09-2110 - Olga L & Christian SaavedraD_
I Ulice Department
A CFA Accredited Law Enj6rcernent Agency
100 H. Boynton Beach Boulevard
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Phone; t561) 742-6100
Jeffrey Katz
Chief of Police
Code Compliance Division
Phone; (561) 742-6120
FAX: (561) 742-6838
Date: November 20, 2014
To: City Commission
From: Code Compliance Division
RE: Code Compliance Case #09-2110
In accordance with Ordinance number 001-07, the enclosed "Final Lien Modification
Order" is hereby forwarded to you for review. As required by Ordinance number 001 -07,
the following procedures are to be followed:
❑ A City Commissioner has seven (7) days from the rendition of the Order to
request the City Manager's Office to place the case on a City Commission
Agenda for review. (Space provided below for transmittal purposes)
❑ Said review must occur within thirty (30) days of the request for review.
❑ Upon such review, the City Commission may take one of the following actions:
a. Uphold the Code Compliance Board's recommendation in full.
b. Over -rule the Board's decision in full.
c. Modify the Board's Final Order.
❑ The City Commission shall direct staff to take action consistent with their review
of the "Lien Modification Order".
1, , hereby request the City Manager's
Office to place the above referenced case on the next available City Commission
Agenda for review.
Signed on this date, the day of , 20_.
NiEETING MINUTES
CODE COMPLJANCE SPECIAL lViAGEARA E 14EARINGS
BOYINTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 15,20-14
corrected on September 22, 2014, accruing a fine of $54K and administrative costs of
$634.12.
M& Springer
pringer was contacted in September and she explained what neoded to be done.
Mr. Dean obtained the permit on So-piamber 22, 2014. There were outstanding taxes of
$4,303, and the permit was finalized on September 29, 2014, the taxes were paid on
Octobc,r 2, 201�, and the property passed tree lien reduction inspection an October 1,
2014.
rCoUrf, 102, ovfner explained when. he purchased th
Roy Dean, 2601 NE 3d _ Unit e
property it was an "as is" sale. The property had water damage, which the Association
wanted him to resolve. He did not know he needed a permit. The property
management firm took over so he did riot get the notices from the City regarding the
permit or the fine. When he received that ini'ormation, he hired an architect and a
contractor to pul9 the peirnits, Since then, went to the Tax Collector ard Property
Appraisers offi,,c and updated his contact information. The letters were sent to the
prernises and he lives in Broward. He purchased the property in 2007 and it had not
been rE-M.A. Discussion followed the notice was sent to the address of record. He
learned about d ie violation wle,-i the proporty was posted.
Mr. Dean spoke to the mailman because the association said they sent him
cora espoodence he never received, and he updated his address with the post office. All
thev;ork was coi npleted and the permit was approved .
Ms. Ellis explained it was the owner's responsibility to update their contact information
Decisiori
Ms. E-1-11is red! icd the lien to $1,000 plus the $634.12.
Mr. Dean explained Boynton Beach has been very helpful, expedient and kind. He
appreciated the help of Code Compliance,
Case W. 09-2110 tCa L &Cristian� Saavedra 1021 Grove Park Circle
Ms. Springer advised a Notice of Violation was sent on June 30, 2009, regarding a
BLIsiness Tax Receipt, The case was heard on September 16, 2009, and no one
appearcd. The compliance date and fine set was October i, 2009, or a fine of $50 a
day would be imposed thereafter. The violations were corrected on October 10, 2014,
accruing a -fine of 'PE1,300, plus administrative costs of x,'634,12. The, compliance date
was based on the day the inspection was completed, but the respondent had advised
the property was vacant prior to that, so the Business Tax Receipt would not have been
required. The compliance date was the date compliance was verified.
in
MEETINGa NIINUTES
CODE COPWPUANCE SPECIAL iV!AG1S1 RATE HEARINGS
BOYNTON DEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 15,2014
Ms. Springer was contacted in early October. The lien reduction inspection occurred on
October 5, 2014. 711 -here vvare two outstanding water bills totaling $850 that had to be
paid, and all else was fine.
Constance Rao, 14,ha broker r,..'�presenflrig the propetty, was administered an oath.
She explained she was trying to effect a short sale. Tho property is under contract, and
there is also a pending foreclosure sale, November 24, 2014, was when the window of
opportunity would clouts. Thcrc were nuoierous contracts and three different lender
servicing agents. She spent huncirr-cls of dollars of her own money hoping to make a
Commission. The ownjrs live out of state and the property was never rented, although
the owner's daughter did reside in the pr, mises for a short time, and left in early 2014,
Ms, Rao hoped the lien reduction would be substantial, otherwise there would be no
short sale and trtiere were thousands of rnnn hours involved. Nogotiations were so
difficult, she actually hired a professional negotiator, The property was an investment
property-, however, the market fe'l jmm,�diately aider the owners purchased if.
In addition to the water bill, nearly $5,000 in fines were paid to the Homeowner's
Association, The contract that was accepted by the bank was for $300,000 and the
original price was ;"527,000. Thi now owner knows he has to invest about $20,000 into
the home. The exterior was in pristine condition because the Homeowner's Association
maintained it.
Giv,3n the testimony, P.1s. Ellis reduced the $91,300 lien to $3,000 plus administrative
costs of $634.12.
Ms. R -Pc did not know 11 it could close with tha' amount, The bank would not pay the
amount and the owners did not have the money, If it sold, she would only earn $4,500.
Ms. Ellis explained the bark was 31-ecapturing their loss. The owners were walking away
from 2 quarter million dollars of debt and may possibly have their deficiency waived. A
short sale was not mandatory and the owners were receiving a substantial benefit. She
understood the broker put in many hours, but she could not justify eliminating the lien.
The reduction stood at $3,000 plus $63,x12 inqdn',ini8tratIve fees.
Case No. 11-2388 F - ran dieu Nazaire 607 S. acrest Boulevard
Ms. Springer prey, )rated the case. The Notice of Violation w£:s sent August 30, 2011, for
a permit for a carport enclosure. The case was heard November 16, 2011, and Mr.
Nazaire appeared. The complianc.,, date and fine set was January 15, 2012, and a fine
of $100 a day thereafter. 'The cc -so complied August 28, 2013, accruing a fine of
$59,000 and administrative costs of W730.15.
Mr. Nazalre had an outstanding water bill of $136 that had to be paid, Ms, Springer was
contacted in early Sopternber for a lien reduction inspection. He had to paint new
W
CITE' OF BOYN'T'ON BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
Petitioner.
VS. CASE NO. 09-2110
OLGA 1... SAAVEDRA & CRISTIAN SAAVEDRA
Respondent(.,;).
LIEN MODIFICATION ORDER
THIS CAUSE carate before the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Magistrate on the Respondent's
application for lien reduction on October 15, 2014, pursuant to Chapter Two, Article: Five of'the City Code of Ordinances.
The Magistrate having considered the application, all the facts regarding the specific code or codes the appealing party was in
violation of', the date of the original Magistrate hearing, the date the affidavit of compliance was issued, the cut -rent lien
amount and all pertinent information relating to the specific case and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is
hereupon,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. This Magistrate has subject matter jurisdiction of this cause and.jurisdiction over the Respondent.
2, The Respondent has met all the lien reduction procedures established by the City Code of Ordinances.
3. The lien imposed by the Magistrate oft Septernber 16, 2009 oil the Property located at 1021 Grove Park Cir.,
Boynton Beach, Florida, %,pith the legal description of:
PALMYRA ESTATES; PUD LT 11, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 104, Pages 26 and 27, of the
Public Records ofPahn Beach County, Florida
PCN: 08-42-45-12-26-000-01 10 is REDUCED TO $3,634.12.
The City shall prepare a release and satisfaction consistent with this Order.
The release and satisfaction shall be recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County at the Respondent's
expense.
6. This Order is not final until the time period for appeal under the Code has elapsed and if appealed is properly
disposed by the City Commission.
7. In the event that the property owner does not comply with the Magistrate's order, as approved or modified by
the City Commission, within ninety (90) days of Commission's action, the Lien Reduction Order shall be of no further farce
or effect, and the original lien shall remain on the property. No extensions of the ninety (90) day period shall be permitted,
and no further action by the Code Compliance Magistrate or the City Commission shall be permitted regarding, lien
reduction.
ONE AND ORDERED after hearing at City of Boynton Beach,
P' 20 SLA
ATTEST;
r
JC Y CLERIC
Palm Beach County, Florida this ay of
copies furnished:
Honorable Mayorand the City Commission
City Attorney
City Clerk FILED
Respondent
V 01
ITS` CLERK'S OFFICE