Need help regarding 3-day notice

[Damazul]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

My apologies for the re-post. I have not received a reply to my original one. Thanks!

Our building was in violation of several codes and the City of Los Angeles established an escrow account until the landlord made the corrections (he was given 3 chances prior to this). We received a notice by the LA Housing Dept. that we had a choice to pay the City to the escrow account or pay the landlord, furthermore because of the violations the rent had a 20% reduction. I have been paying on time to the city, with the 20% off, at the end of July the inspectors signed off on the corrections (even though we still have issues) and we were given notice in August that the case would closed as of September 5. Our rent is due from the 1-5 of each month, therefore the city told us that September was the last month to take the reduction. I paid with a cashiers check (have the receipt) to the escrow account for September on August 29, and gave the receipt as usual.
On September 8, the property manager served me with a letter (as well as the other tenants) that the reduction only applied for the first 5 days of the month and the other 25 were at the regular rate, and ordered us to pay the remaining balance which reflected the discount for those days. I called the city immediately and told them the situation, they told me he was wrong and to disregard the notice. I then call the manager and told her what the city said, she said "I'm following the rules". Tonight, Saturday Sept 13 at 8 pm I was served with a 3 day pay or quit, for the amount they claimed I owed. Upon telling the manager that the city said he was wrong, she said that the property owner's lawyer told them we are wrong and have to pay. We are being harassed by the owner, he is a scum landlord that will do anything to get us out. I have been a tenant for 9 years, live with my daughter and my mom who is a disabled senior citizen and all this problem are very stressful for all of us. My mom was extremely nervous tonight and I'm in tears. I don't know what to do any more. Please, if someone can give me advise as to what step to take. I followed the rules and I clearly understood what the city wrote, but our landlord and his lawyer do not. I also know that the landlord will find anything possible to harassed out of our unit. I have done a lot of improvement, with permission, and he knows he can get almost $1000 more for my apt. I live in a rent control area. Please, please, please can someone help??? What can I do to stop him.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)

 

[alex468]

The most likely reason nobody's helping you is because this is a national forum and a lot of things seem to be happening to you that are LA-specific. Also, it seems like you've got a pretty good thing going and you're being greedy about peanuts.

Personally, I would pay, even though it sounds like the city has already said you are in the right here and the owner/lawyer/property manager are all wrong. You said the owner could rent the place for $1,000 more per month. Damn! What's 20% of 25 days-worth from one month of your lower rent compared to the amount you're saving and the landlord is losing year in and year out because of that? Damn! Even scummy, rich slumlords are human beings. He invested something in the property, if not now then long ago, and your presence is probably damaging his bottom line in a big way. Unless you are indigent or in huge credit card debt or something, pay it and get some peace of mind. It really isn't much that much money, right? 20% of 25 days....damn....

If you decide to fight it and stress out your daughter and mom, I'd do two things, but I don't know if they are the right things to do:

1) Ask your contact at the city to talk to your landlord's lawyer.
2) Get a note from the city confirming that your September rent has already been paid in full and send it by certified mail to the property manager, your landlord, and his lawyer. And save a copy for yourself in case you have to show it to a judge later.

 

[Damazul]

This isn't peanuts. We have 11 units, and the city took over because the one that is greedy IS the owner, not us. We have fire code violations, safety and health violations that have been poorly patched. Black mold that has been cover with paint but not removed, leaning balconies, brown water, scalding hot shower, roaches, termites. And the city wants the owner to take responsibility, not just collect the rent.
If we all pay the difference at this time, we are basically telling him that it is ok for him to be a scum landlord. And the reference to how much more he could take on my unit if I move out is because I have been in my unit for almost 10 years and we are in a rent control area.
I spoke with other tenants and looked at the LAHD rules, a landlord can't take action against a tenant, basically according to Section 162.00 if we are not in default of paying rent, then the landlord may not evict or cause the tenant to quit voluntarily. Unitl the unit is remove from REAP and for one (1) thereafter, the landlord mus be able to demostrate that the evition action, other than for nonpayament of rent, is not retaliatory in nature.

So basically, he is doing this in retaliation because he can't access the funds until the City releases them, the city keeps the fund to make sure he knows that what they are doing is not simply a slap in the wrist. This is serious.

As for civil actions the city states "Any landlord who violates the provision of this section, or retaliates against the tenant for the tenant's or the enforcement agency's exercise of their rights or duties under Section 162.00, shall be liable in a civil action for damages, a penalty of $1,000 per violation, and reasonable attorney's fees and expenses.

Am I being pitty for just peanuts? NO, this landlord-who owns many buildings across the county, needs to know that we have had enough.

 

[Damazul]

Also, our rent payment is paid at a Housing office in LA, we get two papers a blue copy with a stamped receipt and a pink paper with a stamped and official signature that shows the cashier's check #, the amount paid and the date an time it was accepted which is turned to the manager by the tenants (which I did). Then to be on the safe side, the city sends via postal mail a second receipt with all the details of payment, which they also send to the property's owner registered address. So in total there are 4 receipts (2 for the landlord and 2 for the tenant).
The attorney is a landlord's payroll employee.

There is also the fact that the landlord does not like to be talked to by woman, he is from Iran and he has a set of misguided issues against the female genre in general. Loves to deal with man, and belittles woman.

 

[alex468]

Here's what I mean by peanuts. On one hand, we have 10 years of rent where you've benefited from rent control at the owner's expense. On the other hand, we have 5 days of rent in dispute, 20% of the 25 days. Compared to 10 years, 5 days is peanuts. Compared to the 10 years that you might stay there in the future, 5 days is even smaller peanuts.

Maybe the "true motive" really was retaliatory, but the paperwork on the notice indicates that it is for nonpayment for that 20% of those 25 days. It seems to me like he is wrong and you are right. You say that the city has said he is wrong and you are right. But being wrong doesn't seem to me like proof of acting in retaliation.

If you don't pay then you'll stress out for a few more days or maybe the rest of the month and chances are the landlord will do nothing and accept your Oct. rent, but he might try to evict you and it will go in front of a judge or whatever they do in L.A. and then you and your family will stress out even more. If it goes in front of a judge, the judge will hear everything and the chances seem very, very good that you will not be evicted and that the owner won't be charged that penalty and your wonderful tenancy in Shangri-La will continue just as it was before without the owner "knowing" anything new that he didn't know before.

 

[MIRAKALES]

First and foremost, tenant fails to understand that the issues between the property owner and the county/city (LAHD) are standard operating procedure. In the conduction of normal business, the LL does what needs to be done to perform to the county’s satisfaction; and the LAHD does what is required to enforce the housing law. In the end, neither the LL or the county are personally vested in the tenant.

Second and least, tenants often make their interest in the LL personal which is where their tenancy becomes compromised. The LL’s personal issues with women is none of tenant’s (YOUR) concern. Tenant characterizes LL as a “scumlord”. There are many that characterize tenants of “scumlords” as “scum tenants.” (Neither of which much matters.) Tenant only has a vested interest in the maintenance of the premises which has been satisfied, according to LAHD.

Now, the continuing arguments made by tenant is petty. Whether the percentage (20%) of the rent stabilized rent is paid or not will be tenant’s choice. Whether the percentage (20%) claimed by LL as owed is pursued is LL’s choice. However, many LL’s walk away from unprofitable buildings for lesser reasons than described. When LL’s disown the premises, tenant’s are left to conduct their maintenance issues with the county. The county does not have the resources to maintain the rent stabilized conditions and maintain the premises (at taxpayer’s expense).

The Notice to Pay or Quit may or may not be a form of retaliation. If LL wanted to retaliate, there are far more sophisticated methods to inconvenience tenants.

 

[CA LL]

Termination from REAP are very specific. The notice you received in August should have noted the exact date (30 days out from the notice date typically) that your rent will go back up to the original rate and that it is to be paid back directly to the LL. Sounds to me that effective 9/5 this is the case. Not sure why they didn't make it on the 1st but they didn't. Rent in CA is a literal day state so it's quite possible your LL's attorney has a valid case. You were given notice 30 days ahead of the effective date your rent would go back up to full price and be owed to the LL. That date is 9/5. That said, the housing group is supposed to issue a full accounting to LL of all money held in escrow during the period the building was in REAP and after applying to all outstanding fees, etc. return the rest to the LL.

Bottom line, you received notice of compliance/termination of REAP in August to be effective (new rent/method) 9/5. Rent IS costed out on a daily basis in CA. So is it really worth the risk of destroying your credit and having an eviction on your record over 20 percent different for 25 days? I wouldn't think so. The LL did remedy the items to the program's satisfaction.

This is not retaliation as outlined for the one year after as he's just trying to get the money he and his attorney feel are owed him per the notices. Only a local judge can determine who is right or wrong. So either file an answer and go to court and try to fight it, knowing if you lose you will have a destroyed record, be forced to move from what I think is probably a very affordable rent controlled unit, etc.

REAP and LAHD in general with their horrific ordinances have destroyed housing in L.A. The stifling bureaucracy and all it's ridiculous levels of hearing, people, etc. is a fine example of why government should stay OUT of private industry.

Good luck.