- 80 - 7th Ave. #3 & #4 R001-43R
(cont. from 10/1)
The landlord’s petition for rent increases based on comparable rents to two units rented by the same tenant was granted, and the hearing officer granted a rent increase from $50.00 to $750.00 per month for unit #3 and from $50.00 to $950.00 per month for unit #4. The hearing officer found that the initial rents on the units were set very low because of a special relationship between the tenant and the landlord’s brother, a prior joint owner, who had created two fraudulent leases to "loot" the current sole landlord’s interest in the property. On appeal, the tenant asserts that: the hearing officer simply adopted as "facts" the hearsay allegations contained in the landlord’s petition, without supporting evidence, and that therefore her due process and constitutional rights were violated; the hearing officer demonstrated bias and prejudice against the tenant in his conduct of the hearing; the landlord failed to meet the requisite burden of proof for rent increases based on comparable rents and the tenant has no legal burden of disproving the claims made in the petition; and the hearing officer exceeded the bounds of his jurisdiction in making judicial determinations as to matters beyond the scope of the petition before him.
MSC: To deny the appeal. (Lightner/Mosser: 5-0)
- 4314 - 17th St. R001-17A
The tenant’s petition alleging substantial decreases in housing services was granted, in part, and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in the amount of $1,296.25 due to a disconnected wall furnace; ceiling leaks; and limited use of a patio area. The tenant’s failure to repair claim was denied because it was untimely failed. On appeal, the landlord asserts that: there is a mathematical error in the calculation of rent overpayments; the source of the ceiling leak was difficult to locate, especially since the upstairs tenant refused to provide access to his unit; and that the same neighboring tenant was responsible for the unsanitary condition of the patio.
MSC: To excuse Commissioner Moore from consideration of this appeal. (Becker/Marshall: 5-0)
MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case to the hearing officer on the record to issue a Technical Correction to the Decision regarding the amount granted for the disconnected wall furnace; and to cut off the rent reduction for loss of use of the patio as of August 18, 1995. (Becker/Wasserman: 3-2; Gruber, Lightner dissenting)
- 3130 Taraval St. R001-21A
The tenant’s petition alleging a substantial decrease in housing services was granted and the landlords were found liable to the tenant in the amount of $1,525.00 due to the loss of use of a parking space for a two and one-half year period. The tenant’s failure to repair claim was denied. On appeal, the landlords claim: that the tenant sometimes parked her car in the parking lot during the instant period, and the amount granted should be reduced accordingly; that the landlords thought that the matter was settled, and the tenant’s unreasonable delay of over a year in bringing her claim caused them real prejudice; that the tenant parked her car behind other tenants’ parking spaces, and therefore the housing service was not decreased; that the tenant’s parking behind other tenants’ parking spaces made it impossible for the landlords to rent a vacant parking space, resulting in a double loss to the landlords; and that the value of the parking space was less than that assigned by the hearing officer.
MSC: To deny the appeal. (Marshall/Wasserman: 3-2; Gruber, Lightner dissenting)
- 1600 Larkin St. #104 R001-47R
The landlord’s petition for certification of the costs of bathroom renovation necessitated by dry rot was granted, resulting in a capital improvement passthrough in the amount of $180.70 to the tenant in one unit in the building. On appeal, the tenant alleges that the work was in the nature of repair, and not capital improvement; that he failed to vigorously contest the passthrough at the hearing because he assumed that the hearing officer would agree with his depiction of the work as necessary repairs; and that the work was necessitated by the current landlord’s deferred maintenance. The tenant also is concerned that the cost of repairs to the bathroom in the unit above his might have been improperly allocated to his unit.
MSC: To deny the appeal on substantive grounds but to continue this matter until the next meeting in order for staff to contact the tenant and see if he wishes to pursue a hardship appeal. (Marshall/Wasserman: 5-0)
- 15 Lapidge St. R001-19A
The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs was dismissed due to his failure to appear at the properly noticed hearing. On appeal, the landlord alleges that he missed the hearing due to a variety of personal problems, including eviction from his apartment and the fact that he was going through a divorce.
MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case for a new hearing. (Marshall/Gruber: 5-0)
- 2400 Pacific Ave. #702 R001-20A
The landlord’s appeal was filed several months late because the landlord’s agent had initially submitted a request for a technical correction to the decision. After Rent Board staff informed the landlord that an appeal would be necessary, the appeal was filed 14 days late without explanation.
MSC: To find no good cause for the late filing of the appeal. The Decision of Hearing Officer is therefore final.
(Becker/Marshall: 5-0)
- 515 John Muir Dr. #313 R001-48R
The tenant’s petition alleging substantial decreases in housing services was denied due to the tenant’s failure to meet his burden of proof. The tenant, who has filed numerous prior petitions, alleges on appeal that the hearing officer erred in that she did not number the evidence that was submitted at the hearing; and that there are numerous factual and legal errors in the decision, including evidence of racism and discrimination on the part of the hearing officer.
MSC: To deny the appeal. (Lightner/Gruber: 5-0)
- 1624 Alabama St. #A R001-22A
The tenant’s petition alleging substantially decreased housing services due to numerous habitability defects on the premises was granted, in part, and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in the amount of $3,062.50. The landlord, who failed to appear at the hearing but sent a representative, asserts on appeal that: he failed to bring evidence in his possession to the hearing because he was not aware that it would be required; the tenant failed to meet her burden of proof regarding the claims raised in the petition and whether or not notice was given to the landlord, only providing uncontradicted testimony; the landlord provided heat to the unit shortly after receiving oral notice of the problem; the tenant was never prevented from using the yard; many of the conditions were caused by the tenant and her children; a bedroom closet was available and simply had some exposed sheet rock, which is not hazardous; pest control was provided to the unit, but the tenant’s unsanitary housekeeping practices contribute to the problem; and some of the rent reduction amounts granted are excessive.
MSC: To deny the appeal. (Marshall/Wasserman: 5-0)