More than 10 families living in the Wikiup mobile home park are being evicted. According to a spokesperson for the community, owned by RHP Properties, residents are not following the rules.
Tomasa Hernandez and her family are one of those families being asked to leave. She says this puts them in a bind since this is all they can afford.
The family adds they've always paid their rent on time, but now they're being asked to leave by mid-September.
"I spend my time crying because I am always thinking, where am I going to go with my kids and my sick husband?" cried Hernandez.
To make ends meet, Hernandez sells fruit and vegetables on weekends...
Read More
There is no evil agenda going on here. The statement from the resident:
"When we realized we had a court date it was already too late, and they sent us an eviction notice, I think they want me to leave because I didn't remove the fence, they said my curtains are ugly and they told me to clean outside because it was messy," said Hernandez.
And now the statement from the park owner:
"Our priority at Wikiup is to provide a safe, well-maintained, and affordable community for our residents. We work with residents when there are violations to the rules and regulations of the community that present health and safety concerns for them and other residents. If after repeated requests and notifications, residents fail to address those violations, for the sake of all residents, and as required under Colorado law, management, as a last resort, must take necessary legal steps to ensure compliance."
The bottom line is that the resident broke the rules, refused to fix the issues even after notification, and then the park owner gave up and evicted them for the good of the entire community at large.
It’s important to remember here that evicting any resident costs the park owner thousands of dollars: 1) legal cost 2) cessation of lot rent 3) demolition of the home. It is very rare for a park owner to evict for rules violations unless it’s a very serious case. There are two sides to every story and the writer of this article gave 99% of the benefit of the doubt to the resident and 1% to the park owner – and that’s clearly unfair.
Basically just more poor journalism that is simply geared to pander to their base at the exclusion of fairness.