Monday, April 18, 2011

Los Angeles County - Nuisance Abatement Team (N.A.T.)

According to the Los Angeles Community Policing Department, the Nuisance Abatement team's major functions are as follows:

1)to eliminate nuisance locations through the implementation of available remedies, including: encouraging voluntary compliance from owners; filing criminal complaints for non-compliance with Building and Safety orders or Zoning conditions; imposing conditions or revoking conditional use permits through the Zoning Administrator; filing narcotics abatement and/or red light abatement lawsuits; preparing asset forfeiture lawsuits; and demolishing vacant buildings declared public nuisances by the Board of Building and Safety Commissioners;
2)to establish integrated networks of law enforcement and governmental agencies, community-based organizations and concerned citizens;
3)to provide neighborhood crime prevention and education programs to residents and businesses in targeted areas; and,
4)to foster community coalitions among property owners, tenants, residents and business owners.

Please refer to the complete article here:

For further information from the County, here is another link to check out:

Back on March 2, 2000, L.A. Times printed the following article about N.A.T.:  11 years later, it is rather disconcerting to observe that things seem to be getting worse rather than better.

The concept of having a department that oversees neighborhood compliance makes sense on paper.  The problem develops when the officials who enforce such regulations become brutish in their tactics.  Unless there is a clear reason for concern for safety, it seems, many times, that their intimidating approach is unnecessary.

Sure, everyone is expected to comply with governed county codes but geez do you have to scare the living daylights out of people?  Please review some of the on-going complaints by actual L.A. County residents:


Anonymous said...

The NAT claims that they do not point guns at citizens when entering property to clear the way for code enforcement. Can all the folks who have stated that they were threatened with guns be lying? One deputy sheriff says yes to that question and even stated that he doubted the existence of the person who (with her daughter) claimed otherwise. When presented with the woman who didn't exist the deputy slinked out the back door and left the town hall meeting. Interesting.....

Anonymous said...

Have them with guns drawn on a surveilance camera. Have it now on a DVD. Will post.

Anonymous said...

There is presently before the 2nd District Court of Appeal, Div 2, a case challenging the constitutionality of Civil Code Sec. 3479 (the definition of nuisance) which is used by unscrupulous landlords to evict ANYBODY they want with only 3 Days notice. Case # B218529

If any part of N.A.T.'s supposed authority relies upon this statute for definition's etc., perhaps the outcome of this appeal can put a crimp in their activities.

In the event this appeal fails, I intend to continue in Federal court under the broader theory that California has a deliberate policy of depriving citizens of due process rights in order to permit acquisition (theft) of their property by a favored class.

Briefs, summaries and a large number of trial court documents can be found at
Also, feel free to use the contact info there to contact me for any reason.

My Reply brief, recording of oral argument and their summaries are not yet posted but should be up by August 01, 2011

Greg Hernandez said...

my name is Greg Hernandez and i live in the Antelope Valley. Lake Los Angeles to be exact. your site directly addresses the problem we are facing here. there other issues as well. im hoping someone from your organization can get back to me so that we can see if our interests are the same...we need help but knowing where to turn or how to defend ourselves is the real problem