sbd
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Disabilities act a shakedown vehicle?
We bought a building in 1996 and made it ADA compliant. Last year we had a lawsuit filed against us because our tenant did not have a table specifically marked for the disabled. Is that realistic enough for you?— January 2, 2017 11:38 p.m.
Lincoln Acres family cited for illegal house
The fact that this was a FHA Loan means that certain mandated compliance had to be met by the lender before FHA would have approved the loan and insured the lender for 100% of the risk. One of those requirements has to do with the safety in the building and renovations. These HUD FHA requirements were not followed in this case and HUD has an obligation to protect themselves from the risk of default. If the property went into default due to the lender not following the FHA requirements and HUD is not informed, the lender will in fact get paid in full for the loan that they caused to go into foreclosure in the first place. That is not how it is supposed to work. In fact, I believe that HUD will force the lender to make the fixes or they will rescind the insurance which in turn will cause problems for the lenders who have relied on that 100% guarantee to market a share in that loan. Here is the HUD document with the requirements and the quote from the story that applies. "Zerla says that someone reminded them that they have two children and told them that an unpermitted addition to their property could easily fall apart or burn down." http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/handbooks… 2-8 DEFECTIVE CONDITIONS. Defective construction, poor workmanship, evidence of continuing settlement, excessive dampness, leakage, decay, termites, or other conditions impairing the safety, sanitation or structural soundness of the dwelling shall render the property unacceptable until the defects or conditions have been remedied and the probability of further damage eliminated. 2-13 HAZARDS. The property must be free of hazards which may adversely affect the health and safety of the occupants or the structural soundness of the improvements, or which may impair the customary use and enjoyment of the property by the occupants. The hazards can be subsidence, flood, erosion, defective lead base paint (24 CFR Part 35) or the like.— October 1, 2010 4:48 p.m.