Thursday, March 28, 2024

AdvertiseDonateSubmit
NewsSportsArtsOpinionThe QuadPhotoVideoIllustrationsCartoonsGraphicsThe StackPRIMEEnterpriseInteractivesPodcastsBruinwalkClassifieds

Apartment woes plague Westwood-dwelling Bruins

By Daily Bruin Staff

Feb. 14, 1996 9:00 p.m.

Apartment woes plague Westwood-dwelling Bruins

Negligent managers, rent increases are amongst complaints

By Karen Duryea

Daily Bruin Staff

Danielle Tavizon wonders every Thursday if she will be served
with an eviction notice. Any day now, the resident of the
nonuniversity-owned Landfair Apartments could be evicted or left
sitting in the dark without electricity or gas.

"I don’t know when the electricity is going to go off …
probably during midterms," Tavizon said.

The fourth-year biology student was recently found guilty in a
January court case for failing to renew her lease for the 1995-96
year.

Tavizon said that for two years in a row, the management of the
building tried to impose an illegal rent increase for each new
lease agreement. However, when the case went to court, the judge
ruled that the second modified lease adhered to rent control
laws.

The manager of the building refused to comment, claiming he
deals with repairs, not tenant issues.

The plaintiff in Tavizon’s case, Phoenix Professional
Corporation, also had no comment on the case, claiming that the
court documents could speak for themselves.

The first time Tavizon claimed there was a rent increase, she
and the management reached an agreement on the rent rate, which
included a small increase. This year, the building was under new
management, and the owners decided to take her to court for failure
to sign her lease.

According to the Los Angeles Housing Department, annual rent
increases can be limited in both amount and frequency, depending on
the age, type and location of the rental unit.

Tavizon admitted that she refused to sign the lease. She claimed
that the lease initially requested a $60 increase and was changed
to accommodate the legal 3 percent increase.

"I didn’t sign it because I knew they knew it was under rent
control," she explained. "Their primary goal was just to get more
money out of my apartment," said Tavizon, who is on financial aid.
"Even though it’s 15 bucks, 15 bucks means a lot more to me than it
does to them."

Numerous UCLA students shared Tavizon’s feeling that landlords
and building owners in Westwood have excessive autonomy when it
comes to issues of leases, rent and deposits.

Tamara Deuel, for instance, said that the rent in her apartment
complex is above and beyond what it is worth.

"This is an ancient apartment building and they’re getting as
much as a more modern place would get," said Deuel, a fourth-year
history student and resident of the same apartment complex Tavizon
occupies.

"There are so many places in Westwood like this. (The
management) see(s) students who don’t understand rental problems –
students who are on their own for the first time," Deuel said.

Deuel argued that landlords and owners take advantage of
inexperienced new renters, overcharging residents for substandard
living conditions.

According to the Los Angeles Housing Department, habitability
standards – such as watertight roofs and walls, working plumbing
and gas and no vermin infestation – must be upheld by the property
owner. If the owner ignores standards, the tenants may be eligible
for a rent reduction.

Tavizon claimed she made rounds to all the units of the Landfair
Apartments and compiled a three-page list of requested repairs.
Residents said that, on occasion, they could not locate the
manager.

"(The manager) is not here during business hours. Every time
I’ve needed him he hasn’t been around," Deuel said. "I am sure
there are other apartments doing far worse because they think the
students don’t know what is going on."

Dennis Romero, a 1992 UCLA alumnus, argued that based upon his
experience living in the village, Westwood landlords have an
underlying profit motive.

"Getting an apartment in L.A. is usually a bad experience," said
Romero, who has rented four apartments in Los Angeles.

Romero once had $350 deducted from his $600 security deposit for
what the management of his building deemed necessary cleaning. He
was charged for a dirty carpet and broken vertical blinds, which
Romero alleged were in the same condition as when he moved in. He
claimed he reported these problems to the management, but to no
avail.

"I wouldn’t doubt that the next tenant will be charged, probably
overcharged," said Romero, who said he plans to sue his former
management."The law sort of errs on the side of not just landlords,
but for business over the little guy."

… annual rent increases can be limited in both amount and
frequency, depending on the age, type and location of the rental
unit.

Comments to [email protected]

Share this story:FacebookTwitterRedditEmail
COMMENTS
Featured Classifieds
More classifieds »
Related Posts