Elmwood U-Haul HARASSMENT Columbia South Carolina
On January 11, 2019, I leased Unit E-236 from the Elmwood U-Haul facility in Columbia, South Carolina. Thus far, I have had no delinquency issues, nor have I knowingly violated my lease terms or the law while on U-Haul property.
During my tenancy, the General Manager, Rebecca Davis (“Davis”), while conducting a watch tour, has routinely photographed me while I entered my unit. On other occasions, Davis, without announcement, has frequently opened the door to my unit, which was partially ajar, and photographed me, without explanation, before exiting the area.
On this date, February 20, 2019, Davis approached my unit and observed me sitting on the floor of my unit. Davis aimed her phone at me initially, until she observed me aiming my cellphone at her with intent to take a photograph of her photographing me. Davis then became belligerent and ordered me to leave my unit because I was prohibited from “just chill[ing] out” in my unit. After asserting my right to be in my unit, Davis threatened to evict me and have me escorted off the property by the police.
According to the terms of my rental agreement, which reads in pertinent part, “Customer shall have access to the rental space only for the purpose of storing and removing property stored in that rental space. The rental space shall not be used for residential purposes.” Additionally, “U-Haul has the right to establish or change hours of operation or to proclaim rules and amendments, or additional rules and regulations for the safety, care and cleanliness of the premises or the preservation of good order at the facility.”
The issues to be decided, should this matter proceed to arbitration, are, among other things, whether it could be reasonably construed that I am utilizing my rental space for “residential purposes”, or otherwise, in violation of my rental agreement; and whether Davis’ persistent, unwarranted and invasive photographic activities are consistent with my rental agreement. (I would argue that such activities are actionable and I am prepared to subpoena Davis’ phone for recovery of any deleted photographs, if necessary.)
In addition to the foregoing, Elmwood U-Haul has a history of persistently failing to timely unlock the inside storage units at 7:00 am during weekdays, which are leased primarily by the homeless population. Many of the homeless are employed and need access to their units before proceeding to work. There have been occasions when the units were unlocked 45 minutes late. Management’s reason for the persistent delays is that they are too busy to unlock the units so early.
Ironically, management is swift to deny access to units due to delinquent payments. They are NEVER too busy for that. Amazing!
It is highly unlikely that any positive changes will be forthcoming under the tenure of Elmwood U-Haul General Manager, Rebecca Davis. Therefore, I recommend that current and prospective customers consider leasing storage units from U-Haul competitors such as CubeSmart and others, which have better rates, better facilities, and a better class of personnel. You’ve been duly warned!
8 Updates & Rebuttals
Whistle Blower
Columbia,South Carolina,
United States
Access Denied!
#9Author of original report
Thu, May 23, 2019
Why is it that U-Haul customers at the Elmwood facility in Columbia, South Carolina are denied access if they are even one day late paying rent, as I've witnessed happen to another customer? (I have not been late, personally.) Yet, Assistant Manager, Cedric, locks the doors to the inside units 20 minutes early so he can "get home".
There's no safety and security issues that require Cedric to "get home" on a routine basis, though it is rumored that there is impending violence planned for certain employees at the offending U-Haul facility. (When will they learn?) And when will they sweep the inside units?
They haven't been swept in at least 5 months. U-Haul and it's advocate, who routinely responds to this report, are so hypertechnical as it pertains to U-Haul's interests, while they engage in persistent malfeasance of their own. Lord, please make units available at the nearby CubeSmart facility soon. I'm ready to relocate from this ghetto.
Whistleblower
Columbia,South Carolina,
United States
Dear Advocate for UHaul:
#9Author of original report
Sun, March 10, 2019
Apparently, you are an attorney for UHaul, otherwise, you would not be so invested in this matter. Whatever the reason for your intense interest, I'm not obligated to answer your questions! You can draw whatever conclusions you wish (technically)! And since you couldn't find a hand grenade to play with, as I suggested, I would be obliged to accomodate you.
Robert
Irvine,California,
United States
Public Website
#9Consumer Comment
Sun, March 03, 2019
This is a public website and when you make a claim, some may question it as to the exact situation. So yes the public may make comments that don't exactly agree with the narrative you are trying to show. You can try to mis-direct the actual issue, by talking about technicallities until the cows come home. But it still comes down to one basic question you refuse to answer.
What exactly are you doing each time you are on their property?
But since you ignored that question multiple times, the public really has only one conclusion to come to. That you are not using the unit strictly for storage and you are in violation of the lease agreement.
Whistle Blower
Columbia,South Carolina,
United States
Why Is It So Much Of Your Business?
#9Author of original report
Fri, March 01, 2019
I understand that the filing of my report invites comments; however, aren't you just a bit too invested in my report, and aren't you being as technical as you complained about me being, if not more so? Are you the offending manager of the Elmwood U-haul, an employee of, or legal counsel for U-Haul?
You made your initial comment, now move on and get a life already. Find something constructive to do like play with a hand grenade. Just remember to pull the pin, okay? Have fun!
Robert
Irvine,California,
United States
Failure
#9Consumer Comment
Thu, February 28, 2019
What is very intersting here is your failure to answer any of the questions posed as to your activities while on their property. This tells us several things. Including when you are on the property you are not just moving items in or out and are in fact staying in your unit for extended periods of time. Which is in violation of the specific terms you posted.
It is a business and a storage unit and therefore you should have no expectation of any sort of privacy. If you go down the road that it is your private property and therefore they can't video you, you would have to admit that it is your personal residence and that would prove your violation of the lease agreement and their residence clause.
Notwithstanding that the facility is private property, arbitration would decide whether surveillance under the stated conditions of opening a partially closed door without announcement or cause is reasonable.
- Why partially close the door? Why did you fail to answer any questions about your specific use of the storage unit? The answer is obvious, an answer to those direct questions would prove that you know you are in violation of the lease agreement and just posted this in hopes that people wouldn't see right through your post.
Finally, the manager was hypertechnical toward me, why shouldn't I reciprocate?
So I guess if the the manager jumped off a cliff, you would follow?
Whistle Blower
Columbia,South Carolina,
United States
Dear "genius" who commented on my report:
#9Author of original report
Mon, February 25, 2019
Dear "genius", technically, lease agreements are based on "technicalities"; thus, one must address such issues accordingly, as I did. Additionally, you have focused too much on the "technical" issues, rather than the substance thereof. Understand how it works now?
Whistle Blower
Columbia,South Carolina,
United States
Read More Carefully - "Technically"
#9Author of original report
Mon, February 25, 2019
As I stated in my report, I was sitting on the floor for the purpose of photographing the manager photographing me. And there is no provision in my lease agreement for video surveillance of customers within their leased units.
Notwithstanding that the facility is private property, arbitration would decide whether surveillance under the stated conditions of opening a partially closed door without announcement or cause is reasonable. Finally, the manager was hypertechnical toward me, why shouldn't I reciprocate?
Robert
Irvine,United States
Sounds like
#9Consumer Comment
Sun, February 24, 2019
Sounds like you are trying to play the "technicallity" game by your focus on the "residential" clause.
However, by your own admission you were just sitting on the floor of your unit. That is technically neither storing or removing items so based on that definition you were in fact in violation of your lease agreement.
So the question is how long were you just sitting there? How often do you go there and how long are you there each time? What do you do while yo0u are there? Do you happen to do things such as change clothes or other activities?
As for the recording, SC is a 1-Party consent State and there is no reasonable expectation you should have while you are at the storage unit for any sort of "Privacy". I would also not be surprised if there was an item on video surveillence in your lease as well. So them recording you is probably not only legal, but in no way harrassment.
You previously stated you had no delinqency issues, but by your own time-line you would have been required to make only 1 payment which is hardly any proof of some sort of trackrecord. However, one does have to wonder how you know they are quick to deny you access if you are late.
I bet the full story to this would provide a lot of details.