Improper Rental Increase

[Proserpina]

I have the slightest disagreement with you. I believe that it could be retaliation but just not something that is prohibited. I believe that is one of the points OP is hung up on. He's arguing that it is retaliation. We need to agree that it possibly is. Then move on to the question of: what law prohibits the LL's behavior? There is none that I know of.

Analogy: Let's say that years ago in a parking lot I was backed into by a Lexus. The driver was a jerk and yelled at me. So now when a prospective tenant drives up in a Lexus I automatically reject him/her. Is this discrimination? Yes, based upon the car they drive. Is it illegal? No (Would it be a poor business practice: Yes).

Oh, and to the poster who said they come to this site for humor - me too.

I'm not sure that's what Nellie meant to begin with.


1. She paid the rent late.
2. The landlord wanted to charge a late fee and Nellie refused.
3. The landlord raised the rent - and did the smart thing by raising everyone else's rate at the same time.

Where Nellie is getting lost, is that she seems to believe that #2 makes #3 illegal retaliation and completely ignores #1. She's dead wrong and even more fun is the fact that she completely and utterly failed to understand the statute, AND the case law.


Is it retaliation? Possibly. But it's not illegal retaliation. I don't believe for one single moment that the landlord all of a sudden agreed with Nellie. She's not Franco Harris, and this was not a Hail Mary that actually worked.

If this went to court, Nellie would find herself with a judgment against her and, to add insult to injury, paying the landlord's legal fees to boot.

I expect more of the OG Effect.

 

[Nellibelle]

I'm not sure that's what Nellie meant to begin with.


1. She paid the rent late.
2. The landlord wanted to charge a late fee and Nellie refused.
3. The landlord raised the rent - and did the smart thing by raising everyone else's rate at the same time.

Where Nellie is getting lost, is that she seems to believe that #2 makes #3 illegal retaliation and completely ignores #1. She's dead wrong and even more fun is the fact that she completely and utterly failed to understand the statute, AND the case law.


Is it retaliation? Possibly. But it's not illegal retaliation. I don't believe for one single moment that the landlord all of a sudden agreed with Nellie. She's not Franco Harris, and this was not a Hail Mary that actually worked.

If this went to court, Nellie would find herself with a judgment against her and, to add insult to injury, paying the landlord's legal fees to boot.

I expect more of the OG Effect.

"Is it retaliation? Possibly. But it's not illegal retaliation."

Retaliation is retaliation!!! If this matter would have gone to a judge, I'm sure he would have been alarmed at the extra 25.00 increase of my rent and asked why I was assessed more than tenants with similar sized apartments.

Even if the LL explained the increase was due to not paying the late fee, I'm sure the judge wouldn't have allowed it. It is irrelevant that anyone thinks I'm wrong or not!! If I'm sure enough to want to take it to court, then I will live with the consequences--whether I prevail or not. For you, Proserpina, to state that I would find myself with a judgment against me, is stupid because we don't know for sure what would happen in court!

 

[Proserpina]

"Is it retaliation? Possibly. But it's not illegal retaliation."

Retaliation is retaliation!!! If this matter would have gone to a judge, I'm sure he would have been alarmed at the extra 25.00 increase of my rent and asked why I was assessed more than tenants with similar sized apartments.

Not quite. The landlord doesn't have to give you all the same rent increase. Of course, if you can find something (other than a Title VII problem) to the contrary I welcome it. Gladly.

Even if the LL explained the increase was due to not paying the late fee, I'm sure the judge wouldn't have allowed it. It is irrelevant that anyone thinks I'm wrong or not!! If I'm sure enough to want to take it to court, then I will live with the consequences--whether I prevail or not. For you, Proserpina, to state that I would find myself with a judgment against me, is stupid because we don't know for sure what would happen in court!

Oh dear.

You see, there is retaliation and there's illegal retaliation. Just as there is discrimination and illegal discrimination. Understand yet?

 

[Nellibelle]

Not quite. The landlord doesn't have to give you all the same rent increase. Of course, if you can find something (other than a Title VII problem) to the contrary I welcome it. Gladly.




Oh dear.

You see, there is retaliation and there's illegal retaliation. Just as there is discrimination and illegal discrimination. Understand yet?

Ca. Civil Code section 1942.5(H): The remedies provided by this section shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by statutory or DECISIONAL LAW.

Read Orozco vs. Cashmiro (2004)!

 

[justalayman]

The LL called me this morning and after I persuaded her that it wouldn't be beneficial for either of us to spend time in court over this, she reduced the rental increase by 25.00 and waived the late fee she was seeking.

So much for the wrongful opinions throughout this thread. Only FarmerJ and os478 gave informative responses! Tje rest of you can keep your day jobs because your opinions and advice is horrible.

Of course I'd rather successfully persuade the LL to decrease my rent than to persuade Proserpina that I have a case. The LL also complimented me on my longivity as a tenant, so my certified letter and negotiation worked out like I figured it would.

nothing wrong with what you were told. You just have a LL that agreed to wimp out and not push the issue.

I do have a question though;

you said your increase was $50 while the others was $25. Was your rent equal before the increases? Is your unit identical to their units? Just because they are all 1 bedroom doesn't mean they are all worth the same on the market.




if the LL is smart, the termination of your tenancy is in the works. You are obviously a PITA to deal with.

and since you love to go to court; realize that if you push the issue that a landlord has to file an unlawful detainer suit, your choice of landlords that will rent to you diminishes drastically. Think about that before you get all high and mighty and insist the landlord take you to court.

 

[Proserpina]

nothing wrong with what you were told. You just have a LL that agreed to wimp out and not push the issue.

.

Don't bother, JAL,

She is either deliberately being an idiot, or she's so tragically clueless she'd give spinny a run for his money.

There's a third possibility...but I'll leave that up to your imagination.

 

[Nellibelle]

nothing wrong with what you were told. You just have a LL that agreed to wimp out and not push the issue.

I do have a question though;

you said your increase was $50 while the others was $25. Was your rent equal before the increases? Is your unit identical to their units? Just because they are all 1 bedroom doesn't mean they are all worth the same on the market.




if the LL is smart, the termination of your tenancy is in the works. You are obviously a PITA to deal with.

and since you love to go to court; realize that if you push the issue that a landlord has to file an unlawful detainer suit, your choice of landlords that will rent to you diminishes drastically. Think about that before you get all high and mighty and insist the landlord take you to court.

To answer your questions, yes my rent was equal to the other tenants before the increase. My unit is identical to the other 1 bedroom units. I can tell by your post that you are even questioning why the LL raised my rent higher. It all leads back to my refusal to pay the late fee.

I certainly do not love to go to court and that is why I'm happy that there was a resolution to this matter. Please give me an example of pushing the issue allowing the LL to file an unlawful detainer against me. I'm not nor have I ever been 'high and mighty' about anything. I simply didn't want to sit by and let the LL take advantage of me.

I've lived in the complex for over 5 years now and even accepted a previous rent increase a couple years ago and have kept a low profile, while being a model tenant, so how does that equate to being a PITA?

 

[Nellibelle]

Don't bother, JAL,

She is either deliberately being an idiot, or she's so tragically clueless she'd give spinny a run for his money.

There's a third possibility...but I'll leave that up to your imagination.

How am I deliberately being an idiot? Because I disagree with you? Let it go, will ya? My issue has been resolved through no help from you.

What does Whittier mean and what is the 'third possibility' that you are obsessing about? and Justalayman says I'm being a PITA?

 

[FarmerJ]

Nel best wishes, if your are satisfied with what you learned and want to see this thread die please use the padlock icon , lock this up.

 

[Ladyback1]

I know that this thread has long since "jumped the shark"...But, after reading all of it, I cannot believe that no one asked what the lease said re: charges for late payment of rent! (and if was mentioned, I obviously missed it!)

So...was there/is there anything in a lease document/rental agreement indicating how late payments would be assessed an extra charge?
(Every lease document/rental agreement I have ever had stated exactly when rent was due, if there was a grace period, and what the charges would be for late payment(s))

 

[Eekamouse]

Good point, Ladyback1. I am sure there is something in OP's lease that addresses late fees but I doubt OP wants to go there.

 

[Just Blue]

Ca. Civil Code section 1942.5(H): The remedies provided by this section shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by statutory or DECISIONAL LAW.

Read Orozco vs. Cashmiro (2004)!

No more current Case Law??????? 2004 is the best you can do? You DO know is is 2014...Yes?