Please note: The material in these articles, provided by Chauvel & Glatt, is designed to provide informative and current information as of the date of the posts. The articles should not be considered, nor are they intended to constitute, legal advice. For information on your particular circumstances, please contact Chauvel & Glatt at 650-573-9500.
The bay area is home to many savvy real property investors who will often transfer their real properties into legal entities for liability protection. However, doing so has property tax implications for you and your heirs.
San Mateo and Burlingame have placed rent control measures on their respective ballots in the November election.
The City of San Mateo ballot will include Measure Q. This measure would amend the city’s charter to enact new laws regulating the rental of multi-family rental properties certified before February 1, 1995. The measure would not apply to certain designated properties including single family homes, condominiums and owner-occupied duplexes.
Revisions to the Biennial Inspection of Terminals (BIT) program significantly expands the number of California motor carriers required to enroll in BIT. As the CHP implements the changes to the BIT program, California carriers should be aware of how these revisions may affect their operating authority and responsibilities.
Without a doubt, when my clients call me with a new claim against their company for wage and hour issues, there is always a claim thrown in the mix for failure to properly provide an itemized wage statement to their employees. While a new law (AB 1506) will allow an employer to cure certain pay stub violations, not all, dealing with these claims is a huge headache for employers. When I ask my clients to see their itemized wage statement provided to their employees, more often than not, they do not state all the necessary items as required by California law.
A client came to us after a fire sprinkler inside her condo caused significant water damage to her neighbors’ condos and her home. Her HOA attempted to levy a special assessment against her to recover repair costs not covered by the HOA’s insurance. The HOA also did not repair portions of her unit which were covered under the HOA’s insurance policy. Instead, the HOA pressured her to pay out-of-pocket expenses to the HOA’s contractor whose rates were significantly higher than other estimates. The HOA ignored her repeated requests for more information as she attempted to resolve the matter. Meanwhile, she lived in her water-damaged condo as the dispute continued for several months.