■ Arendt coerced & then participated in the pretense of an appointment on 9/20 to provide a "temporary" remedy to "hopefully" correct the water with "a" filter to affect all taps (?) after 5 months of this water.
■ Presented with antithetical written & photographic documentation submitted with the complaint, Arendt chose lies & misrepresentations in his response to issues in my complaint to Wisconsin's DATCP while
choosing to ignore issues also described.
■ Four days after my visit to Saratoga Building Inspector re not to code (no permit) stairs necessitating Five Skies repair of the stairs two days later, Arendt wrote a letter to accompany the Five Day Notice to Pay or Vacate
that revealed the true motivation that has
nothing
to due with rent:
"It appears that you are unhappy with the manner in which my client manages its trailer park." Rent had been paid on time & in accordance with
§704.07(4). Both
his calculation
and the statute he cites is incorrect: he wrote 704.17(1) even though there is no such numbered statute; I have to assume that, at least, the "1" is correct and he meant 704.17(1p).
But that is also incorrect as it pertains to week to-week or month-to-month tenancies. In this case he should have cited 704.17(2) for tenancy of one year or less or year to year. Are all Wisconsin attorneys this sloppy?
■ Arendt does not appear to understand any part of §704.07(4) or thinks it should not apply to this client who would choose to terminate my lease 63 days after I moved in rather than make the necessary repairs that
were known to them prior to showing the unit on 3/27 and required by law (§704.07(2)).
■ Arendt conspires with Five Skies to defraud court with false information on 10/14 S & C for my eviction. Rent had been paid for September in accordance with §704.07(4) and was not due until 10/15.
Late fees are calculated incorrectly; on S & C, his arithmetic is oddly incorrect on and the wrong box is checked (not an eviction due to foreclosure).
■ Arendt coerced & then participated in the pretense of an appointment on 9/20 to provide a "temporary" remedy to "hopefully" correct the water with "a" filter to affect all taps (?) after 5 months of this water.
■ Presented with antithetical written & photographic documentation submitted with the complaint, Arendt chose lies & misrepresentations in his response to issues in my complaint to Wisconsin's DATCP while
choosing to ignore issues also described.
■ Four days after my visit to Saratoga Building Inspector re not to code (no permit) stairs necessitating Five Skies repair of the stairs two days later, Arendt wrote a letter to accompany the Five Day Notice to Pay or Vacate
that revealed the true motivation that has
nothing
to due with rent:
"It appears that you are unhappy with the manner in which my client manages its trailer park." Rent had been paid on time & in accordance with
§704.07(4). Both
his calculation
and the statute he cites is incorrect: he wrote 704.17(1) even though there is no such numbered statute; I have to assume that, at least, the "1" is correct and he meant 704.17(1p).
But that is also incorrect as it pertains to week to-week or month-to-month tenancies. In this case he should have cited 704.17(2) for tenancy of one year or less or year to year. Are all Wisconsin attorneys this sloppy?
■ Arendt does not appear to understand any part of §704.07(4) or thinks it should not apply to this client who would choose to terminate my lease 63 days after I moved in rather than make the necessary repairs that
were known to them prior to showing the unit on 3/27 and required by law (§704.07(2)).
■ Arendt conspires with Five Skies to defraud court with false information on 10/14 S & C for my eviction. Rent had been paid for September in accordance with §704.07(4) and was not due until 10/15.
Late fees are calculated incorrectly; on S & C, his arithmetic is oddly incorrect on and the wrong box is checked (not an eviction due to foreclosure).
The kicker, of course, was that they secured the services of an attorney, Patrick Arendt, who was willing & able to help them succeed in this fraudulent endeavor despite:ABA Rule 1.2(d) "A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent"Arendt then took it a step further in his falsely concocted claim filed in the court for my eviction. He misrepresented (lied) about the rent money received and when it was due(not late) as he wrote. He also falsely claimed that the next month's rent was late (it wasn't) and wanted late fees for both months though rent had been paid on time in Septemberin accordance with §704.07(4) and wasn't due until 10/15.Let's assume that, at least, Arendt should have known that WI Stat 704.44 provides abatement for repairs not completed as he claimed residential real estate expertise on his website.He knew that my letter of 9/15 specified that abatement and that that abatement also was in accord with previous abatement for Five Skies failure not to repair & maintain. Instead, hechose to support Five Skies in breaking laws and ignoring Uniform Dwelling Codes and SPS regulations.But wait, there's more!
"If the water remains unimproved, it may be necessary to replace lines below ground. We will determine how best to approach that situation if the need arises but if that is the case,we may have to terminate your lease because we would not continue to rent the unit until that issue is remedied and it may take a considerable amount of time to remedy."
The kicker, of course, was that they secured the services of an attorney, Patrick Arendt, who was willing & able to help them succeed in this fraudulent endeavor despite:ABA Rule 1.2(d) "A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent"Arendt then took it a step further in his falsely concocted claim filed in the court for my eviction. He misrepresented (lied) about the rent money received and when it was due(not late) as he wrote. He also falsely claimed that the next month's rent was late (it wasn't) and wanted late fees for both months though rent had been paid on time in Septemberin accordance with §704.07(4) and wasn't due until 10/15.Let's assume that, at least, Arendt should have known that WI Stat 704.44 provides abatement for repairs not completed as he claimed residential real estate expertise on his website.He knew that my letter of 9/15 specified that abatement and that that abatement also was in accord with previous abatement for Five Skies failure not to repair & maintain. Instead, hechose to support Five Skies in breaking laws and ignoring Uniform Dwelling Codes and SPS regulations.But wait, there's more!