Can I get your thoughts on this?

Well as a parent I would have a hard time with someone else telling me what time they have to be home. I understand why they are doing it but they need to present it better. If my child came home from a friends house and got "detained" by them I would be well mad is a understatement.

But it is a parents job to have control of where the kids are at. It sounds like some parents are not doing the job.

There is a difference of happening to be outside after that time and being loud and disruptive.

Because they really don't care what their kids are doing or maybe the fact that it makes THEM have a curfew to be sure their kids are inside???

I have no problem with the time curfews!

Seems like another case of let's target the bad guys to stop such and such behavior (and the good ones that aren't bothering anyone or anything will suffer too but oh well)
If the place is having specific problems with a group of teens, the best way to approach that is take care of the problem with them and their family, not impose a curfew for one and all that rigid. Many times those type of kids that are causing many problems don't even care about rules anyway, and the parent's have a hard enough time trying to enforce many rules, so making more isn't effective. Keep us updated, it will be interesting to see how long they keep this and if it works.
My city had a curfew while I was growing up, it was never an issue. I did get stopped before coming home from work later than the curfew allowed, which wasn't a problem since I was working then going straight home.

Originally Posted by sarahp

I daresay it would only be enforced when the kids are being noisy or acting suspiciously. I can't imagine if there was a 17 year old coming home from work at midnight, and just going from their car to their apartment that security would stop them or even look twice at them.

It's definitely a very badly worded notice - it should make it clear in what circumstances security will try to take action.

Click to expand...

I agree. I hope they wouldn't harass the teen going to their car or coming home from work.

Wow, that does seem harsh..I get it for the younger kids..but no way are teens going to go in that early.

That does seem nuts. Like others have said... at 17 I had already graduated from HS and was working at a restaurant where I didn't get home until 2 or 3am. Ok granted, I lived in a house at the time... but if I were in an apartment at the time and they stopped me coming home from work I would be pi$$ed!

....and so would my mom... and she's not one whose bad side you want to be on

But I also agree that its probably something they're putting out there in order to selectively enforce in order to catch those that are known trouble makers. I think there are just too many ways for the apt complex to get in trouble if they enforce this across the board.

I personally don't see anything wrong with it. It says "off the grounds", meaning outside the building.

It seems to me that they have had problems with the "under 18" crowd probably causing excess noise outside the building on buildingp property.

Is there a pool or recreational area outside your building for tenants to use? If so there have probably been problems with teens hanging around in the area and partying and drinking etc.

To me it seems badly worded and I can't see it extending to those who are under the age of 18 walking into the building after a certain period of time. I would think it would extend to those who were caught loitering outside causing disturbances to other tenants.

I'm assuming that maybe they mean kids hanging around the building, rather than actually arriving home after that time.

I mean, obviously most kids have jobs that would keep them out that late and what if they are out with their parents that late? Are they going to detain the kids and then give them straight back to their parents?

Pretty stupid decision to make without any obvious consultation with the people who actually live in the building and have to live with these rules.

I think we have a town curfew for the under 18 group. At least we did 10 years or so ago when I fell into that category. I was sitting in my car outside of my house on the street one time with my BF and a cop drove by and told us we had to go in the house, it was after curfew.

Also, most places here aren't allowed to let kids 16-17 work past a certain time. I don't know if that is only during the school year though..

It sounds like they just don't want the kids hanging around outside the building after dark.. and I don't blame them. I have a friend who lives in a complex with a curfew and the kids can come and go, they just can't be outside loitering about at night..

And there's a reason I live in a building that doesn't allow any residents under 16...

Curfews only happen when parenting fails.

Wow that's nuts, and the eviction threat is way out of line.

I can understand the curfew, but they should probably reconsider the time for the 16-17, at least so it matches the city's curfew because of working situations. However, I cannot agree with the curfew for 18-yr-olds. I assume that you are in the United States (correct me if I'm wrong), and an 18-yr-old is legally an adult, and so 18-yr-olds should not have a curfew (unless their parents give them one, and then that's their business). Technically, that's age discrimination since they are not setting a curfew for the other legal adults.

And eviction after 2 violations is just insane!

Tricia

Wow...that would really infuriate me if I were living there. On the one hand, something just doesn't seem legal about that. On the other hand, the city where I grew up instituted a curfew for anyone 17 and under when I was in high school. So who knows whether such things are actually okay. But if enough tenants are mad about it, they should definitely get together and complain. If the management has to worry about a mass of tenants leaving at the end of their lease, they may rethink such policies. I do seem to recall that some apartment restrictions on pets that were instituted out of the blue have been held to be legally invalid, so maybe something like this would be too.

All I keep thinking is:



I honestly think that's a load of bull-hooey. I understand, but kid sunder 16 being in by 9pm? When I was under 16, I was always outside(albiet in the country) after 9pm around my place.....it's so peaceful. I suppose if the kids were being peaceful, I don't see the need for the curfew.

I think they need to rather create stricter punishment & stricter rules for "loitering". I forsee some serious troubles going on enforcing that....

I know a case where a CITY cerfew ended with a HONOR student getting detained for stopping in a OPEN park .... Lets just say it cost the city a lot of $$$ to settle and a PUBLIC APPOLOGY.... so I would say the complex is likely in for it

Meh. It's crazy. ^^^ to what everyone here has said regarding why it was enacted. I think it was definitely to combat specific teens. :censor::censor::censor: are they going to do about teens that aren't in their building? Kick them off the property? That seems like the only thing they could do.