RENT STABILIZATION BOARD CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO. 13 Program (herein "RSP") on March 13, 2013 regarding the premises at 445 O'Keefe Street, Unit 39, 14

Transcription

1 1 RENT STABILIZATION BOARD CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO JESUS PIURA, 6 vs. 7 Petitioner, Case No. 01/1-1 EQR at Woodland Park, Respondent I I. HEARING 1 The above entitled tenant petition application fonn received by the Rent Stabilization 1 Program (herein "RSP") on March 1, 01 regarding the premises at O'Keefe Street, Unit, East Palo Alto (herein "unit") came on for hearing on July 1, 01. Present at the hearing were 1 petitioner tenant Jesus Piura and his counsel Jason H. Tarricone and law student Reed Risenmay of Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto (herein "Tenant") and respondent landlord EQR at 1 Woodland Park, through Davina Slusher (herein "Landlord"). Also present were Carol Lamont and 1 Stephen Ford of the RSP and Spanish language translator Teresa Mendivil. The parties were sworn 0 and both oral and documentary evidence were submitted. 1 II. ISSUES PRESENTED Petitioner seeks a rent reduction and rebate due to a reduction in services and a breach of the warranty of habitability. Petition B attached to the tenant petition application fonn alleges that the unit has a broken bedroom window which lets in air and water causing mold, a shower in which the 6 7 tile is separating, a clogged bathroom sink, peeling vinyl at the entrance to the unit, a broken heater 1

2 1 and cockroaches. Landlord opposes the petition and filed a response on April, 01. Landlord asserts that it corrected all problems which were reported to it. m. TENANT'S RELIEF REQUESTED 6 In Petition B tenant requests relief in the form of a reduction in monthly rent from the date o 7 notice to the owner as follows: Problem Windows Wmdows Windows Windows, Floor, Bathroom Problem with water in the bathroom Heater does not tum on Date Owner Notified Dec 01 Jan0! Feb 01 Mar01 Dec01 Nov01 Percentage of Rent Reduction Sought by Tenant 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1 Petition B was amended to include a cockroach infestation problem. The petition alleges 0 that the problem began and the owner was notified on //01. A rent reduction of 0% is 1 requested for this problem. Tenant testified that the window problems about which the owner was notified on December 01, January 01 and February 01 all concern one window in the bedroom. IV. EVIDENCE 6 Maximum Allowable Rent 7

3 1 An Initial Certificate of Maximum Allowable Rent was issued on April, 01 (herein "ICMAR"). In the ICMAR the Maximum Allowable Rent (herein "MAR") was certified to be $1,0.6 for the period from July I, 01 to June 0, 01. This MAR was based on the Information Reported by Your Landlord form which stated that tenant's tenancy began on //01. 6 There has been no objection to the ICMAR. As a result, the MAR contained in the ICMAR 7 is final and conclusive. Regulation IOIO(E). The evidence submitted shows the term of the initial lease to be from //01 through //01. Pursuant to the Costa-Hawkins Act initial rent for a new tenant is not subject to ll restrictious. Ordinance In this case, pursuant to a lease, the tenant, as a new tenant, and 1 the landlord agreed to initial rent of$1,01.00 which rent included a water charge of$0.00 per 1 month for the period from /101 through //01. Upon expiration of the lease, rent becomes subject to the restrictions imposed by the Ordinance. 1 The initial rent of$1,01.00 per month for the period from //01 through //01 is proper under the Costa-Hawkins Act and the Ordinance.0.1!0. The MAR for period from 1 //01 to 6/0/01 is $1,0.6 per month as certified by the ICMAR. The $1,0.6 MAR 1 includes the $0.00 monthly charge for water. 0 Reduction in Services and a Breach of the Warranty of Habitability 1 Tenant's Position and Evidence The unit is a one room, one bath junior studio. It is on the ground floor. There are occupants: petitioner, his wife and their baby. In Petition B tenant states: 6 7 SectionB Air and water enter through the window. Window locks do not work. "There have been burglaries on this street." Because of the humidity that enters through the window, mold has

4 grown. The shower tile is separating, the bathroom sink is clogged, the vinyl at the entrance is peeling, the heater does not work, and there are cockroaches. SectionD I have been verbally notifying Woodland Park Apartment managers Oscar and Teresa and maintenance also since December but nobody has paid attention. They have sent people but there has been no solution or repairs to the apartment. Because of that I went on //1 and complained again. The person helped me put it in the system and someone went the next day. They did not fix anything they just said they needed supervisor approval. They have given me the run around in order not to fix the problem. On / the supervisor went and told me he has seen worse and there is no reason to fix it. SectionE The window has affected me to the point where I have missed weeks of work due to colds and my 6 month old baby has gotten sick also. My greatest fear is that the mold will cause a bigger problem. Because the tile is separating, the bathroom is always cold. The sink is always leaking and wets the paper I have below it. The front entrance is armoying because when I open it gets stuck and makes noise. The heater does not tum on and they never returned to fix it. The kitchen floor has a metal and is dangerous because it is sharp. I had a problem with the bathroom in December because the second floor neighbor had a valve break and that started the mold problems in my roof. When maintenance went they said they had had that problem before. I was relocated in December to a hotel in Mountain View for 7 days without being able to use my apartment or bathroom. When I came back the problem started within a few days because they did not glue the water valve correctly and the bathroom gets all wet. I have a problem with the bathroom tile separating. It has not been resolved. They also say I complain too much and if the neighbors live with those problems why can't I? It is inhuman to live in those conditions. They always have excuses to not fix or help when stuff happens. When I moved into the apartment, I told them about the heater. A new control was put in but that did not resolved anything because of the air and water that enters through the window during the rainy season. The locks do not work on the windows and on that street there are burglaries. The only excuse I have received from maintenance is they do not have to change the windows because they have seen some in worse condition and to wait until winter to see if water enters. And to buy bleach for the mold and to Jive with the windows because they are not going to fix them. Because of this I am paying more for my gas and electric bill. (franslated from Spanish) Tenant submitted photographs of the unit. Photographs of the window were taken in June

5 1 01 which show that the window has a 1/" opening between the window and the window frame. A photograph of the bathroom window shows mildew along the comer of that window. Photographs also taken on June, 01 show cockroaches. Photographs of the clogged sink were submitted. A photograph of a comer of the shower stall shows a separation at the comer where the 6 tile like wall coverings meet. 7 Tenant testified that he gave notice to landlord about the heater not working both orally and by telephone in November 01. Because the heater did not work he bought a space heater in December 01. He had a larger electric bill because he had to use the space heater. The heater is a gas heater and there were no instructions in Spanish on the use of the heater. The heater has been 1 fixed. The person who fixed the heater said that the heater problem had to do with some cables. 1 The heater repair person loosened some screws and the gas came on. Tenant asserts that he gave notice of the window problem to landlord in December 01 by IS phone. He does not remember to whom but knows it was a woman. Landlord sent someone to repair the window last March but air and water were still getting through. The photographs taken in 1 June 01 were taken after a rain and show mold and mildew around the windows. On June, 1 01 landlord installed a new window frame. Tenant stated that the window still does not close 0 properly. Air still gets through the window. Tenant would like the window fixed. 1 The mold around the window spread to about feet under the window. Tenant cleaned the area with Clorox. Tenant says the mold has not come back because there has not been any rain. Landlord's own records show that there was a request to correct the mold problem on February I, 01 but that it was not until March 1, 01 that someone carne out to correct the problem. Tenant 6 asserts that the mold problem is not caused by lack of maintenance but is a structural problem 7

6 1 because the window does not fully close. The problem of the slow draining, clogging sink has been occurring for a few months. It began after plumbers serviced the entire apartment building. Now when tenant turns on the water, the sink clogs. Tenant asserts that he gave notice to landlord about this problem in December Tenant alleges that he has had a cockroach infestation problem since March, 01 and that 7 he gave notice to landlord about the problem on that same day, March, 01. He also had a grain beetle problem. His unit has been fumigated times with the last time being June 1,01. The frrst fumigation got rid of the grain beetles. The cockroaches keep coming back. A photograph taken June, 01 shows cockroaches in the unit. Tenant stated that he keeps his apartment clean. II 1 One of his reasons is that he has a baby there. 1 Tenant reported his problem with the vinyl at the front entrance to his unit to landlord on December 7, 01. A ' x ' section of vinyl lifts when it gets wet. 1 Tenant stated that the shower stall tile like wall was fixed on June, 01. However, only the top of the stall was fixed. A bubble still exists on one side of the shower stall wall. 1 In response to landlord's assertion that tenant's credibility is to be questioned since he 1 falsified information relating to his occupancy in apartments, tenant stated that he does have his 0 name on leases but has asked to be removed from one and that he has been living in the unit which 1 is the subject of this petition since March, 01. In response to landlord's assertion that tenant had made a statement cin September, 01 that he was very satisfied with the unit, tenant stated that he did not remember making the statement, and that the problems he has had with the unit began after that date. 6 In response to landlord's assertion that tenant did not give landlord notice of the conditions 7 6

7 1 at the time tenant states he did because landlord's record of service requests show different dates, it is tenant's position that landlord's written service request records do not provide direct evidence that tenant did not give landlord notice at the times tenant testified he did, but only show a record generated by landlord. Tenant further questioned the integrity of landlord's service request record 6 pointing a discrepancy in the service request regarding "Miscellaneous: Pests/nuisances" which 7 indicates the condition to have been reported on 1//01 but that the unit was inspected by Team Too on 1/6/01. Landlord's Position and Evidence Landlord responded to the petition on April, 01. Attached to its response were work 1 orders, service requests along with the service request history, an invoice (Yes! We Can Building 1 Services, Inc.), an Acknowledgment and Release, the Move-In/Move-Out Inspection Form and a resident note of//01. Landlord also submitted tenant's rent ledger which shows that tenant paid rent of$1,01.00 per month from //01 through /0/01. Rent increased to $1,0.6 on /1/01. In its response to the petition landlord states: Windows do not close and lock properly Service request reported /1/1. This unit was inspected by our Service Manager on /1/1. Attached is the service request along with the notes generated by our Service Manager, Andrew Danly. Mold in the apartment/shower Tile Service Request was reported on 1/0/1 and was serviced on l//1. Attached is the service request along with the invoice. Bathroom sink is clogged First reported / and addressed on //1. Seven months later resident reported 7

8 the sink being clogged again. Second service request was generated on /6/01 and completed the sane (sic) day. Both service requests are attached. Vinyl at the entrance to the unit is peeling Reported on 1/1 and addressed on 1/7/1. Service request is attached. Heater does not work No request has been made by the resident. Attached is a complete list of all service requests from the time of move in through today. Cockroach infestation Initial request was generated on 1//1. At this time, Team Too found grain beetles in the unit. On //1, resident requested treatment for roaches. This unit was service (sic) on /6/1. On //1, resident requested a second treatment. Services were rendered on //1. Please note, from //1 to //1, resident did not report any cockroach concerns This apartment home was provided to the resident in clean and working condition, per the signed move-in checklist. On September, 01, the resident confirmed he was very satisfied with the unit and location and had no problems at the time. Attached is the move-in checklist along with the resident note documenting this conversation. Landlord testified that the lease specified only male occupants and not a wife or children. Landlord questioned tenant's credibility based on tenant's having apartments, the unit which is the subject of this petition and also a unit at 0 E. O'Keefe Street, Unit 7. 1 Based on its records, landlord stated that the window problem was first reported on /1/01 and was fixed on /1/01. It is landlord's position that any mold or mildew on or by the windows 6 7 is caused by lack of maintenance by the tenant. Tenant needs to clean and ventilate the window areas. Pursuant to the lease the tenant must properly ventilate the apartment and keep it clean. With respect to any mold in the bathroom, landlord stated that it installed a new shower. Landlord's position regarding the clogging bathroom sink is that it is a maintenance

9 1 problem. Landlord has been out to the unit a number of times to unclog the sink but the clogging keeps recurring. Landlord addressed the problem with the vinyl at the front entrance. The work order shows that a transitional strip was placed between the vinyl and the carpet. The applicable service request 6 shows the work as having been completed on 1/7/01. 7 Landlord asserts that it first received notice of the broken heater on //01. It fixed the problem on /101. Landlord stated that the only problem with the heater was that the gas valve was in the off position. Landlord stated that the cockroach problem is caused by a lack of maintenance of the unit. 1 Landlord asserts that tenant needs to maintain a clean apartment. 1 Landlord presented the Move-In/Move-Out Inspection Form to show that there were no 1 problems with the unit when tenant moved in. The form is signed on //01. Landlord also presented a note by Moises Pimental dated //01 entitled "Resident Note Detail For Jesus Piura" which notes "Very satisfied with unit and location. Has no problems. Appreciate's follow up." 1 V. DISCUSSION 1 Landlord does not appear to dispute the existence of the conditions which are the subject of 0 the petition. Landlord is disputing the dates of notice and the causes of the conditions. Tenant must 1 prove by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of the condition, the date he notified landlord about the condition and the cause of the condition. Ordinance.0.0(E), Regulation 0(A)()(a). Despite landlord's assertion that tenant lacks credibility because he is on 1eases, the 6 Hearing Examiner does not find that position to be well taken. Tenant provided a credible 7

10 1 explanation and the relevance of tenant's being on leases is, at best, marginal. Heater Tenant's evidence is that he notified landlord of the heater problem in November 01 and he had to buy and use a space heater. Landlord states that it did not receive notice of the heater 6 problem until Aprii!O, 01. Landlord fixed the heater on May, 01. Assuming that landlord 7 received notice on April,01, it still took days to address a problem which would render the unit untenantable. Civil Code l.l(a)(). Regardless of the cause of the heater problem, whether it was the gas valve being off or something to do with the cables, landlord should have immediately addressed it. Landlord did not present any evidence to directly contradict tenant's 1 assertion that he notified landlord bothorally and by telephone in November 01. Landlord's 1 argument is that if there is no service request for the problem, there was no notice. While landlord's 1 policies and procedures may require its employees to generate a service request whenever there is a complaint from a tenant about living conditions, no evidence has been produced to show that such policies and procedures were followed with respect to petitioner tenant's complaint regarding his 1 heater problem. Further, tenant asserts in Petition B that his complaints were not addressed because 1 he was told by landlord's employees that supervisor approval was needed. 0 The Hearing Examiner finds that tenant has met his burden of proof with respect to notifying 1 landlord in November 01 about his heater problem, and, finds that notice of the heater problem was given to landlord in November 01. The Hearing Examiner further finds that the heater problem was fixed on May, 01. Tenant is entitled to a 0% rent reduction for the period from November 1, 01 to May, Failure to maintain heating facilities in good working order renders a dwelling untenantable. DEClSlON

11 1 Civil Code 1.1(a)(). Window Tenant's evidence is that he notified landlord in December 01 about his bedroom window problem. Tenant stated that landlord installed a new window frame on June, 01 and that the 6 window does not close properly and still lets alr into the unit. Landlord stated that it fixed the 7 window on March 1, 01 as evidenced by its service request. However, tenant produced photographs taken in June 01 which show a gap in the window and mold in a corner of the window sill. The photographs are persuasive in supporting tenant's assertion that both water and alr were getting into the unit through that window until June, With respect to notice, in light of what has been discussed above, landlord has not presented 1 any direct testimony to contradict tenant's evidence of notice. The Hearing Examiner finds that landlord received notice of this window problem in December The unit is a one room junior studio. The effect of having a window that is neither air nor water tight is greater on a junior studio than it would be on a larger unit. A dwelling is to have 1 unbroken windows so that it is waterproof and protected from weather. Civil Code J.l(a)(l). 1 In light of this and the presence of mold caused by the window tenant is entitled to a I 0% rent 0 reduction from December I, 01 through June,01. Tenant is entitled to a rent reduction of 1 % from June 6, 01 until such time as the window problem has been corrected. Sink clogging Tenant testified that he notified landlord of the clogging sink problem in December 01. Tenant stated that this problem began after plumbers serviced the entire apartment building. Tenant 6 further testified that he has had the problem for a few months. When he turns on the water the sink 7 II

12 I drains slowly and then clogs. Tenant submitted photographs of the clogged sink. Landlord's evidence is that it first received notice of the clogging sink on //01 and that it unclogged the sink on //01 with the resident stating that the drain was working good. Landlord's service requests show that it received notice of the sink clogging again on /6/01 and 6 that it completed correction on /7/01. Landlord maintains that the clogging sink is cansed by 7 the tenant's lack of maintenance. It appears that from August 01 through March 01 landlord has been responsive in dealing with the clogging sink problem. This shows that landlord has been receiving notice regarding this problem. Tenant stated that the sink has been clogging again for the past few months. 1 There was no evidence presented as to tenant notifying landlord of the clogging sink after landlord 1 serviced the sink on /7/01. Landlord was given notice at the hearing of the sink continuing to clog. The Hearing Examiner adopts July 1, 01 as the date that landlord was notified of the 1 continuing clogging sink problem. A clogging sink presents health issues and certainly affects tenant's ability to use and enjoy his unit and presents health concerns. The rental value of the unit is 1 also affected Tenant is entitled to a % rent reduction from July 1, 01 until such time as the clogging sink problem has been corrected. Cockroaches Tenant alleges that he gave landlord notice of the cockroach problem on //01. Tenant stated that landlord has fumigated the unit times, the last time being 6/1/01. The first fumigation got rid of the grain beetles found there, but the cockroaches keep coming back. 6 Landlord alleges that it first received notice of this problem on 1//01 and thst it treated 7 1

13 I and sprayed the unit on the same day. Landlord received subsequent notice of cockroaches on //01 and sprayed the unit again on //01. Photographs of cockroaches taken on 6//01 were submitted by tenant. They confirm the presence of cockroaches in the unit as of6//01. No evidence was presented as to the extent of 6 the cockroach infestation being claimed by tenant. 7 Tenant's claim that he gave landlord notice of the cockroach problem on //01 is contradicted by the "Resident Note Detail For Jesus Piura" of //01. In that note tenant does not mention any cockroach problems. Relative to that note tenant testified that he did not remember making that statement and further that the problems he has had with the unit began after that date. I In light of this, the Hearing Examiner finds that the landlord did not receive notice of the cockroach 1 problem on //01. Landlord was responsive to tenant's complaints about cockroaches which were made in 1 December 01 and March 01. The problem is that the cockroaches keep coming back. Landlord did receive notice of the further presence of cockroaches at the hearing hereof. The 1 Hearing Examiner adopts July 1, 01 as the date that landlord was notified of the further 1 cockroach problem. 0 The presence of cockroaches certainly affects both tenant's ability to use and enjoy his unit 1 and the rental value of the unit. The amount of any rent reduction must be based on the extent of the infestation. Tenant has the burden of proof to show the extent of the infestation. Ordinance.0.0(E), Regulation 0(A)(l6)(a). Tenant has produced evidence of the presence of cockroaches but not the extent of any infestation.. 6 Tenant is entitled to a 7% rent reduction from July 1, 01 until such time as the cockroach 7 1

14 I problem has been corrected. Vinyl at front entrance Both tenant and landlord agree that landlord received notice about the vinyl at front entrance problem on 1/7/01. Landlord addressed the problem on 1/7/01. Tenant maintains that the 6 vinyl remains a problem in that a ' x ' section lifts when it gets wet. 7 Landlord's response to the problem was appropriate as once notified landlord has to be given a reasonable opportunity to correct the condition. Regulation 0(E)()(a). However, tenant asserts that the problem remains. The evidence presented in tenant's Petition B is that landlord received further notice of this problem on March, 01. The Hearing Examiner adopt~ March, 1 01 as the date that landlord was notified of the further problem with the vinyl at the front 1 entrance. The condition of the vinyl at the front entrance affects tenant's ability to use and enjoy his unit. It also affects the rental value of the unit. Tenant is entitled to a % rent reduction from March, 01 until such time as the vinyl problem has been corrected. Shower stan The evidence presented includes an Acknowledgment and Release signed by tenant on February 6, 01 in which tenant, for consideration of$.71 in the form of a credit to his account, released landlord "from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, injuries, damages and actions, known or unknown, direct or indirect, which Resident had, might now have, or may have against any of the Released Parties arising out of, relating to or in connection with, directly or indirectly, the Dispute... " The dispute is identified as the "Bathroom Rehab/Hotel Relocation." 6 7 The scope of the release is limited to the conditions and repairs to the bathroom that are referred to

15 1 in Section E of tenant's Petition and which were performed on 1//01 as contained in the Yes! We Can Building Services, Inc. invoice dated 1//01 submitted by landlord. The invoice indicates the scope of work to be "Bathroom Rehab." Tenant was relocated during these repairs. Part of the bathroom repair consisted of the "Removal and installation of new Tub, wall Enclosures 6 and Trap, including Shower Valve and Insulation." 7 Tenant now complains that the tile like shower stall wall was separated at the corner. The II evidence is that the separation is now caulked and waterproofed. Tenant states that there is a bubble on the shower stall wall. Landlord states that the tile like wall does not consist of individual tiles but is a one sheet covering and that the bubble is the result of pressure on the wall covering. 1 The evidence presented in tenant's Petition B is that landlord received further notice of this 1 problem on March, 01. Since that time the separation had been caulked and waterproofed. There is no evidence as to when the separation was sealed and the bubble created. Landlord did 1 receive notice of the bubble in the wall at the hearing. Regardless, the evidence is that a problem has existed in the shower stall wall since March, 01. The Hearing Examiner adopts March, 1 01 as the date that landlord was notified of the further problem with the shower stall wall. 1 The separation and the bubble in the shower stall wall is a claim that arose after tenant 0 1 signed the release. It appears to be a claim that tenant did not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time he executed the release. Civil Code section states: A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor. The release therefore does not bar tenant's claim for a rent reduction for the bubble in the shower 6 stall wall. The bubble in the shower stall wall affects tenant's ability to use and enjoy his unit. It 7 1

16 1 also affects the rental value of the unit. Tenant is entitled to a % rent reduction from July 1, 01 until such time as the shower stall wall problem has been corrected. Bathroom mildew 6 Tenant submitted a photograph of mildew on a comer of the bathroom window taken in June It was taken after a period of rain in June 01. This photograph confirms the existence of mildew in the bathroom on the window. The same considerations relating to the bathroom rehab with respect to the effect of the release that were set forth in the section above entitled "Shower stall" are applicable to this mildew condition. The Yes! We Can Building Services, Inc. invoice 1 dated 1//01 indicates that the bathroom was treated for mold. 1 Tenant has not provided any evidence that he notified landlord about the bathroom mildew problem after the bathroom rehab was performed and prior to the date of the hearing herein. IS Tenant's Petition B does not specifically include the bathroom mildew as the subject of notice given to landlord on March, 01. Landlord did receive notice of the bathroom mildew problem at the 1 hearing. The Hearing Examiner adopts July 1, 01 as the date that landlord was notified of the 1 further problem with the bathroom mildew. Mildew in the bathroom affects the tenant's ability to 0 use and enjoy his unit. It also affects the rental value of the unit. 1 Tenant is entitled to a % rent reduction from July 1, 01 until such thne as the mildew problem in the bathroom has been corrected. 6 7 Rent reductions and refunds The amount of the following rent reductions are based on rent of$1,01.00 per month for the period from //01 to /0/01 and on rent of$1,0.6 per month {$.6 per diem) for the

17 1 period from /1/01 to the present. In his petition tenant requests rent reductions and refunds in excess of I 00% of his rent. Where there is a failure to maintain the premises in habitable condition consistent with building and housing codes, the board may order a rent reduction pursuant to a tenant petition based on a loss of 6 rental value attributable to a failure to maintain the premises in habitable condition. Ordinance (A). Where there is a decrease in housing services or maintenance, the board may order a rent reduction pursuant to a tenant petition based on a loss of rental value attributable to a reduction in maintenance or services. Ordinance.0.10(B). Thns, the Ordinance allows the board to order a rent reduction based on loss in rental vaiue. 1 The reduction cannot be more than the rental value. To find that tenant sustained more than 0% reduction in rent and decide that tenant is entitled to amounts in excess of the rent charged would be 1 tantamount to awarding tenant damages. While other remedies are authorized pursuant to Section.0. of the Ordinance, an award for damages is not authorized under Section.0.10 under 1 the Ordinance. The aggregate amount of the rent reduction or refund will not exceed 0% of the 1 rent paid by tenant. The rent reductions and refunds which follow are set forth in the aggregate 0 amount for the specific period listed. 1 The Hearing Examiner finds that tenant is entitled to the following rent reductions and refunds: l. A rent reduction and refund for the period from November 1, 01 to and including April0, 01 for the heater, bedroom window, front entrance vinyl and shower stall problem: 6 7!00% which is equivalent to $6,00.00 (6 months x $1,01.00).

18 1 0% which is equivalent to $6,00.00 (6 months x $1,01.00).. A rent reduction and refund for the period from May 1, 01 to and including May, 01 for the heater, bedroom window, front entrance vinyl and shower stall problems: I 00% which is equivalent to $. ( days x $.6 per diem). 6. A rent reduction and refund for the period from May, 01 to and including June 7, 01 for the bedroom window (%), front entrance vinyl (%) and shower stall problems (%): % which is equivalent to $.1 {one month [$.1] and days [$6.70]). A rent reduction and refund for the period from June 6, 01 to and including July II, 01 for the bedroom window (%), front entrance vinyl (%) and shower stall problems (%): 1 % which is equivalent to $. ( days x $.1 per diem). 1. A rent reduction and refund for the period from July 1,01 to and including August 1, 01 for the bedroom window problem (%), the clogging sink (%), the cockroach 1 problem (7%), the front entrance vinyl problem {%), the shower stall (%) and the bathroom mildew (%): % which is equivalent to $06. (one month [$6.] and days [$.60]) A rent reduction of in the aggregate of% from August,01 until such time as 1 the conditions set forth in item above are corrected. The aggregate amount of the rent reduction 0 will be reduced by the equivalent percentage of each condition as each condition is corrected. 1 Either party may request a compliance hearing pursuant to Regulation 0(A)(0). The total amount of the refund determined hereinabove is $7,00.. VI. 1. The Maximum Allowable Rent for the unit for the period from March, 01 to 6 March, 01 is $1,01.00 per month. 7 1

19 1. The Maximum Allowable Rent for the unit for the period from March, 01 to August 1,01, the date of the decision is $1,0.6 per month.. Tenant paid rent of$1,01.00 per month for the period from March, 01 to and including April0, 01; tenant's rent was increased to $1,0.6 on May 1, Tenant is entitled to rent reductions and a refund of$7,00. for the period from 7 November l, 01 to August 1, 01.. Tenant is entitled to a rent reduction of % in the aggregate for the conditions which are remaining as of the date of this decision from August,01 until such time as those conditions are corrected. The aggregate amount of the rent reduction will be reduced by the 1 equivalent percentage of each condition as each condition is corrected. Either party may request a 1 compliance hearing pursuant to Regulation 0(A)(0) DATED: August 1,01 flee, PETER C. LABRADOR Hearing Examiner 1