South of Sunnyside

One less excuse for my excessive weight.

Don’t get me wrong—I’m glad that a construction project in the area not only started, but is now complete…it’s just that I’ve really enjoyed whining about the distance to the nearest gym, of which I’m a defunct member.

I’m still riled up about the attempted class-action litigation that an L.A. lawyer wants to bring against my home’s builder. Thus, I decided to send a note to the instigator.

March 5, 2009

Law Offices of Danil Monteleone
8160 Tunney
Reseda, CA 91335

Dear Mr. Monteleone,
I’d like to thank you.

I attended the community meeting last week that you held for Granville homeowners. I was disappointed to hear that the previous night’s meeting was less than friendly, but I left the gathering quite optimistic.

You see, our neighborhood has seen every challenge imaginable: high foreclosure, negligent home owners, theft—of personal property, vehicles, the wire that passes power through to our streetlights. Add to this a variety of cultural and economic backgrounds, and there’s one thing that we have lacked: unity.

But you helped us find that. You helped us come together, and to find a common voice—a voice that I imagine is still ringing in your ears.

So, I’d like to thank you. But I just can’t muster enough respect for your business, or your personal ethic, to do so.

If you want to stir up doubt and prey on confusion, please do so elsewhere. You are not welcomed here.

A proud Granville owner,

James Collier

The following was submitted to The Fresno Bee this afternoon for consideration as in Saturday’s Valley Voices. It’s an in-depth follow up to a previous post about attempted class-action litigation against Granville Homes.

It’s been a long time since I’ve sat in an elementary school cafeteria. I don’t have many pleasant memories of my first years in school…let’s just say I was an overweight out-of-towner from a low-income split family, and leave it at that.

Needless to say, bullies loved me.

Evidently, they still do, and they still hang out on the schoolyard, as evidenced by last week’s neighborhood meeting at John Wash Elementary School. The host: Danil Monteleone, a lawyer working out of a home office in Reseda. The purpose: to unite homeowners in a class-action suit against our homebuilder, Granville Homes. It seems the entire Sunnyside development is defective.

I’m of the opinion that the perfect home is about as tangible as the perfect homeowner—or the perfect neighbor, for that matter. It just doesn’t exist, no matter who the builder is, though I’d argue that Granville comes close. The literature distributed by Mr. Monteleone prior to the event highlights pictures of cracked stucco and concrete, chipped tile and rotting exterior wood; I don’t suppose that gravity, use, or weather could factor in to these "defects," but perhaps I’ve exposed my bias.

From Mr. Monteleone’s initial letter:

California law entitles you to recover money from the builder and its insurance carriers for stucco cracks, roof leaks, toilet leaks, window leaks and other types of damage. While we cannot guarantee a result in your case, our firm has a track record of obtaining sizable settlements for homeowners. This may be your last opportunity to compel the builder to stand behind its product. [Italics added for emphasis]

A letter from Granville announcing a meeting to discuss the implications of litigation notes that they, "think it is very likely that these lawyers have never even seen [our] neighborhood." They also provide contact details for the customer service department, urging homeowners to let them know if there’s a problem.

I tried to process all of this before the public gathering, but only came up with questions:

• Could Mr. Monteleone have a genuine concern for me and my neighbors?
• Would litigation affect what little value my home has retained?
• Have some of my neighbors already been turned away by Granville’s customer service department?

So, I attended the meeting. I found a seat in the cafeteria, and I waited. Half an hour after the scheduled start, Mr. Monteleone welcomed everyone; he then proceeded to outline the reasons why we were not going to talk as a group. He explained that a similar meeting the night before turned aggressive, due to the overwhelming turnout by a "cheering section" of Granville homeowners. He wasn’t willing to go through that again, though he offered to meet with us individually.

Several attendees tried to ask questions, but they were shrugged off. One woman noted that she was not dissatisfied, but she was a new Granville owner, and wanted to hear the concerns of those who weren’t happy. That didn’t happen.

Instead, Granville’s president Darius Assemi pleaded with the room, requesting that each homeowner give him the chance to address their concerns—whether physical or financial—before turning to a lawyer. And with that, we were dismissed.

Though I was disappointed in the resulting non-meeting, I was encouraged by the overwhelming voice of those in attendance, not only affirming the quality of our homes, but challenging the motive of Mr. Monteleone. We’ve suffered enough in our neighborhood: numerous foreclosures, negligent owners, theft (of personal property, vehicles, the wire that passes power through to our streetlights). We don’t need a career instigator preying on our vulnerabilities.

I would be wary of any builder that claimed perfection, and I don’t doubt that there are legitimate claims for which the service that the Law Offices of Danil Monteleone provides is warranted, but my personal experience with Granville has been extremely positive, and I know others in the neighborhood that share in my satisfaction with what they’ve built.

To other homeowners who receive correspondence from Mr. Monteleone, or anyone with a similar "service," please consider the impact on not only your home, but those of your neighbors. It’s highly unlikely that a lawyer from outside of the community is looking out for your best interest.

To Darius and the team at Granville, my wife and I thank you. Thank you for your commitment to quality. Thank you for your commitment to this community.

I had hoped to never need to write this post. Alas, after tweeting the following, I realized that there is a need to agree on proper protocol for using a public restroom:

@jamescollier understands that sometimes one *forgets* to lock the door to a public bathroom. But it should at least be closed! Seriously.
3:44 p.m. – Monday, February 16, 2009

We all need to use a public restroom now and then, and I’m certain we’ve all done so in a hurry. I, for example, once used the women’s restroom…at an organization where I was interviewing for a job…and the HR manager walked in…moving on now.

For guys, the rules are pretty simple: if it’s a single-stall room, walk in, close the door, lock the door, and do your thing. If you fail to lock the door, it’s forgivable—once. But failing to close the door is simply unacceptable. Also unacceptable: leaving your Preparation H behind (see picture).

Things get a bit more complicated in multi-stall bathrooms, but it’s best to:

• Look forward and up at all times
• Avoid talking. At all.
• Respect the buffer zone (one urinal in between is sufficient)

Is this too much to ask? Evidently it is, as today I also learned that some grown men still find the need to pull their pants all the way down to stand in front of a toilet.