Posted by Tenant A on August 16, 2001 at 10:06:18:
Tenant A rents an apartment on January 2000 and tenant B rents similar apartment in April 2000.
Both are for 1 year and the rent for both is $500. The agreement says that at end of lease, it will be renewed with same terms unless other party send a notice 30 days before lease expiry.
Tenant A sends a notice in November 2000 stating that he would extend the lease for 3 months (January 2001 to March 2001) on expiry of current term. The LL manager verbally agrees and says that there won't be any rent increase.
On December 2000, tenant A goes ahead to sign the lease (Jan 2001 to March 2001) and the new LL manager says that there is an increase of $25 -- pay it or move out. There is 4 days to lease expiry and no way to move out. Tenant A accept it but send a letter to LL that it is illegal since tenant was not given the required 30 day notice.
On March 2001 tenant A again extends the lease for another 12 months (April 2001 to March 2002) and rent increase by another $25 making it $550. LL says that is the current market rate.
On March 2001 tenant B too extends his lease for 12 months and there is a rent increase of $25 making it $525. So effectively tenant B is paying less than market rate while tenant A is paying the market rate.
Is this Discrimination/Retaliatory action ?
If so, where to file complain (for Discrimitaion it is HUD, for Retaliatory action who ?)
Part 2 of the question assuming tenant A decide to file a complain:
Tenant A is certain that he would move out by end of this term (March 2002). State law says that any action from LL will be considered retaliatory if it is within 90 days of tenants complain.
Should tenant A file complain after December 2001 so that LL does not try to create problem in next referral/security deposit refund ?
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup