 iv wa4fl n Gutters and down s.outs Roof .500 N' �?�• I i 2 . Lead .502 .253 B i paint Entr li:hts 1 11 services working and available 620 re heating facilities in good epair? .200 eat 68� 100 A h R of water 120° to 140° 190 acilities vented 202 pace heater - proper 200 R 'emporary wiring 256 Ilectrical service adequate 995 nsects and rodents 550 welling sanitary 602 & 452 Miscellaneous a/al�tel 'he next scheduled reinspection is: itle Time a.m. (P.S11) a.m. p.m. Date Time Name of Complainant Address Nature of Complaint BOARD OF REALTR CITY HALL COMPLAINT RECORD Date Time ocation of Premises Owner Address Occupant Taken by Date of inspection INSPECTOR'S REPORT Action Taken Referred to nspecto • BOARD OF HEALTH )FIN T. JOYCE,Chairman _TER C. KENNY, M.D. ichael R. Parsons ETER J. McERLAIN, Health Agent CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ()-) MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH 210 MAIN STREET 01060 nt�n ag3mcR . . li Tel. l4lll 586-6950 Ext. 214 '.DER TO CORRECT VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER II OF THE STATE SANITARY CODE "MINRIUM STANDARDS OF :TNESS FOR HUMAN HABITATION" AT 37 Holyoke Street, Apartment A (DER ADDRESSED TO: Mogens V. Herman 50 Hawley Street DATE June 26, 1987 Northampton, MA 01060 DPIES OF INSPECTION REPORTS ISSUED TO: Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley 37A Hnlynka Street Mnrthamptnn, MA ninRn his is an important legal document. It may affect your rights. You may obtain a translation rf this form at: :sto e um documento legal muito importante que podera afectar os seus direitos. Podem adquiri ma tradusao deste documento de: :e suivante est un important document legal. I1 pourrait affecter vas droi[s, Vous pouvez cbtenir une traduction de cette forme a: Questo e un documento legale importante. Potrebbe avere effetto sui suoi diricti. Lei pub ottenere una traduzione di questo modulo a: Este es un documento legal importante. Puede que afecte sus derechos. Ud. Puede adquirir una traduccion de esta forma en: To jest waine legalny dokument. To maze miec wplyw na twoje uprawnienia. Mozesz uzyskac tTumaczenie tego dokumentu w ofisie: Board of Health 210 Main Street Northampton, Mass. Tel. No. (413) 586-6950 Ext. 214 The Northampton Board of Health has inspected the premises at 37 Holyoke Street, Apartment A , Northampton (assessor's map 32C parcel 215 . ) , for compliance with Chapter II of The State Sanitary Code. This letter will certify that the inspections revealed violations, listed below, which are serious enough as to endanger or materially impair the health, safety, and well-being of the occupants. Under authority of Chapter 111, Section 127 of the Mass. General Laws, and Chapter II of The State Sanitary Code, you are hereby ordered to make a good faith effort to correct the following violations within twenty-four (24) hours from the date of receipt of this order. REGULATION 410.351 410.500 410.500 VIOLATION plumbing leak causing water to seep through bathroom ceiling - water has damaged ceiling upper pane of living room window is broken 410.502 lead paint found as indicated in the written notice sent under separate cover If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact the Board of Health Office. REMEDY locate & repair the leak and then repair and paint the ceiling replace broken glass with a new window pane remove the lead paint indicated Very truly yours, ag Peter J. iicErlain Health Agent Certified Mail 11 P 417 860 356 PJMc/mr Hearing Persons have the right to seek a modification of an order. To accomplish a modification, a person must file in writing a petition for a hearing before the Board of Health. Petitions must be filed on time in accordance with the regulations below: (a) Any person or persons upon whom any order has been served pursuant to any regulation of this code (except for an order issued after the requirements of Regulation 410.750 have been satisfied); provided, such petition must be filed within seven days after the day the order was served; (b) Any person aggrieved by the failure of any inspector (s) or other personnel of the Board of Health: (1) to inspect upon request any premises as required under this code; provided, such petition must be filed within thirty days after such inspection was requested; or (2) to issue a report on an inspection as required by this code; provided, such petition must be filed within thirty days after the inspection; or (3) upon an inspection to find violations of this Article where such violations are claimed to exist or to certify that a violation or combination of violations may endanger or materially impair the health or safety, and well—being of the occupants of the premises; provided, such petition must be filed within thirty days after receipt of the inspection report; or (4) to issue an order as required by Regulation 410.750; provided, that such petition must be filed within thirty days after receipt of the inspection report. Any person upon whom this order has been served or any person aggrieved by the failure of the inspector to perform as enumerated above has the right to be represented at a hearing and any adverse party has a right to appear at said hearing. Public Documents All relevant inspection or investigation reports, orders, notices and other documentary information in the possession of the Board of Health are open for inspection and may be copied for a fee. Remedies and Penalties Part of the Inspection Report contains a brief summary of some legal remedies tenants may use in order to get Housing Code violations corrected. Failure to comply with this order also subjects the person ordered to a criminal fine of not less than ten ($10.00) dollars, nor more than five hundred ($500) dollars for each day's failure to comply with this order. THE FOLLOWING IS A BRIEF SUMMARY OF SOME OF THE LEGAL REMEDIES TENANTS MAY USE IN ORDER TO GET HOUSING CODE VIOLATIONS CORRECTED. 1. Rent Withholding (General Laws Chapter 239 Section 8A) If Code Violations Are Not Being Corrected you may be entitled to hold back your rent payments. You can do this without being evicted if: A. You can prove that your dwelling unit or common areas contain code violations which are serious enough to endanger or materially impair your health or safety and that your landlord knew about the violations before you were behind in your rent. B. You did not cause the violations and they can be repaired while you continue to live in the building. C. You are prepared to pay any portion of the rent into court if a judge orders you to pay it. (For this it is best to put the rent-money aside in a safe place.) 2. Repair and Deduct (General Laws Chapter 111 Section 127L). The law sometimes allows you to use your rent money to make the repairs yourself. If your local code enforcement agency certifies that there are code violations which endanger or materially impair your health,safety or well-being and your landlord has received written notice of the violations,you may be able to use this remedy. If the owner fails to begin necessary repairs (or to enter into a written contract to have them made)within five days after notice or to completerepairs within 14 days after notice you can use up to four months' rent in any year to make the repairs. 3. Retaliatory Rent Increases or Evictions Prohibited (General Laws Chapter 186,Section 18 and Chapter 239 • Section 2A). The owner may not increase your rent or evict you in retaliation for making a complaint to your local code enforcement agency about code violations. It the owner raises your rent or tries to evict within six months after you have made the complaint he or she will have to show a good reason for the increase or eviction which is unrelated to your complaint. You may be able to sue the landlord for damages it he or she tries this. 4. Rent Receivership (General Laws Chapter 1111 Sections 127C-H). The occupants and/or the hoard of health may petition the District or Superior Court to allow rent to be paid into court rather than to the owner. The court may then appoint a "receiver"who may spend as much of the rent money as is needed to correct the violation. The receiver is not subject to a spending limitation of four months' rent. 5. Breach of Warranty of Habitability. You may be entitled to sue your landlord to have all or some of your rent returned if your dwelling unit does not meet minimum standards of habitability. 6. Unfair and Deceptive Practices (General Laws Chapter 93A). Renting an apartment with code violations is a violation of the consumer protection act and regulations for which you may sue an owner. THE INFORMATION PRESENTED ABOVE IS ONLY A SUMMARY OF THE LAW, BEFORE YOU DECIDE TO WITHHOLD YOUR RENT IF R YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO CONSULT IT AN)ATTORNEY` YOU YOU SHOULD CONTACT THE NEAREST LEGAL SERVICES OFFICE WHICH IS: Western Mass, Legal Services (NAME) 28 Center Street, Northampton, Mass, 01060 (ADDRESS) 584-4034 (TELEPHONE NUMBER) t'cgens V. F.ermann, 50 Hawley Street, `IOrthamntrn, '`ass. , 010'0, July 7, 1937. Mr. Peter J. McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton, Massachusetts, 01060. Dear Sir: I want to give you herein a summary of my recent con- tacts with you and other officials at the Board of Health. In the afternoon of Thursday, July 2, I visited you at your office and I told you that I had received your orders in re- ference to lead paint and Sanitary Code violations at the LaVallee apartment, 37 Holyoke St. , Nh. On the morning of '!onday, July 6, I went to your office again, and talked to one of your assistants. I told her that on July 2 and 3, I had been in contact with a state-approved Deleading Contractor, Mr. James Carroll, 736-6555. He, his assistant, and I, had looked over the LaVallee apartment to- gether on the morning of July 3. I told your assistant about that, and gave her some further details, of which she took note. I also told her that earlier on July 3, I had tried to get into the LaVallee apartment in order to sake a goodwill effort to comply with your order re: Sanitary Code violations, and that Mr. LaVallee had refused to let me in. On the afternoon. of Monday, July 6, I got two phone calla from Mr. David E. Kochan, of the Northampton Board of Fealth. In the first of the ensuing conversations, he asked me to des- cribe, in broad outline, my problems with the LaVallee couple. I answered to the best of my ability. In the second conversa- tion, a few minutes later, Mr. Kochan told me that he had tal- ked to Maureen LaVallee, who, allegedly, had said that she and her husband wanted to be left in peace for about six weeks. In Mr. Kochan's conversation with me and presumably in his with her, he said that he didn't have authority to allow her that much delay with de-leading procedures, since he is only filling in for you during your one-week vacation. Then I asked Mr. Kochan whether he would Hermit me and the LaVallee couple a resrite until Monday July 13. To this, he answered in the af- firmative. I await your further decisions on these matters. p Sincerely, /`7 %'' Mogens V. Hermann, landlord. e Copies to: David B. Kochan, Nh. 3oard of Fealth. Mr and Mrs. Robert LaVallee, 37 Holyoke Street, Northampton (with extra cony for their lawyer). James Carroll, 18 Wellington St. , Spfld. , 01109. TO: FROM: David E. Kochan, Sanitary Inspector SUBJECT: DATE: July 9, 1987 Mogens V. Hermann MEMORANDUM BOARD OF HEALTH 210 Main Street - City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Extension of time limit to begin de-leading of the LaVallee Apartment at 37A Holyoke Street Per our two telephone conversations and my conversation with Mrs. LaVallee on July 6, 1987, I hereby make written confirmation of my verbal agreement to extend the seven (7) day time limit (de-leading order dated June 29, 1987) until July 13, 1987. • This extension is granted as a result of my conversation with Mrs. LaVallee. She suggested to me that a 5 or 6 week delay before de-leading procedures are undertaken would be appreciated as her child is still extremely young. She was concerned about the constant movement of her baby since the child should not be present on the premises when the de-leading work takes place. Any further decision with regard to this order will be made by Mr. Peter McErlain upon his return on Monday, July 13, 1987. Sincerely, David E. Kochan ec • MEMORANDUM BOARD OF HEALTH 210 Main Street - City Halt Northampton, MA 01060 TO: Assistant City Solicitor Kathleen Fallon FROM: Peter J. McFrlain SUBJECT: Review of "Lead Paint" Case DATE: July 20, 1987 Attached, for your review, please find copies of letters and notices concerning the removal of "lead paint" from an apartment at 37A Holyoke Street. Following an inspection, the Board of Health ordered the owner (Mogens Hermann) to remove the lead paint hazard. He has submitted written objections to the order and also claims the tenant will not allow him into the apartment in order to assess and correct the problem. The tenants (Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley) have indicated, verbally, that the process will be too upsetting for their new born son and wish to delay the lead paint removal for six or eight weeks. Please advise on the following issues: 1. Does Mr. Hermann have a viable legal objection to the order to remove lead paint? 2. Must the Board of Health order the tenants to allow the deleading project to proceed or is it permissable to delay enforcement as the tenants have requested? I will be happy to meet with you to discuss this case further. ec Attachments ' ogens V. ^.ermann, 50 -r,awley Street, vorthamnton, 'ass. , 01050, July 7, 1997. Mr. Peter J. McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton, Massachusetts, 01060. Dear Sir: I want to give you herein a summary of my recent con- tacts with you and other officials at the 3oard of Health. In the afternoon of Thursday, July 2, I visited you at your office, and I told you that I had received your orders in re- ference to lead paint and Sanitary 0ode violations at the LaVallee apartment, 37 Folyoke St. , Nh. On the morning of Monday, July 6, I went to your office again, and talked to one of your assistants. I told her that on July 2 and 3, I had been in contact with a state-approved Deleading Contractor, Mr. James Carroll, 736-6555. He, his assistant, and I, had looked over the LaVallee apartment to- gether on the morning of July 3. I told your assistant about that, and gave her some further details, of which she took note. I also told her that earlier on July 3, I had tried to get into the LaVallee apartment in order to make a goodwill effort to comply with your order re: Sanitary Code violations, and that Mr. LaVallee had refused to let me in. On the afternoon of Monday, July 6, I got two phone calls from Mr. David E. Yochan, of the Northampton Board of Fealth. In the first of the ensuing conversations, he saved me to des- cribe, in broad outline, my problems with the LaVallee couple. I answered to the best of my ability. In the second conversa- tion, a few minutes later, Mr. Kochan told me that he had tal- ked to Maureen LaVallee, who, allegedly, had said that she and her husband wanted to be left in peace for about six weeks. In Mr. Kochan's conversation with me, and presumably in his with her, he said that he didn't have authority to allow her that mach delay with de-leading procedures, since he is only filling in for you during your one-week vacation. Then I asked Mr. Kochan whether he would permit me and the LaVallee couple a respite until Monday July 13. To this, he answered in the af- firmative. I await your further decisions on these matters. /�jp Sincerely,r / Mogens V. Fermann, landlord. e Copies to: David F. Tochan, Nh. Board of Health. Mr and Mrs. Robert LaVallee, 37 Folyo'-e Street, Northampton (with extra cony for their lawyer). James Carroll, 19 Wellington St. , Spfld. , 01109. un$ +, . Nwy _i,;.i To: Inspector Peter McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton, Massachusetts. From: Mogens V. Hermann, 50 Hawley Street, Northamp- ton, Massachusetts, 01060. Phone 586-2689. u jects: Refusal to obey your order re: lead paint, in the shape in which that order was given about a week ago, Statement of willingness to do a reasonable amount of child protec- tion work, in accordance with MOL C 111, section 197, provided I am given protec- tion and a reasonable amount of time. invamp avvve NO1d4WNiUON Date: July 8, 1987. Dear Sir: On July 2 this year, I received from you two envelopes postmarked June 30. One of them re- ferred to ordinary Sanitary Code violations, whereas the other dealt with lead paint. My present communi- cation represents a series of facts and opinions on the latter subject. The lead paint order, and the batches of papers that were enclosed with it, presented themselves as consisting, mainly, in printed pages issued by an agency called The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Human Services, .Department of Public Health, Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program", to which I'll refer in the following as E.O.H.S. In all the pages sent, there was little from your hand except your signature , the names and addresses of people directly involved, and the re- sults of an inspection of the relevant apartment. The contents of the lead-paint envelope were as follows: (1) "Order to Correct Violation", one page. (2) "Lead Advisory" , ten pages. (3) "Report of In- spector"; consisting in two pages of printed instruc- tions for general use and five pages of special in- spection results re: the affected apartment, at 37 Holyoke Street , and (4) "Standard Procedure for Re- moving Lead Based Paint"; three pages of printed material. In the said envelope , there wasn' t any copy of MOL C 111, section 197, which is the basic law in reference to lead paint and lead plaster problems in Massachusetts. Thus, the Order that you sent me didn' t present itself as an Order to obey that law, but as an order to obey those other directives, evidently issued by E.O.H. S. I have several reasons for refusing to obey them. Some of those reasons are too complex to fully ex- pose in a letter such as this, Others are simpler. A fairly simple one consists in the fact that your Order was issued under false assumptions. MVH to McE, July 8, 1987, page 2. I quote from the second paragraph of your "Order to Correct Violation" : "The Director further declares that the presence of the aforementioned violation presents an immediate danger of lead poisoning to one or more occupants of the premises , and that this constitutes an emergency . . . " This declaration ap- pears over your signature in a letter addressed to me, so that I must assume that you really meant it. I perceive that statement ae being untrue. The si- tuation of the relevant apartment, at 37 Holyoke St. , Northampton, has been as follows for the last six weeks or so: a baby boy was born to the occupants, Mr. and Mrs. LaVallee, on or about the 25 of May. No other child has resided in the apartment recently, The baby who was there was physically unable to lick or chew paint from any of the apartment' s woodwork, unless somebody strongly encouraged such behavior, which I cannot believe that anybody would. Hence, the supposed lead paint emergency didn' t exist. The baby ' s father and mother have clearly shown, in words and in deed, that they didn' t think, either, that an emergency, of the type suggested in your letter, really existed. That ' s why I suggest that that letter was based on a wrong assumption. Another fairly simple reason for my refusal to obey the Order follows from the fact that no one can be obliged to do the impossible. I quote from the Order' s third paragraph: "You are hereby ordered to remedy said violation within 7 days of receipt of this notice according to the directions in the Lead Advisory accompanying this order. " (underlining theirs) I have carefully read the said Lead Advisory, all doesn' t en pages of it, and on this basis I can truly state that it contain any mitigating factor, like, for instance, "you are requested to make a goodwill effort within 7 days " Nor does it say that I have to contact a deleading expert, or to sign a valid contract with such a person within that time limit. The Lead Advisory simply describes what has to be done; the apparent assumption being that the landlord or landlady has to do it personally. To an ordinary small landlord such as I, who has never been through this ordeal, and who is completely taken aback by the vast diffe- rences between the basic law (MOL C 111, section 197) and the E.O.H.S. directives, the list of direct hard- ware work and safety precautions reads like the Twelve Labors of Hercules, or a Stalinesque Five- Year Plan. Much of the work requires special equip- ment such as "approved respirators" , special vaccuum cleaners, acres of dropcloths, and a special exhaust fan. Much of the work also requires special training. The job simply cannot be done in seven days by an ordinary landpord such as I, even if the tenants co- operate, as the Lead Advisory requires them to do, but there is no guarantee that they will. MVH to NcE. , July 8, 1987, page 3. I have later found out that although the Lead Ad- visory ' s instructions are almost entirely directed at the landlord (lady) , they aren' t really meant to be carried out by such a person. There is sleight-of- hand thought process involved here , the essence of which is that about 98$ of the work is really meant to be done by a team of state-approved de-leaders. But that fact isn' t stated directly. It is something that the owner finds out as, terrified by the mate- rials sent him, he frantically thrashes around for ways of somehow, apparently, complying with that . fearsome Order, with its threat of criminal prosecu- tion if not complied with within seven days. I have other reasons for refusing to obey the in- struction, as given, but it would take a lot of space for me to explain what I have in mind. Howe- ver, I want to give a hint about it. In Massachusetts General Laws Annotated, Volume 40, on page 39, it is stated, almost in plain terms, that municipal ordinances and by-laws, as well as administrative regulations issued by state or local agencies, are open to challenge and invalidation if they are "in violation of the Constitution of the United States or of the laws of the commonwealth, or are in violation of rules or regulations promulgated under the authority of such laws . " I attach here- to a Xerox copy of . the said page for reference. The point that I am trying to make is that as I consider the entire batch of papers sent me by the Board of Health about a week ago, I find that, as formerly mentioned, its requirements are fantasti- cally more onerous than those of the basic law (MGL C 111, section 197) . Also, I think that I can point out incompatibility on at least two points of detail. I must admit that some complex and fine distinctions are involved, but if my rationale is valid, then the said incompatibility is one, or two, or more, extra reasons for me to reject the order, as given. Speaking of MGL C 111, section 197, it plainly mandates the removal or covering of all the toxic paint and plaster on all the listed areas, in all dwellings in which there are children of six or less. If the law had been strictly applied since 1973, as , according to its own wording, it was supposed to be, there would hardly be any affected dwellings left in the state , because nearly all dwellings in the commonwealth have been inhabited by such children at one time or another during the last 14 years. But evidently, the law hasn' t been applied that way. It has only been applied to a rather small percentage of the apartments to which it theoretically should have been applied. No instruction or directive can be fully valid under such circumstances. MVH to McE. , July 8, 1987, page 4. One of the E.O.H.S. enclosures, titled, not quite properly, "Report of the Inspector" , contains two slightly veiled incitements for tenants to commit le- galized theft. Thus, one of those paragraphs permits "occupants", without further ado, to withhold rent for as long as lead paint violations remain incor- rested, subject only to hazy and uncertain obliga- tions to deposit money in escrow accounts. The other paragraph permits them, also quite cavalierly, to use up to four months' rent on "necessary repairs"in the apartment. In this context, I want to add that my own tenants, the LaVallee couple , cannot legally take advantage of the latter privilege. If they want to know why, let them ask, and I'll tell them. But this peculiari- ty is irrelevant to the wider issue of legalized theft permitted by the "Report of the Inspector. " There is much more to be said on those subjects, but since I don't want the letter to be too long, I' ll leave it at this. I am willing to mostly obey the instructions con- tained in MGL C 111, section 197, provided they are construed In a reasonable manner. Those instructions were meant to be carried out by ordinary landlords and ladies with their own hands, as I am sure that they could be , because a lot of "Covering" was ex- pressly permitted by the law. There is a world of difference between covering a patch of smooth and solid paint , on the one hand, and removing it on the other. I would expect to use about two months for the job, old man as I am. I would absolutely re- quest to have the run of the apartment for the dura- tion, and to have due guarantee against interference with my work. If a considerable amount of litigation is expec- ted to result from this communication, I suggest that the LaVallee couple be given an opportunity to have another apartment made available to them, by public authority, perhaps for years on end. Attachments: (A) MGL C 111, section 197. tB) Mas- sachusetts General Laws Annotated, Vol. 40, page 39. (C) Article about lead paint in Holyoke Transcript Telegram, February 6, 1987. c Copies to: Mr. and Mrs. Lavallee. Mr. James Carroll; a Deleading Contractor who has looked over the LaVallee apartment. Pe e-`s.c r Bay State's best hope 4 only partial solution 79,e 7 l to lead poisoning. By SHARON VOAS Transcript-Telegram staff Even if the Legislature passes a major new bill to prevent lead poisoning, many more chil- dren will continue to suffer mental retardation and organ damage, says the bill's sponsor,, A special legislative commission proposed only partial reimbursement for those who re- move lead paint from their homes and apart- ments in order to get the package of bills through the Legislature, said state Rep. John McDonough of Jamiaca Plain. Without full reimbursement, many people will not remove the lead, said McDonough, who headed the commission. Lead poisoning, which damages the brain and kidneys, is a problem in older cities like Holyoke and Chicopee because so many of the apartments and Victorian homes were built be- fore use of lead-based paint was outlawed. Statewide, 1-2 percent of all children are poi- � soned by lead; in Holyoke, the rate is more than 4 percent. An estimated 80 percent of the homes and apartments in Holyoke and 53 percent in Chico- pee contain lead paint. In the summer of 1985, the Valley Nurses Association went door-to- door throughout Holyoke screening kids and found 55 who been poisoned by lead. The special commission reported on Jan. 20 that 2,000 children in Massachusetts are poi- soned by lead each year and, that if lead re- moval dawdles along at its present rate, it won't be eliminated from homes in the state for another 548 years. The commission proposed offering property owners grants, loans and tax credits to remove lead; state-reimbursed blood screening for all children younger than six to catch the problem earlier; inspection of all homes and apartments built before 1978; and a training and certifica- tion for people who remove lead. When asked how many years it will take to rid the state of lead contamination if the bills 'become law, McDonough said "250,' . and laughed. . The bills would give property owners $1,000 tax credits for removing lead — short of the average cost of $2,500. Property owners who don't earn enough to take advantage of tax credits may be able to get grants or loans. The bills don't yet specify who would be eligible for the grants and loans or how large they would be. Mark Berezin, president of the Holyoke landlords' assocation, said few landlords will re- move lead if the tax credit is no more than $1,000. The cost can be as much as $10,000 per Continued from front page But neither the state nor prop- erty owners would be willing to pick up the tab for mandatory lead removal of every property in the state, he said. Furthermore, there are only 100 companies that re- move lead now. At least 5,000 would be needed. AR of them would have to be trained and certi- fied by the state — something the bills require because anyone can hang out a shingle as a lead re- moval expert now. He hopes the public will get in- volved and become a strong force in shaping how the bills change as credit and low-interest or no-inter- they go through the Legislature. est loans from the state for the The first public hearing on the balance of the cost so they could bills will be March 4 before the spread it over several years. House Health Care Committee. The commission recommends a Howard S. Sasson, a Springfield 3-cent tax on leaded gasoline to lawyer who specializes in liability pay for the grants and loans. The suits filed against landlords for state Department of Revenue esti- lead poisoning, is handling a num- mated the state would lose $5 mil- ber of such cases in Holyoke. He lion a year on the tax credits. thinks the threat of liability suits, "We're not going to get it on in combination with the financial the books if we ask for more than incentives in the bills, would get a $1,000 tax credits," McDonough number of landlords to remove said. "There are hundreds of prop- lead from their apartments. osals before the Legislature to The current law requires land- create tax credits for worthwhile lords and homeowners to remove projects every year.. lead from their property if any The real estate industry filed children under 6 years of age live bills for tax credits for lead re- I there. In cases where a landlord moval every year for the past five hasn't removed lead paint and a years. None passed. tenant's child was poisoned, court But this is start and a call to settlements have ranged from action," he said. "If we don't get $10,000 to$1 million, Sasson said. started, we will continue to have But Sasson thinks the bills 2,000 kids poisoned a year. should mandate much greater en- "Ideally, we would pass an en- forcement of the lead removal law. forcable law that every property The new laws also should require would be de-leaded at the time of landlords to carry liability insur- sale, and every apartment would ance so they can pay for damages, be de-leaded upon vacancy," he he said. Many landlords cut costs said. "That would get the lead out by not carrying the insurance, he of the state in 7 to 10 years." said. apartment by the time lead is removed from adjoining porches and hallways, he said. "We would like to see a lead- free environment, but we don't feel we ought to bear the burden of a $2,500 to $10,000 cost for a prob- lem we didn't cause," Berezin said. We feel the de-leading should be done for the good of society, but the majority of the cost should be borne by the government." He would propose that land- lords be able to get the $1,000 tax Mogens V. Hermann, 50 Hawley Street, Northampton, Mass. , 01060, July 16, 1987, afternoon. Mr. Peter McErlain, Inspector, Board of Health, Northampton. Dear Sir: In our conversation this morning, the statement of yours that I liked the best was when you said, in sub- stance, that you would try to get the Lavallee couple to pay me rent. I've done some legal research in reference to that type of problem. There is a ruling in "Kargman v Dustin (1977) 359 N.E. 2d 971, 5 Mass. ADp.101" which affirms, in principle, that landlords are entitled to reasonable assurance that rent will continue to be paid during lengthy court proceedings. I quote from the Kargman v Dustin case report: "The District Court judge decided that the tenants' rent withholding, pursuant to C 239, section BA (n. 5) was without merit and he ordered that they pay the Yargmans all of the base rent which they had withheld. He also ordered them to begin to pay the increase into the District Court on a monthly basis. " I repeat my statement, already made to you in wri- ting this morning, to the effect that I believe MGL C 239, section 8A, to be unconstitutional, especially insofar as it refers (perhaps) to lead-paint regula- tions. I believe it to be unconstitutional, and there- fore invalid, by virtue of the federal Constitution' s Article I, section 10, which says: "No State shall . . . pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts . . . " Of course, MCI C 239, section BA does impair the obli- gation of contracts, since every landlord-tenant rela- tionship is a contract. Since I have now raised the question of the vali- dity of Mt 239, section BA, and given you other perti- nent information, I suggest that you proceed, without delay , to obtain an order for my tenants to pay rent. Sincerely, Xerox copies to Mr. and Mrs. Lavallee, by certified mail. Mogens V. Hermann, 50 Hawley Street Northampton, Mass. , Mr. Peter McErlaine , Inspector, Board of Health, Northampton. Dear Sir: First, I want to remind you that on July 2, you and I discussed the possibility of covering some of the lead paint in the LaYallee apartment instead of removing it. As I am sure you know, MGL C 111, section 197, allows a lot of that. I wonder whether we can reach an agreement of some sort. Second, I enclose herewith a copy of an Affidavit made out jointly by Mr. Carroll and I on July 10. Third, I want to let you know that I believe MGL C 239. section 8A (which presumes to allow tenants to withhold rent in some lead-paint and Sanitary-Code si- tuations) to be unconstitutional, at least as applied to lead-paint situations. I quote from the federal Con- stitution's Article I, section 10: No State shall . . . pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts . . ." As I am sure you know, every landlord-tenant relationship is a contract. And my question is whether the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had a right to issue a law which nul- lified the tenants' (or occupants' ) obligation to pay rent. Of course , looking at contract law in general, I know that some pact valid; others not. A court can under certain clirrcumstances determine that a gi- ven contract, even if valid to begin with, shall be nullified. The application of the federal Constitu- tion' s Article I, section 10 is therefore hazy and un- certain. But in such situations , considerations of e- quity and common sense become important. As far as I understand, tenants can, if they wish, sabotage the operations for years on end. The law (MGL C 239, sec- tion 8A) doesn' t definitely compel them to pay rent in case of such sabotage. All told, I think that that law should be considered invalid for being contrary to equity, common sense, and the Constitution' s wording. I assume that you have seen David Kochan' s letter of July 9 to me. It confirms that Mrs. LaValle wants to be left in peace for several weeks. What I get out of that is that (A) she doesn' t think that there is any emergency, and (B) she and her husband may want to sabotage the operations for a long time, and to live rent-free for the duration. Actually, I think there must be several interesting subjects that you and I could discuss. Please arrange for a conversation of some sort. Sincerely, AFFIDAVIT, made out jointly by James Carroll , a Deleading Contractor of 18, Wellington Street, Springfield, Massa- chusetts, D1109, and Momens V. Hermann,_ who resides at 50 Hawley Street, Northampton, Mast. ,01060,Nandhownsoa,ren- tal property located at 37 Holyoke St. , By the way of background information, it should be no- ted that on Thursday July 2, 1987, Mr. Hermann received a Eoard of Health Order to de-lead apartment A at 37 Holy- oke St. , and to do some other work there. The said apart- ment is occupied by Mr. and Mrs. Lavallee. The said order requested, in effect, s to to completed on or apart- ment, in n such aa way before July 9. Mr. and Mrs Lavallee had received a copy of the Order on or about July 1, 1987. Friday We app987date100:00tA.M. or thereabouts.1tMr.i July e, 1987, Hermann knocked on the door, and Mr LaVallee , without opening it, said, in substance, that he wouldn't let anybody in. Mr. Carroll then said that he was a state-authorized De- leading Contractor, and that he and his assistant had an absolute right to get in, because he needed to see what work had to be done, so as to be able to quote a price for the job. Mr. LaYallee then opened the door, and a discussion ensued between him and Mr. Carroll. The latter had a copy of the Eoard of Health Order in his hand; he showed it to Mr. Lavallee , who made it clear that he had known about it for a couple of days. But he again refused to let us in, on the ground that his baby son was sleep- ing, and that he had had only half an hour' s notice of our coming. He also intimated that since he expected uE , and didn' t want ue in, he had called the police. But Mr. Carroll again insisted that we had a right to get in. He added that if Mr. LaVallee persisted in his denial of entrance , he would want a sheriff or officer to help ue get in. After that, Mr. LaVallee mellowed, and after an exchange of conciliatory statements, he allowed us in. No police officer came while we were there. Done at Northampton, Massachusetts, July 10, 1987. ( *C James Carroll Mogens V. Hermann Hampshire Countfy State of Mass July 10, 1987 Appeared before me, James Carroll and Mogens V. Hermann and this is their free act and deed. �� • L < /1" ' Notary MYCD, r !?- nnl EXViHES JULY ?.J. . i➢ Mogens Y. Hermann, 50 Hawley Street, Northampton, Mass. , 01060, July 17 , 1987. Inspector Peter McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton. Dear Sir: This is in sequence to our conversation in your of- fice yesterday afternoon. I want to add a few commenta- rieYo° intimated that and as if I were spoilingte. for a battle in court. But in fact, I would rather com- promise than fight. If, for instance, you'll content yourself with having the toxic accessible woodworkvered with plastic varnish (polyurethane) , go along with that. In a way it is "paint" , in a way it isn't. But s to the nousaencl surest to°your order, which goi far h mbeyondthe demands of MGL C 111, section 197 , I am, as I said yes- terday, a conscientious objector. You made it clear yesterday that you have y of my printed letters to newspaper editors, including your can seee,rwell defined, my ideas oofe where in refence to statesmanship in connection with urban rental properties. Against that background, you will readily see that in my eyes , the whole complex of more recent lead-paint directions is an abomination, an absolute negation of all decency, equity and statesmanship. I would lose all self-respect if I were to comply with those more elaborate direc- tives. That is what I mean by saying that insofar as they are concerned, I am a conscentious objector. If you cannot, or will not, work out a compromise, or withdraw your order, I shall, of course, have to go that , to court. As far as I know, tenants repeat what I said yesterday, namely that they haven't paid me for July; they were very prompt with the last four simply withhold that, withhold rent, cavalierlyy l ndwithoutwa word of apology or notification. That' s what they have done, and their in obviously based permie- If you cannot or will not retract your notice or work out a compromise, you' ll be Sing me a taking me to court as soon as possible, I would appreciate a prior consultation with the soli- citor at Town Hall. Of course, a special problem ise rais raised Bby Maybe con- stitutional aspect of MGL C 239, accor- ding to g thetDeclaratoryS Judgments sAct i(MGL eCs ecor- 231A) Sincerely • D: ROM: David E. Kochan, Sanitary Inspector UBJECT: Extension of time limit to begin de-leading of the LaVallee Apartment at 37A Holyoke Street Mogens V. Hermann MEMORANDUM BOARD OF HEALTH 210 Main Street- City Halt Northampton, MA 01060 IATE: July 9, 1987 Per our two telephone conversations and my conversation with Mrs. LaVallee on July 6, 1987, I hereby make written confirmation of my verbal agreement to extend the seven (7) day time limit (de-leading order dated June 29, 1987) until July 13, 1987. This extension is granted as a result of my conversation with Mrs. LaVallee. She suggested to me that a 5 or 6 week delay before de-leading procedures are undertaken would be appreciated as her child is still extremely y She was concerned about the constant movement of her baby since the child should not be present on the premises when the de-leading work takes place. Any further decision with regard to this order will be made by Mr. Peter McErlain upon his return on Monday, July 13, 1987. Sincerely, David E. Kochan ec Mogens V. Hermann, 50 Hawley Street,W Wednesday 7-29, 1987. Inspector Peter McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton. Dear Sir: As you know, I am very dissatisfied with the way the LaVallee couple have almost completely denied me access to their apartment during these almost four weeks. I am eager to comply with those your r edrs which are rendow based only on the Sanitary Code (i.e. and the bathroom ceiling, since the toilet in the apart- ment above was fixed by by on I do not ignore what you told me yesterday about but kage between lead-paint and Sanitary- even so, I believe that my legal position will be im- proved if I can comply with those belonging to the lat- ter category. That, however, is impeded by the restric- tions imposed by the LaVallee couple; especially by Mrs. LaVallee. I want to recall that on July 3, Mr. Carroll and I met with stiff opposition as we tried to get into the apartment, he in order to observe and take measurements and I in order to make a start on the broken window. On July 6, Maureen LaVallee told Mr. Yochan that she wan- ted to be left in peace for five or six weeks. Mr to- than, very reasonably, took the attitude that such a delay wasn't his to grant; the decision had to be left to you. For awhile , I awaited a word from you. Then, on Tues- day, July 21, you told me that you had arranged for me to get access to the LaVallee apartment so that I might work on the broken window and the bathroom ceiling. How- ever, Mrs. LaVallee almost immediately made it clear that she wouldn't let me start either on Wednesday or on the following morning. On Thursday afternoon I cal- led self aatl theodoorl,®Iswasngivenstart. l presented a window frame the broken window in it. On Friday morning I gave it back with a new window pane in it, and paid Robert LaVallee twenty dollars for installation, and for work on sash cords on a neighboring window. Which he promised to do over the weekend. Today, Wednesday 7-29, I've tried to find out whe- ther it had been done; I would also have taken mea- surements for the ceiling Job itted. But'Mrs.ut LaVallee told me, quite me in, not even for a few minutes. She has consistently treated me as a person who has no rights. I assume that at one time she must have pro- mised you that she would grant me workman privileges, i.e. free access for as long as the job takes, the workman' s leisure. Any promise less than that MYH to McErlain, July 29 , 1987, p 2. would hardly have made sense , but that' s not the way it has worked out. Meanwhile, I haven' t received any rent for July. Nor, of course , for August. I take this opportunity to repeat what I've said and 8 itwhiche presumesmtoy allow consider Lavallee couple to withhold rent, to be unconstitutional, and therefore invalid. Let me add now that there is another called equity , which if applied MGL C 239, section 8A, at least in a situation such as s the landlords fnrt principles of neqt says, in substance, that if a law, rule , contract, etc. , greatly favors one person to the detriment of another, to such an extent that no decent person would take ad- vantage of it, then that law, rule , contract , etc. , is invalid. And I ask: granted that my deleading orders suffer from all the debilities that I've pointed out in my recent letters, and granted that the LaYallee baby is not in danger of lead poisoning during the next eight months or so, would any decent person in their position withhold rent while denying me workman' s rights to do the repairs I am willing to do? There is yet another principle which, if applied, would work in the same way as that of equity, namely toedevel concept h; don't brieflylmen- tion that I am aware of it. Signed, with sweet reasonableness, - William J. O'Grady Attorney at Law 1248 Main St. Suite 300 Springfield, MA 01103 413-737-7694 (r / ' C . July 30, 1987 CERTIFIED MAIL/RRR 4:04/9184i3 8 77 Mr. Mogens V. Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 Re: 37 Holyoke s Street, Northampton, MA SOUTHAMPTON,Parka O''Gn.4y 162 College Highway P.O.Box 249 Southampton,MA 01073 Dear Mr. Hermann: Be advised that this office hrepresents resentsltthe rintereestrofiMr. and apathment unit Mrs. Robert B. romayou, which is located at 37 Holyoke Street, Northampton, NorMassachusetts. On June 26, 1987, my clients' apartment was inspected by the Board of Health of the City of Northampton, and an order to correct violations was issued by that department on or about June 29 , 1987. To date, no progress has been made with respect to correcting those violations. The dwelling unit contains code violations which are serious enogh to my uclients.enYoug are herebyr advised mthat they hwill hwi tthholdrent until all of those violations are corrected. Very truly yo s, William J. WJO/stt cc LaValley dy, Esq. SRD OF HEALTH r.JOYCE.Chairman TEL B.PARSONS L McEBLAIN•Health Agent August 4, 1987 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS 01060 OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH 210 MAIN STREET 01060 (413)586-6950 Ext.213 Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley 37 Holyoke Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. & Mrs. LaValley: Re: 37 Holyoke Street, Apartment A Please be advised that Section 410.810 of 105 CMR 410.000 of the State Sanitary Code Chapter II requires the following: 410.810: Access for Repairs and Alterations unit shall Every occupant of a dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming give the owner thereof, or his agent or employees, upon reasonable nonce, reasonable or r access,rooming if possible by appointment, to the dwelling, or alter unit, as roaming snit to effect compliance with the provisions or alterations as are necessary of these minimum standards. Therefore upon reasonable notice (24 hours in advance) , you must allow Mr. Hermnn ad/or his eployees(between a 8:00 n a.m. and 5:00 p.m.) to assess aand/or ncorrect rviolations t e of the Sanitary Code. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact the Board of Health office. Very truly yours, Aft Peter .7. McErlain Health Agent ec cc: Mogen V. Hermann Certified mail P 417 860 369 „ gens I. 'Termann, By Certified Mail. ,% E-a Pte, u r. William J. O'6rady, Attorney at Law, 1249 Fain St. , Springfield, Mass. , 01101. Dear Sir: Thank you for your letter of July 30. I agree with some parts of it ; not with others. It is tr•:e that on June 29 this year, the Northampton Board of Health issued orders to me with respect to a toilet, a win- dow, a bathroom ceiling and lead paint. I signed receipts for those orders on July 2. has In your letter, you wrote that "To date, no progress been made with respect to correcting those violatipde. " But I want you to know that I an a stickler with respect�mant1cs and the meanings of words. The word "violation" , troperly used, refers to an improper activity, such as improper hand- ling of a vehicle on public land. But whenever the word, or any of its derivatives. is used in the Massachusetts State Sa- nitary Code, or in affiliated laws, rules, regulations or sta- tionery, that same word rather means something like "dlecre- Penny between Massachusetts directives and existing conditions. " That may be a =rely passive configuration, as it is in the situation referred to in your letter. Semantics apart, I object to the main content of that state- went of yours, referred to above. The relevant toilet, located in an apartment above the LaVallee apartment, was fixed on June 2h+ by two employees of Ci^.hy Plumbing (see enclosure 1) ' C The window was fixed, jointly by Mr. LaVallee and myself, on 6 July, and 2h. I ^_aid him twenty dollars for his part in the achty4nt, and for comparatively minor work on a neighboring o� window. the LVallee con- 4 As to danger to their health and safety, a ale have shown by their behavior that they aren't worried by that, so I wonder why you should be. Beginning in the early lays of July, they have followed a policy of almost r_omtletely refusing -e entry. That refusal is documented in written sta- tements of July 9 and 10, enclosed. Later in the month, on July 21, '•1r. Mczrlain, of the Board of Wealth, Put pressure on one of the LaVallee's (I elieve Mrs. LaVallee) to induce them f to let me in. But even 1IE've been given access only once, for LA, a few minutes, and then under special circumstances. While almost completely denying ey owe access, they've heyh July and the nerve to withhold rent. Today, me because I know dow August. I haven't raised any fuss about it, extremely the cards are stacked in favor of tenants, or "occu- pants" , in situations of this tyne. I am struck by the fact that you haven't mentioned MGL C ent. 239, section 9A in connection took it their thatrwas From the very beginning. I the textual basis (Legal or not) for their decision to deprive me. But if that was so, then I think you ought to come right out and say so. Cr is there any other basis for that decision of theirs? Please let me know, without delay, for the matter is important. /':%. '-!�� %/ <, .r^ -x --� Copies to Mc.rlain, Board of Health, and City Solicitor , City Hall, Northampton. Strnet , '?orthamntno, 'mss. , 01O4.r ' on'ay, evvpst 3, 19n7 Mogens V. Hermann, 50 Hawley St. , Northampton, Mass. , 01060, Wednesday August 5, 1987. Inspector Peter McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton. Dear Sir: Thanks for your letter of August 4 to the La- Valley' s, with copy to me, in reference to Access for Repairs and Alterations. With respect to O'Grady ' s letter to me , and my answer of August 3, there are a few angles that may have esca- ped you, but which I now want to highlight. Such as: (1) it is uncertain whether rent-withholding tenants are un- der a legal obligation to notify their landlord, previ- ously and in writing, of their decision to withhold rent. (2) The LaValley couple failed to pay me rent for July, but they didn' t give me any previous written no- tice of their decision to withhold rent. (3) Their writ- ten notice came about one month late, in O'Grady' s let- ter of July 30. (4) According to a certain interpreta- tion of MGL C 239, section 8A, I may now be in a posi- tion to send them a "notice to quit for non-payment of rent. ° ( 5) If I do send the such a notice, and if a court rules that it is valid, those tenants of mine will have to leave, because I sent them a notice of that kind on February 6 this year. It was delivered to their address by Deputy Sheriff George A. Symboreki. I assume that you know that a second notice of that type within a 12-month period is final: if it sticks, they' ll have to leavelrNO matter whether one interpretation or the (6) other is correct, the O'Grady letter has made it obvi- ous that they think they are in danger of being put on the street. That' s what I meant the other day, as I mentioned the O'Grady letter on the phone , and as I said that "they have lost their nerve. ' (7) It seems obvious to me that they now live in fear; the just and natural fear of those who know that they've done wrong. No cheap gimmicks can remove such a fear; it wouldn't even stop if I were to de-lead the apartment. That being so, I want to revive a suggestion that I've made twice before in writing, namely on page 4 of my letter of July 8 to you, and on page 2 of my letter of July 23 to Mrs. Fallon, to the effect that the La- Valley' s should be talked into moving into a different residence, to be provided by public authority. If that is done, it will solve a lot of problems, for you, for me, and for others. Sincerely s 8G - z C ap. Copy to Mrs. Fallon, City Solicitor. ress CHAPTER II STATE SANITARY CODE / (42te 374A Occupant's Name of Occupants Apt. # 11 of Dwelling Units to of Structure B F M # Habitable Rooms ter eve. //�� ddress of Owner nn # of Stories Ik Bedrooms Violations Bathroom 41U.1JU tea between 1200 & 140° : water filet and seat .150 A(1) n -n basin .150 A(2) L .A .��1 ��.(n ) ;h or tub .150 A(3) WWW °4° )wer fficient cold water .350 A t� c) .500 e O it'1'c' ....t Go--0 ( -"(')Y- DOT lls .500 filing .500 .500 or .252 A ght .280 A or B ntilation connection & drains .350 umbing Kitchen 410.100 Regulation Violations tchen sink sufficient size .IQQ A(1) oven .100 A(2) ove and for refri:erator .100 A(3) Lace Outlets electrical .251 B li:ht fixture .251 A le electrical .500 Ills .500 Jilin: Loor .500 (window (mechanical) .251.6 mutilation (sufficient treasures) •350 A ,ld water .190 at water indows .500 .500 D°rs door & window .551 & .552 creens lumbin connection & drains .350 Livin: Room Regulation Violations (2 or one with li:ht .251 B utlets .251 A :lit n: .500 alls :e•lin: .500 'loor - .500 lindows .500 Screens - .551 windows .480 E ocks ` •a r Dinin: Room Regulation Violations _ )utlets (2 or one w • t) .251 B l �-�/u.�g_i_ii/.ti_ f hsin g g .251 A �'<rt• r�� .500 ����1/_A��-�'A - - Gelli Gelling .500 �a NI .500 ge Floor dindow .500 Screens. .551 Locks .480 E iolations Slee.ln_ Room lP1 "" ' ' ''icient 1i•htin: ne_uiai ".a .250 A natural t or 1 - .251 B ets it with 1 outlet 251 A .500 s in: .500 ink .+ l I/ )r 50� . 0 s ���I :...f lows wens r there adequate ce for occupant? Slee.in: Room 62 1:h in .400 .250 A ficient natural 1 .251 B utlets or outlet .251 A ht with .500 Is lin_ .500 .500 for .500 Ldows .551 tens .500 ar there adequate .400 ace for occu.ant? Room #3 .250 A Sleeping 1i:htin: ££icient natural 1 .251 B outlets or •ht with outlet .251 A .500 lls ilin_ .500 .500 oar .500 ndows .551 teens nor there adequate 'ace for occupant? Common Area & Exit (Interior aterior area illuminated .ro.erl .500 .400 .253 A & B .551 .500 - indows creens oars leer e ails ,500 .500 0,•� ' ���a • .air'` d i1 fitg . leers tairwa s 'onmon bathroom clean Common Area & Exit (Exteriorly :himne ?oundat foandation rs > rba:arba:e & rubbish Private wa s ;utters and down s.outs Leaf . •u 151 S .500 .500 .601 .600 .500 .500 .502 .253 B en irnar ? ? W,i I i-/S /Ata IW# -L Murat c- r�fL_in .- �1 �' - • . i . ... . . . _ Lead paint General services working and available heating facilities in good ir? 680 and 64 water 120° to 1400 ilities vented e heater - ,ro.er orar wirin• otrical service ade•uate acts and rodents lling sanitar • Miscellaneous Regulation Violations .200 11 : 1 I 1 niM ran e next scheduled reinspection is: —7744-t.Th 1/4445r- Title Time a.m. p.m. a.m. p.m. Date Time Name of Complainant Address BOARD OF HEALTH CITY HALL COMPLAINT RECORD Nature of Complaint n . Location of Premises Owner Address Occupant Taken by Date of inspection INSPECTOR'S REPORT Date 3 2 " tST Action Taken Inspector 1RD OF IlEALTH '.JOYCE.Chairman C.KENNY.M.D. 37.R.PARSONS 1.McERLARL Health Agent August 4, 1987 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS 01060 OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH 210 MAIN STREET 01060 (4131 5866950 Ext.213 Mr. S Mrs. Robert LaValley 37 Holyoke Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. E. Mrs. LaValley: Re: 37 Holyoke Street, Apartment A Please be advised that Section 410.810 of 105 CMR 410.000 of the State Sanitary Code Chapter II requires the following: 410 810: Access for Repairs and Alterations Every occupant of a dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit shall give the owner thereof, or his agent or employees, upon reasonable notice, reasonable access, if possible by appointment, to the dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit for the purpose of making such repairs or alterations as are necessary to effect compliance with the provisions of these minimum standards. Therefore upon reasonable notice (24 hours in advance) , you must allow Mr. Hermann and/or his employees into your apartment at a reasonable time (between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.) to assess and/or correct violations of the Sanitary Code. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact the Board of Health office. Very truly yours, Peter S. McErlain Health Agent ec cc: Mogens V. Hermann Certified mail P 417 860 369 BOARD OF HEALTH ( CITY HALL COMPLAINT RECORD Name Complainant 71 // v % / / Si Tel 4v- 3 3 3/ Nature of Complaint LaZilar Address Date 0 • - Location of Premises Owner i'Hd{afs Address Occupant Taken by Date of inspection INSPECTOR'S REPORT Referred to Time /C;o7V/ Lanz 14. ,/�J� Action Taken TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM BOARD OF HEALTH 210 Main Street - City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley ( (�/�-C� Peter J. McErlain, Agent Board of Health PV SUBJECT: Deleading Project 37A Holyoke Street August 25, 1987 DATE: Please be advised that Mr. James Carroll, deleading contractor for Mr. Mogens Hermann has informed the Board of Health the the deleading project will commence on or about Friday, August 28, 1987. Please be prepared to vacate your apartment during the deleading project in order to protect your family against the lead fumes released .during the deleading project. Thank you. ec cc: James Carroll Mogens Hermann To: Mr. and Mrs. Robert Levallee, 37 Holyoke St, Northampton. From: Mogens V. Hermann, 50 Hawley St. , Northampton. Subject: Cancellation of the de-leading Job that was scheduled to begin August 28. Date of this letter: Wednesday August 26, 1987. I apologise for causing confusion by making a change of plane at such short notice. However, I am doing this in co- operation with Mr. Don Dunne, HAP office, Springfield. On Thursday August 20, I first began to seriously look into the HAP office' s financial assistance program for land- lords who are being forced to de-lead certain apartments. But Mr. Dunn, who is in charge of that program, was on a vacation, and no one else was able to tell me exactly how the program operates. Today is the first day that I 've been able to find out. Mr. Dunn has encouraged me to take advantage of his pro- gram, which I am sure will help me in several ways. How- ever, in order for me to take advantage of it, I must first obtain bids from at least two state licensed contractors. That I hadn' t done, and of course, it cannot be done before August 28; the day when Mr. McErlain had scheduled the de- leading job to be started. That' s why I am now canceling that particular Job plan. I must admit that I don't know when another one will begin. Of course, it is bad for a man to change plans at short notice , as now I am doing. But before anyone heaps blame on me, I think they should direct some blame at the people of the Executive Office of Human Services, of Jamaica Plains, Massachusetts. Those people are so very careful about informing tenants of their"Righte" , some of which I call licence , rent withholding and all. But there wasn't a word about my rights. And a lot of confusion could have been avoided if they had added a few words about those. Sincerely, /fey Q -- 5- e6 -- 2687 Copies to: Peter McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton. Don Dunn, HAP, Springfield. James Carroll, 18 Wellington St. , Springfield. Mogene (Max) V. Hermann, 50 Hawley St. , Northampton, Mass. , 01060, August 28, 1987. / /frf, e t, Mr. Don Dunn, HAP. , Inc. , 145 State St. , Springfield, Mass. , 01103. Dear Sir: This is in reference to a remark that you made yester- day, about getting a court to order the LaVallee couple to pay rent. They haven' t paid me for either July or August. I enclose herewith three relevant documents, namely (1) a joint affidavit (Carroll and Hermann) in reference to events of July 3, (2)1 gr. Kochan' s letter of July 9, which confirms that Mrs. LaVallee had asked for a five- week or six-week delay, and (3) my letter to Mr. McEr- lain of July 16, afternoon. The subject of tenant obstructionism has come up re- peatedly later, in letters and conversations. As you'll see , my letter of July 16 to McErlain con- tains a plea for him to get a court order in my favor about rent. That letter, together with some other papers, was turned over to Mrs. Katherine Fallon, city solicitor, on or about July 21. She never answered in writing, but in a phone conversation of August 6, she told me that City Hall had nothing to do with whether my tenants paid me rent or not. She said that it was entirely a private matter between they and I. There the matter has rested since then. I've toyed with the idea of suing for rent in Small Claims Court, but I am afraid that the matters at hand are too complex for such a simple procedure. Lawyers seem to be all in favor of de-leading, and opposed to landlords; I wonder who got them organized that way. So, I111 appreciate any help you may give me in this matter. �i Sincerely, a w Copy to Mr. McErlain, Board of Health, Northampton. Max Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 HAMPDEN HAMPSHIRE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CHICOPEE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CHAPTER 707 RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM HOUSING SERVICES OF SPRINGFIELD HOUSING SERVICES OF HOLYOKE FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM HOMEOWNERSHIP COUNSELING PROGRAM MODERATE REHABILITATION PROGRAM WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM EMERGENCY SHELTER OF GREATER SPRINGFIELD September 1, 1987 Dear Max, I received your letter dated August 28th regarding your deleading problem. I would first like to point out that I did not suggest or imply you could get a court order to force your tenants to pay their rent. I suggested that only the courts could make your tenants pay their rent. Further, I .would also point out that a contractor does not have the right to enter anyone's apartment without the occupants permission. Stating that he or she is a state authorized (your affidavit dated 7-10-87) deleading contractor may be a misleading or misinterpreted statement when used to gain entry'.to an occupied apartment. It appears the advice of an attorney is sorely needed in this case. Max, the old cliche,the law is the law, can best describe your present situation. The presence of lead based paints on chewable surfaces is a code violation when-ever a child under the age of six (Fed. statutes,under age seven) resides in the dwelling. You are under order from a legal enforcement agency and must delead to comply with the law. Regarding your problems of rent withholding and access to the apartment I would suggest you hire an attorney at your very_earliest convenience. An attorney can not and will not circumvent the lead laws but will represent you in all these matters. Another suggestion would be to call our landlord advocate,Eileen Wilkinson. She is knowledgeable in landlord/tenant affairs and may be albe to offer you good advice. You can call her at our toll free number 1-800-332-9667 Regarding HAP's participation in the deleading process, a copy of our program design is enclosed. We welcome you to apply for a zero percent loan for an amount considered reasonable for the size of the deleading job. We will need two estimates from contractors and will assist you in locating contractors if needed. If you participate in our program we will monitor the deleading work to assure that compliance standards will be met. We will ask the Northampton Health Department to assist in monitoring the work. The NHD will have the final say in approving the deleading work completion. OUSING ALLOWANCE PROJECT,INC. 145 STATE STREET,SPRINGFIELD,MASSACHUSETTS 01103 (413)785-1251 EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY To: Mr. and Mrs. Robert B. LaVallee , 97 Holyoke Street, Northamptn, Mass. , 01060. From: Mogene V. Hermann, 50 Hawley St. , Northampton, Mass. , 01060. Subjects: Notice of Future Publicity. The Power of Ne- gative Thinking. A Friendly Advice to Addressees. Date: September 10, 1987. Copies to Mayor Musante, Peter McErlain, Katherine Fallon, Don Dunn, Eileen Wilkinson, Wm. O'Grady, etc. This is to let you know that I am planning to write and publish a book, probably to be titled: "The Scan- dal of Massachusetts Lead-paint Regulations. " Whether you know it or not, I've produced books in the past, with titles such as "Contribution and Re- ward" and "To Start a New Civilization. " , see attach- ment 1. I've also written many letters to publishers of local papers; samples attached hereto. I happen to think that the present Massachusetts lead-paint regulations are abominably bad. They amount to gangster-like coercion aimed at forcing a few dozen landlords, or perhaps a few hundred, to pay thousands of dollars for work that shouldn't he done in the first place. Meanwhile , the process is enormously traumatic for the comparatively few landlords who are unfortunate enough to be caught in the net. A few years ago, a man wrote a book called "The Power of Positive Thinking. " That never worked very well for me, but I've got another concept called "The Power of Negative Thinking" , which agrees better with my temperament. That' s what is needed in the case of dismal abuses of power such as those of Massachusetts lead-paint authorities. My negative thinking, as ap- plied to this situation, will include the mentioning of real names, and I'll go to the very limit in order to make my tormentors look bad. My friendly advice to the LaVallee couple is that they satisfy me in some way, either by paying me the rent they owe me and moving out, or by paying their debts to me and signing certain papers that they know about. If they do anything less, they'll earn some very bad publicity for themselves, and I think they will be worse off that way, for their present beha- vior doesn' t easily stand the light of day. Sincerely, 777 S!�N d, Retag U Ca-• Sfrni ++9�^ /j feCA--.-G. Pr /9 0 003 . Tamp philosopher extols new re igion NORTHAMPTON — For people who have been plunged into a blue funk by the.television movie "The, Day Alter" and the prospects of a nuclear winter, a city philosopher, has what he considers the answer to the threat of nuclear war. Mogens,V. Hermann, 69, a native of Denmrk who settled here after an international- banking career,. believes the time Is ripe for people to.;turn b j_-New worldwide religion: This religion has no name, but its 'precepts can'6einund in lferrnann's book;To Starta New Civilization: which he self-published In 1976. slccord ng to Hermann, the solar intern and life.m Earth were created by an Intelligent Being far i purpose Rermann doesn't buy.the- Darwinian view of the universe-that. posits mechanical and. accidental •forces.controWng life= He treys that"the coimaan tenet of the peat religions, namely dellb• trate creation of the universe, saal, divine''retribution, and objective standards of good,_evil, right and wrong, are tn.*. '"On the other hand,?sound Yea. son to reject the eater trappings or? most'. • rellgiam, +epeciallf Christianity, Nader weapons won't pc oft`,he bet very• says.imless the Creator wants then to, but the Creator will destroy us unless we drastically improve our understanding and behavior. b order to do mat, people must turn to a Hindu-like religion of rein- carnation and karma, according to Hermann. "If the masses of people will work along those lines, the outcome will make religious wars impossible, in the Middle East. Northern Ireland r and elsewhere.Immense numbers of economic, social and psychological problems will be solved." Hermann's philosophy, which i rejects Darwin and Christianity;, aboakewers Communism, which he teens "a colossal fraud." Hermann says that communism is not a work- ; en' movement, but a movement of • young academia who wanted office jobs; flerinann also sees Western society_in trouble. "Our civilization is tint millions of people know it. It cannot be restored to health in anymlae like Its present shape. But a assts civrlization can be built on the • ns-of the old," he says. Hermann has been disappointed bT the poor sales of his book. After I he published the 269-page velume, • he spent-money on advertising and appeared on a television talk show, I few copies were sold, it ari4Q—te A",• ?row The Morning Union, Star 1r-Gfield, Vasa„ 01_101 -.nril 17, 1980. Suddenly, the trumpets are sounding all ver the place! "Housing Crisis Looms." dared a recent newspaper article. "The 980s will be Amenca's'decade of the hous- ng crisis.'and shortages are likely to cause ;octal protest beyond any brought on by en- ergy problems:' stated a prominent speak- er at recent senatorial hearings in Washing- ton. D.C."Government policies create Y.Y. housing horrors."echoed columnist Stanton Evans. And the Sunday Republican. of Springfield.in the first of four articles dedi- cated to Western Massachusetts' housing problems,anxiously asked,"Where have all the houses gone?" Yes. indeed! Springfield and Holyoke have had mild attacks of the Brooklyn dis• ease For two decades,government officials all over the United States. at federal. state and local levels,have followed policies that couldn't have been more catastrophic if spe- cifically designed to wreck the private hous- ing industry.The present record-high inter- est rates have exacerbated the pre the and forced potentates to take notice,but problem was serious beforehand. Democracy itself is at fault. I predict tha Isis alon with the closely Political instincts delay solution to housing crisis connected problems of inflation and high also that subsidies basically act as sand in crime rates, cannot be cured unless the the free-enterprise machinery. This is pars present government system is replaced with titularly true within the housing industry. another, more apt to take decisions on the where so many are hurt by the subsidies basis of statesmanship rather than °beet- that favor a few. ence to the preponderance of numbers. The real crisis is not in one-family dwell- The housing crisis won't be solved unless ings,but in the urban rental market. Pnbti- lawmakers and administrators take actions co-economic conditions in this market are that are starkly contrary to their political dominated by the twin facts that there are instincts. And I don't think that can be done many more tenants than landlords, and l unless the whole government system is landlords aren't organized for effective lob-I changed. biting.Inexorably,due to the wrong working 1 Meanwhile, authorities can help, in a of democracy.anti-landlord laws have been ; small way,by being nice to landlords. Don't passed, anti-landlord practices have been 1 pass laws that add to their burdens. Refuse t followed, and anti-lanalnrd magazine arti- 1 to enforce tough anti-landlord laws. Make it Iles have been written. The present crisis easier for landlords to discipline destruc- simply represents the resulting chickens live, negligent and non-paying tenants. coming home to roost,with a vengeance. That's the way to reduce-in the words of a Policy-makers have for decades thought prominent speaker at the recent Senatorial in terms of how much it will cost, in just hearings-"abandonment,arson,demolition plain money,to solve problems. But govern- and conversion to condominiums." In other ment subsidies create problems of their words, that's the road to be travelled, fel- own, as policy-makers are now discovering lows,unless you want the houses"to go."as with alarm. It isn't just that the limits they have in the past. of possible taxation are being approached, MOGENS V.HERMANN t government deficits are inflationary, and Northampton administrators incompetent or worse. It is the housing crisis. g Mir 'trn r/ Auguki 31, 1981 Landlords should not be scapegoats in fire aftermath Battle-scarred Holyoke has reached the ultimate stage, that of looking for scape- goats. Somebody must pay. but who? When [amines broke out in Tsarist Rus- sia, and when German arms tailed, dema- gogues had a ready answer: The Jews. Those days are gone. but modern Massa- chusetts knows how to find scapegoats. Landlords are ideal for the purpose; they cannot run away, they lack political power, ! phrases that see they've been smeared for years. they are of that it will get less. If society wants capualists, and they mostly don't belong to 1 more and better bread, it must reward insult, 'humiliate and debilitate landlords sacrosanct minority groups. So, now a farmers, millers and bakers. If society than to benefit anyone. The entire code is crackdown is being prepared for those of I wants favor ands b etert leather asd shoe` stridently anti-landlord in spirit and word. them .`ho are guilty of code violations. I makers. And if it wants more and better Politicians can.if they wish, bureaucrats after lection or re-election; zeal? Ah, a crackdown on code violations is practices, they've driven real estate than politically safe, it creates jobs for bureau- sky high, and they've put into effect e cots and it satisfies popular passions. steady stream of laws,codes,rules and reg The theory on which politicians are ulations that outrageously favor tenants a landlords' expense. elected, and bureaucrats appointed, is that they will serve society. If this theory held l' The ultimate peak of insanity is reacher good, how would they treat landlords? in the Massachusetts State Sanitary Cod Whatever society rewards,of that it will's Chapter II, and resulting administrativ get more. And whatever society punishes,) practices. There, we have examples of a Which means virtually all of them. There is nothing to suggest that the system, favor builders and IandloNS. Espe 'keep whipping landlords, as they did in tilt recent fire on South Bridge Street was due Y past. Or they can try to be good servants to faulty wiring, or any other code years' who,inanher lastsince esort, set are builders nin p P PP For that, they must make life more toter motion. able for landlords. Which will lhe. 8 1 k what's been done! Public auth- housing, it must, under the free enterprise ,build empires. To do that, they've got [c lions. And considering the ast ve ova"in, of Holyoke as a whole, it doesn't seem that code violations were often ut oo choose. orities have supported rent strikes, they've MOGENS Y. HERMAN !'directly at fault. Why then this punitive condoned very unfair real estate insurance Northampton Morning Union, Snfld Massachusetts, January 6, 1984. In The Morning Union of Dec, 21, I saw an article titled "Shelters feel strain in housing homeless." Accordingly,all public and semi-public shelters for the homeless in Springfield, Holyoke and Northampton I are full. They daily turn people away, to fend for themselves, Heavens know how. Similar conditions exist in many other U.S. cities. The generalized shortage and expensive- ness of rental apartments IS a long- delayed consequence of the fact that in 1937 President Roosevelt took drastic action to weaken private property rights in this country. Until then, farmers, urban landlords, industrial employers, and other businessmen had been protected by the Constitution against legislative encroach- ments. The Constitution, put into effect mainly in 1789 and 1791, functioned in such a way as to protect minorities — including businessmen — against those who might hold majority votes in Congress and state legislatures. Urban landlords form a minority as. D.H. 4az ette, Northampton, Vass. ,01060, Augua• 8 1996 New laws needed to restore rental housing options To The Editor. - Daily Hampshire Gazette: This is in reference to your Editor ;Edward K. Shanahan's) article on housing problems printed in the Gazette August 1. As the article makes clear. there is a mystery in ' rthampton's hous- ing situation. there is a shortage of rental apartments here. .-That being so, one would logically expect more rental units to be built. But, instead of that, developers concentrate on the construction of .office buildings, of which there has for long been a surplus. Condominiums are also favored by developers: their prices are ris- :ng at a fantastic speed. As a public Shortage of rentals - conse- quence of FDR policy compared to tenants; the Constitution pro- tected landlords against tenant-dominated legislatures. Industrial employers form a .minority as compared to industrial work- ers; the Constitution protected employers against workers. And so forth. America's Founding Fathers made it that way because they knew that businessmen are the geese that lay the golden eggs; tenants and workmen would be all too likely to kill them off if not protected, In New York, California and Massachu- setts, just to mention a few states that I know about, urban landlords were among those who were unable to defend them- selves effectively. The apartment rental business is everywhere very difficult to organize. Tenants took advantage of that to "kill off" some "geese" that laid the- "golden eggs." Holyoke flamed brightly during 1980 and 1981; large parts of New York City suffered a similar fate on a big- ger scale. All of which, of course, can be traced back to Roosevelt's • 1937 Constitution-tampering. • official has said. 'the whole thing is out of whack." I have by now been a Northamp- toClandlord for almost 18 years. and I believe that 1 have some worthwhile comments to make. In the first place, the awkward situation that exists here isn't spe- cific to Northampton; it is state- wide. In the second place, I see it as being connected with the several anti-landlord laws which were en- acted in this Commonwealth during the late 1970's. Those were real "sock-it-to-them" laws. They includ- ed the Massachusetts State Sanitary Code in its present severe form, the lead-paint regulations, increased guarantees for tenants' privacy and a set of very obnoxious regulations in reference to security deposits. That code, those regulations and a series of ruinous court decisions. drastically increased the hazards and legal obligations of landlords, while dramatically reducing their powers. It was a bloodless revolu- tion which spelled catastrophe for a great many landlords, The City of Holyoke, where code enforcers were more severe than elsewhere, became the arson capital The Massachusetts picture is roughly ' that tenants have abused their voter strength to pass a number of vicious anti- ' landlord laws, such as the Massachusetts , State Sanitary Code, the lead-paint codes, and security-deposit regulations so oner- ous that landlords hardly dare accept secu- rity deposits any more. Tenant damage therefore largely goes unpunished. Droves of landlords have responded by abandoning their properties, or worse. The resulting scarcity of apartments has driven rent levels sky high, and hundreds of people have to camp out in the snow. It is bound to get worse unless and until the Constitution is again allowed to protect those property rights. Each of those sock- it-to-them laws is unconstitutional one way or the other.Let somebody challenge them in court, and let the Appeals Court or Supreme Judicial Court favor the chal- lenger.That's the only possible remedy for the present catastrophe situation. MOCENS V. HERMANN Northampton. of the United States of America,as ,a result, in 1980 and 1984 Adolf)/ in eastern Massachusetts II believe Lowell) became a close second. .. . And all over the Commonwealth, developers became extremely reluc- tant to build rental units. Marginal units were torn down, and not re- placed with others of a similar type. By virtue of the laws of demand and supply, rent levels all over Massachusetts have risen very fast. But as far as I can see,.they haven't risen high enough to make the apartment rental business really attractive to developers. They may never rise high enough, ibecause there is a limit to how much the prospective tenants can pay. And that, in my opinion, is the key to the paradox which confronts our august city fathers. Not only here, but all over the Common- wealth. If I am allowed to make a sugges- tion, it is this: Change the laws so as to give landlords a reasonable balance of perogatives, hazards and obligations. That's the only way of restoring balance to the whole situa- tion. Mogens V. Hermann • Northampton -.a722 -3/ 7 -7tCyi o� r47/ �''12-J-2,' wry' _'70 �rz , 77294r -171-J J/ r ,72,7 0-7 Yt6' , 77 ? 1fi/ % zrz-" - /7 MC7 �yY _a/ n-Oti D-i_-,q jyl a-.Z .,7)J�r - i /727 v ner „� �a��4 T. a29 — / " 1"377/ '�O `' G26J z � �J✓h � Mogeas V. Hermann, 50 Hawley St. , Northampton, :✓.ass. , 01060, Sept. 11, 1987. To: Mayor David Musante, City Hall, Northampton. Dear Sir; Yesterday, I deposited in your office a copy of a memorandum about my lead-paint problems. I assume that you knew about them beforehand, and there- fore I don' t add a lot of background information. Just after visiting your office, I had a short talk with Inspector McErlain. We discussed the subject of how to break the LaVallee couple ' s obstructionist tac- tics. He said that he had contacted their attorney, named Wm O'Grady, and that the latter seemed to be wil- ling to tell his clients to give me, and possible con- tractors, workmens' entry rights to their apartment. Mr. McErlain had previously wanted to get a court order of the kind that would compel the LaVallee' s to co-operate. But he couldn' t go to court about that, or about anything else, unless Mrs. Fallon did the tech- nical job of filing papers in court. That, apparently, she wouldn't do. On the other hand, I find it unsatis- factory, obviously, to have Mr.CGrady' s authority substituted for that of the court. The authorities want de-leading to be done, but no de-leading contractor should begin to work unless he has reasonable assurance that the tenants will do their part of the work, and stay away during the pe- riods of time mandated by regulations printed in the papers. As matters stand now, there isn' t any guaran- tee of that. There presently exists a very muddled situation. In written communications of July 8, July 16 and July 17, I 've drawn attention to serious imperfections in Inspector McErlain' s Order of June 29. That Order con- sisted simply in a pre-printed form, on which a few names had been filled in; so he should perhaps not be blamed for details, but as matters stand, the Order was beset with erious flaws. A few weeks ago (I be- lieve on July 20), he declared himself willing to with- draw it if Mrs. Fallon would go along; he seems to have sent the papers over to her. A long silence fol- lowed. Then, on August 6, I laid down a barrage of phone calls to her office. Finally, in late afternoon, I got her on the line. I got the distinct impression that she hadn't read the relevant papers, but she gave a negative answer. I told her to send the papers to the court, and she promised to do so, but apparent- ly she never did. My attitude is this, that I 'll string along with a de-leading process if it is guided by ity Hall, provided the cost is no more than $4 ,000?But I sim- ply cannot aggressively push a de-leading process, because it is contrary to my inner convictions. As a matter of principle, I don' t think that de-leading should be done. Perhaps a compromise solution can be found. I hope that you'll give attention to this pos- sibility. . . . Xerox copies of this letter are sent to the people mentioned herein by name. -s. Cc-w4. ox 249 nucgc Highway ampton,MA 01073 ylA. Parker (/�� ^/ Suite 300 iParker & O,V I ad Y 1248 Main St. JJJ Springfield MA 01103 Attorneys at Law William J. O'Grady 413-527-8660 September 21, 1987 CERTIFIED MAIL/RRR /9/5WY38t7 Mr. Mogens V. Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 Re: Mr. and Mrs. Robert LaValley 37A Holyoke Street, Northampton, MA Dear Mr. Hermann: As you know, this office represents Mr. and Mrs. Robert LaValley of 37A Holyoke Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Since the inception of their tenancy, the premises at 37A Holyoke Street has failed to meet the minimum standards of habitability required by the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Specifically, said premises contain levels of lead paint which are prohibited, and contain defective plumbing, windows, rodents and vermin, and numerous other conditions which violate the State Sanitary Code and the rules and regulations of the Northampton Board of Health. On numerous occasions, you have been ordered to correct these violations by both the office of the Board of Health of the City of Northampton and by the Department of Public Health of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. To date you have failed and refused to correct most of those violations. Your conduct constitutes an unfair and deceptive act or practice prohibited by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A. My clients, therefore, make demand that you return all rent paid by them since the inception of their tenancy. Mr. Mogens V. Hermann Page 2 September 18, 1987 You are hereby advised that your failure to respond with a written reasonable offer of settlement within 30 days may subject you to the possibility of treble damages, plus liability for reasonable costs and attorneys fees incurred by the LaValleys. We also demand that you take immediate steps to correct violations. Very truly yours„ William/J. O'Gkady, Esq. WJO/st BOARD OF HEALTH )HN T.JOYCE.Chairman ETER C.KENNY,MD. RCHAEL R.PARSONS ETER 1.McERLAIN,Health Agent Mr. Mogens V. Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS 01060 OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH October 9, 1987 210 MAIN STREET 01060 14101 5868950 21 Dear Mr. Hermann: At your request, I have prepared the following summary of the Housing Code Violations Case at 37A Holyoke Street: Date June 23, 1987 June 23, 1987 June 24, 1987 June 29, 1987 Notice to remove lead paint sent to Mr. Hermann. July 9, 1987 " Initial inspection, in response to Mrs. LaValley's complaint. 9j Notice to correct housing code violations sent to Mr. Hermann. Plumbing leak corrected. August 3, 1987 August 4, 1987 August 5, 1987 August 7, 1987 Mrs. LaValley requested that the lead paint removal project be delayed for 5 - 6 weeks so as not to disturb her newborn infant. Informed by Mr. Hermann that Mrs. LaValley would not let his Deleading Contractor (Mr. Carroll) into her apartment to assess the deleading job. H Notice sent to Mr. & Mrs. LaValley ordering them to allow Mr. Herman and his employee access to the apartment upon reason- . able notice. c Inspection, as a result of complaint from Mrs. LaValley about exterior violations at 37 Holyoke St. Notice sent to Mr. Hermann to correct exterior violations at 37 Holyoke Street. LETTER TO MOGENS V. HERMANN RE SUMMARY OF THE HOUSING CODE VIOLATIONS CASE AT 37A HOLYOKE STREET August 19, 1987 August 25, 1987 August 31, 1987 September 1 - 4, 1987 On or about September 9, 1987 September 21, 1987 On or about September 24, 1987 On or about September 29, 1987 October 1, 1987 October 1, 1987 Very truly yours, Peter J. McErlain Health Agent PJMC/mr Page 2 Complaint from Mrs. LaValley that bathtub drain was plugged. Inspection revealed that plumber was working- on problem. Notice sent to all parties that Mr. Carroll was to begin deleading project on Friday, August 28, 1987. During reinspection of exterior 37 Holyoke Street, I was informed by Mrs. LaValley that any further dis- cussion about access to her apartment would have to be taken up with her attorney William O'Grady. Repeated attempts to reach Attorney O'Grady by phone were unsuccessful. Mr. Hermann was not given access to Apartment 37A. I spoke with Attorney O'Grady and informed him that Mrs. LaValley, under provision of the State Sanitary Code, had to allow Mr. Hermann access to her apart- ment in order for him to correct violations. He agreed to inform Mrs. LaValley of this requirement. Upon return from vacation, I was informed by Mr. Hermann that he was still unable to get into the LaValley apartment. Spoke with Attorney Cheryl Parker (Atty. O'Grady's associate) and informed her that the Board of Health was prepared to seek a show cause hearing with Mrs. LaValley for failure to allow access to correct code violations. Attorney Parker indicated that she would pass on the information. Spoke with Attorney O'Grady who informed me that he would again speak to Mrs. LaValley to secure access for Mr. Hermann. Mrs. LaValley called Board of Health Office to say that she would allow Mr. Hermann to correct violations. Informed Mr. Hermann that Mrs. LaValley would now be cooperative. cc: Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM Mr. & Mrs. Robert LaValley Peter J. McErlain, Agent Board of Health SUBJECT: Deleading Project 37A Holyoke Street DATE: October ]3, 1987 BOARD OF HEALTH 210 Main Street - City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Please be advised that Mr. James Carroll, deleading contractor for Mr. Mogen Hermann has informed the Board of Health the deleading project in your apartment, 37A Holyoke St , will commence on or about Monday, October 26, 1987. Please be prepared to vacate your apartment during the deleading project in order to protect your family against the lead fumes released during the deleading project. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Note: Mr. Carroll maybe dropping off equipment prior to the Oct.26, date. np cc: James Carroll Mogens Hermann BOARD OF HEALTH DHN T.JOYCE.Chairman ETER C.EMINY,M.D. IICHAEL IL PARSONS ETER J.McERLAIN,Health Agent Mr. Morgens V. Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS 01060 OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH 210 MAIN STREET 01060 (413)586-6950 Ext.213 November 9, 1987 Dear Mr. Hermann: A reinspection, on this date, of your property at 37A Holyoke Street, Northampton, Mass. , revealed that all of the Housing Code violation listed in both violation notices dated 6/29/87 and 8/7/87 have been corrected. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Peter S. McErlain Health Agent P.TMc/np Enc. BOARD OF HEALTH RN T.JOYCE.Chairman TER C.KENNY M.D. CHAEL R.PARSONS TER 1.McERLAJN.Health Agent Stephen Ferrarone, Esq. 101 State Street Suite 620 Springfield, MA 01103 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS 01060 OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH November 9, 1987 Re: Deleading at 37A Holyoke Street Northampton, MA 01060 210 MAIN STREET 01060 4191 5866950 Ext.213 Dear Attorney Ferrarone: A reinspection, this date, of property owned by Mogens V. Hermann at 37A Holyoke Street, Northampton, revealed that the deleading work performed by James A. Carroll has been completed. The lead paint hazards cited in the Board of Health notice have been eliminated. Please do not hesitate to contact the Board of Health Office if you have any questions concerning this matter. Thank you. Very truly yours, Peter J. McErlain Health Agent PJMc/mr cc: Mogens V. Hermann BOARD OF HEALTH MN T.JOYCE.Chairman TER C.=TNT.MD. ICHAEL E PARSONS ETER J.McERLAIN.Health Agent Mn Mogens V. Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS 01060 OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH November 12, 1987 210 MAIN STREET 01060 (413)5866350 Ext.213 Re: 37 A Holyoke Street Dear Mr. Hermann: A reinspection on November 9, 1987, of the apartment owned by you at 37 A Holyoke Street, Northampton, (Assessor's map 32 C lot 215) , revealed the following; All of the housing code violations(Chapter II of the State Sanitary Code 105CMR 410-000) , listed in the Board of Health violation notices dated June 29, 1987 and August 7, 1987 have been corrected. The lead paint hazard listed in the Board of Health order dated June 29, 1987, has been eleminated and the deleading work has been satisfactorily completed. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, Peter J. McErlain PJMc/np cc: Mr. & Mrs Bober LaValley c/o Atty.•William O'Grady BOARD OF HEALTH City of Northampton MASSACHUSETTS November 23, 1987 Mogen S. Hermann 50 Hawley Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Hermann: The board submitted by you for lead analysis was tested with the following results; Green Paint Negative White Paint Negative Very truly yours David E. Kochan Sanitary Inspector ,.-.(^'�.� DEK/np