Re: To Joe From Marcie: Re: Joe: Re: Re:New Here - Please help

[Guest guest]

Joe,

You wrote, " The morality of dumping your old problem house on someone else,

can be justified with the comforting thought that only a small percentage of

people have our " sickbuilding " illness, and you are most likely going to be

renting to a non-sufferer, who will think that they are living in a wonderful

house, at a bargain rental. Just don't collect their rent money by going back

to that house. Have them mail it, instead, or arrange for their checking

account to be debited, once a month, and automatically deposited into your

checking account. You will be a " Moldie " for the rest of your life. Once you

have

" healed " , after this initial exposure, you will notice that even tiny

exposures, such as picking up a rent check at a moldy house, is enough to make

you

sick again. "

And,

" What I am about to suggest, should not be evaluated on the basis of

morality, because what we are talking about is a matter of life or death; YOUR

life

or death. "

The morality of dumping your old problem house on someone else, can be never

be self justified. I think this might be the most disgusting concept I have

ever seen presented on this board. For one who claims to have experienced

this nightmare to suggest that it is morally acceptable to put another in this

situation in order to save their own skin, is a despicable idea in my book.

Do you think KC, Sharon C, Darlene, Sue, , Doug, etc have volunteered

so much time over the years to educate because they are only concerned with

their own well being? You are not a person I would ever take advice from

based on your selfish ideas of how one should solve this problem. You are

dangerous to innocent others. You are a person whose mindset is the cause of

much of

the problem. That is terrible advice that one needs to sell their moral

soul in order to get out of this delimma.

Not to mention it is idiotic from a practical standpoint. What do you think

people get sued for? The get sued for lack of disclosure of a known cause

of illness.

Sharon Kramer

[Guest guest]

Sharon, Thank you. Darlene

snk1955@... wrote:

Joe,

You wrote, " The morality of dumping your old problem house on someone else,

can be justified with the comforting thought that only a small percentage of

people have our " sickbuilding " illness, and you are most likely going to be

renting to a non-sufferer, who will think that they are living in a wonderful

house, at a bargain rental. Just don't collect their rent money by going back

to that house. Have them mail it, instead, or arrange for their checking

account to be debited, once a month, and automatically deposited into your

checking account. You will be a " Moldie " for the rest of your life. Once you

have

" healed " , after this initial exposure, you will notice that even tiny

exposures, such as picking up a rent check at a moldy house, is enough to make

you

sick again. "

And,

" What I am about to suggest, should not be evaluated on the basis of

morality, because what we are talking about is a matter of life or death; YOUR

life

or death. "

The morality of dumping your old problem house on someone else, can be never

be self justified. I think this might be the most disgusting concept I have

ever seen presented on this board. For one who claims to have experienced

this nightmare to suggest that it is morally acceptable to put another in this

situation in order to save their own skin, is a despicable idea in my book.

Do you think KC, Sharon C, Darlene, Sue, , Doug, etc have volunteered

so much time over the years to educate because they are only concerned with

their own well being? You are not a person I would ever take advice from

based on your selfish ideas of how one should solve this problem. You are

dangerous to innocent others. You are a person whose mindset is the cause of

much of

the problem. That is terrible advice that one needs to sell their moral

soul in order to get out of this delimma.

Not to mention it is idiotic from a practical standpoint. What do you think

people get sued for? The get sued for lack of disclosure of a known cause

of illness.

Sharon Kramer

---------------------------------

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.

[Guest guest]

There are literally millions of abandoned houses sitting vacant all

across the country, and many of them are deteriorating rapidly, and

are open to the elements. When I heard that I said to myself, this is

a NIGHTMARE waiting to happen, whether these houses are rented or

sold, if they are allowed to change hands *unremediated*. Untested.

I have to come out strongly against renting (or selling) known 'sick'

buildings to others. I was one of the people one of those apartments

was rented to, I lived in it for years, and that is how I got sick.

Many people who have come on this list from time to time have been

revealed to be home 'flippers. Their philosophy seems to be " what they

don't see or know about won't hurt them " .

As Dr. Straus's group's research has shown, some sick buildings can

remain loaded with mycotoxins for many years, probably even many

decades, (based on the slow rate of trichothecene toxicity going away)

after a water incursion.

So a single sick building, unremediated, could cause family after

family to fall apart, and barring still as yet unaffordable testing,

nobody would ever know why. Neighbors would just see that the building

was unlucky, or something.

Thats why we need a mechanism to examine places that are put up for

sale or rent, each time they change hands, (including renting) not our

current " don't ask, don't tell " policy of denial that we seem to have

today that conveniently, increasingly, even uses abuser's logic to

threaten tenants from reporting a moldy building to city authorities

for fear of lawsuits.

(see " Dueling Bills in the Fight Over Housing "

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/nyregion/24harass.html )

What you can't see (hidden mold) can and does hurt people..

[Guest guest]

Responding to LiveSimply:

The article you linked is quite scary:

The landlords’ bill would prohibit tenants from threatening owners, making

frequent baseless complaints to a governmental agency, taking landlords to court

repeatedly without cause and interfering with the comfort or safety of owners or

tenants.

In our case, we were ignored at least three times by government agencies that

had no idea WHAT to do about assessing (let alone remediating) mold, and I

assume that's the norm and that it could create allegations that would support

the above potential law, penalizing us for attempting to get justice. Our

building owner was cited both by the local health department and the building

code people who promptly dropped their citations upon - well, we're not sure

what. And the Coroner's office denied what happened to my neighbors son'

despite being supplied with pathology that was pretty unambiguous (and that they

were not willing to do themselves, of course).

The owner served my neighbor with an eviction notice when the health dept. was

called, and didn't rescind it until the neighbor hired an attorney to respond

that it's not exactly legal to retaliate on tenant who called the health

department.

It's not enough that we may be harmed and then that mainstream medicine refuses

to acknowledge the health issues many of us suffer - but then the offenders can

come after us for attempting to get justice.

~Haley

LiveSimply <quackadillian@...> wrote: There

are literally millions of abandoned houses sitting vacant all

across the country, and many of them are deteriorating rapidly, and

are open to the elements. When I heard that I said to myself, this is

a NIGHTMARE waiting to happen, whether these houses are rented or

sold, if they are allowed to change hands *unremediated*. Untested.

I have to come out strongly against renting (or selling) known 'sick'

buildings to others. I was one of the people one of those apartments

was rented to, I lived in it for years, and that is how I got sick.

Many people who have come on this list from time to time have been

revealed to be home 'flippers. Their philosophy seems to be " what they

don't see or know about won't hurt them " .

As Dr. Straus's group's research has shown, some sick buildings can

remain loaded with mycotoxins for many years, probably even many

decades, (based on the slow rate of trichothecene toxicity going away)

after a water incursion.

So a single sick building, unremediated, could cause family after

family to fall apart, and barring still as yet unaffordable testing,

nobody would ever know why. Neighbors would just see that the building

was unlucky, or something.

Thats why we need a mechanism to examine places that are put up for

sale or rent, each time they change hands, (including renting) not our

current " don't ask, don't tell " policy of denial that we seem to have

today that conveniently, increasingly, even uses abuser's logic to

threaten tenants from reporting a moldy building to city authorities

for fear of lawsuits.

(see " Dueling Bills in the Fight Over Housing "

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/nyregion/24harass.html )

What you can't see (hidden mold) can and does hurt people..

[Guest guest]

The kinds of people who support these laws feel that ALL mold

complaints are 'groundless' and so the already broken people who make

them should be further punished because they have to spend money to

rebut their " groundless accusations " .

Welcome to 21st century America.

[Guest guest]

A friend of mine had toxic mold in their house. The bank knew about the toxic

mold and the family tried to convince them to destroy the house, but the bank

foreclosed on them and eventually sold the house " as is " to another family.

This happens a lot but it should be a crime and these bank executives should be

held accountable.