What does "approximate time" mean in California?

[Dgray321]

Is "Between 10:00am and 3:30pm" too broad of a time frame to fit under "approximate time" as used in California Civil Code 1954?

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=civ&group=01001-02000&file=1940-1954.1

Thanks!

 

[Zigner]

Is "Between 10:00am and 3:30pm" too broad of a time frame to fit under "approximate time" as used in California Civil Code 1954?

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=civ&group=01001-02000&file=1940-1954.1

Thanks!

That would seem a bit broad to me. I would suggest a 2 hour window...

 

[HomeGuru]

That would seem a bit broad to me. I would suggest a 2 hour window...

**A: I disagree. Happy Hour should be more than 2 hours.

 

[FarmerJ]

Is this related to a needed repair in a tenants unit ? if it is then its possible that time frame is the best one that the contractor can offer and they cannot pin it down any better.

 

[Stephen1]

Is "Between 10:00am and 3:30pm" too broad of a time frame to fit under "approximate time" as used in California Civil Code 1954?

Perhaps if you provide us with the situation and which paragraph of the CA Civil code to which you are referring we could provide better answers. Is the situation what FarmerJ mentioned (repairs requiring a 3rd party contractor), or the landlord showing the unit to applicants because you are vacating, or the landlord doing an inspection of the unit, or ???? something else?

 

[Dgray321]

Sorry for the lack of info. We received a notice that our apartment will be entered in order to upgrade our window locks. Though our current window locks are operable and fine, I don't mind them coming in to upgrade them and they gave us plenty of notice (4 days). However, the notice gave that 5 1/2 hour window. We aren't comfortable with people being here when we aren't, so this timeline forces one of us to take the entire day off to wait around. The notice referred to Civil Code 1954, and I'm guessing for subsection "d".

 

[las365]

The time frame doesn't sound unreasonable to me. I understand your feelings about people being in your apartment without you present, but your choice to be there is the only thing forcing either of you to miss work.

 

[Dgray321]

The time frame doesn't sound unreasonable to me. I understand your feelings about people being in your apartment without you present, but your choice to be there is the only thing forcing either of you to miss work.

I'm not sure I understand the point of your second sentence, but I appreciate the opinion in first. If a 5 1/2 hour time frame is reasonable in a legal context then I'll simply have to content myself with being personally offended at what I consider to be a rude situation to put people in. Hopefully a tersely worded email will get my point across. Thanks again.

 

[Dgray321]

Today -three days after the last entrance- I received another notice that they would be entering to test fire alarms. They gave plenty of time since they won't be entering until May 10th, but the time frame is even more vague. This time it says "Maintenance will be entering your apartment between 9am and 4:30pm." I'm still working with the impression that section 1954 of the civil code sets the parameters of this interaction. It limits the time of entry to "normal business hours" to subsection b, and subsection d requires that the notice give " date and approximate time." I tried to find some idea of what "normal business hours" meant, exactly, but was unsuccessful.

I would think that the normal business hours would be something like 9-5. That's admittedly just an ignorant guess, but if it were even close to right it seems like the "approximate time" they are giving is "all day." Since they're required to provide both a date AND a time, it seems like this would be a bit too broad of a definition to fit within the scope of the law.

Then again, that's all based on an ignorant guess. If anyone is still interested I would really like to get more perspectives.

 

[HomeGuru]

Today -three days after the last entrance- I received another notice that they would be entering to test fire alarms. They gave plenty of time since they won't be entering until May 10th, but the time frame is even more vague. This time it says "Maintenance will be entering your apartment between 9am and 4:30pm." I'm still working with the impression that section 1954 of the civil code sets the parameters of this interaction. It limits the time of entry to "normal business hours" to subsection b, and subsection d requires that the notice give " date and approximate time." I tried to find some idea of what "normal business hours" meant, exactly, but was unsuccessful.

I would think that the normal business hours would be something like 9-5. That's admittedly just an ignorant guess, but if it were even close to right it seems like the "approximate time" they are giving is "all day." Since they're required to provide both a date AND a time, it seems like this would be a bit too broad of a definition to fit within the scope of the law.

Then again, that's all based on an ignorant guess. If anyone is still interested I would really like to get more perspectives.

**A: and just what type of more perspectives are you looking for? The hours provided to you for access is reasonable and follows the law requiring proper notice.

 

[Dgray321]

Just so you don't confuse my tone, I'm not being defensive. I don't think that I'm going to be able to change what they are doing any more, I'm just curious about the legal framework.

I'm assuming the purpose of requiring an approximate time on top of the date of an entrance is to add a level of specificity to the note. If normal business hours are 9am-5pm it would seem that an approximate time that increases the specificity -beyond simply listing the date- would necessarily have to be significantly more specific than 9am-5pm. It just doesn't seem as though 9am-4:30pm (just thirty minutes shy of my entire assumed normal business day) really meets that. Is my assumption that far off on normal business hours, or is "approximate time" really a useless addition to the law?

 

[Just Blue]

Here in Los Angeles "approximate" means the same thing that the dictionary says "nearly correct or exact; close in value or amount but not precise". If someone told you that they'd like to arrive somewhere at approx. 11 AM it'd be odd for them to show up to pick you up at 7 AM. Also if someone said Lunch will be served at approximately 12 noon, you wouldn't expect to be eating at 4PM.

Why are you posting to a 6 year old thread? Don't necropost.