Good Deed May Cost Samaritan Her Home

Ollie Thompson, 58, thought she was doing a good deed when she took in two distant relatives as foster children. But what she thought was an act of compassion may cost her the apartment she has lived in for 14 years.

Thompson’s landlord is seeking to evict her. The grounds for the suit: Thompson is harboring two “illegal occupants,” 3-year-old Charlie Thomas and his 16-month-old sister Diane Parker.

Thompson says she did not anticipate any trouble when Los Angeles County children’s services workers asked her to take in the children last February. It was a familiar assignment for her. The eldest of nine children, Thompson said she had to quit school to take care of her brothers and sisters when her parents were separated. When her sister-in-law was jailed 17 years ago, Thompson stepped in to save her two nephews from going to a foster home.

So when social workers stripped a distant relative--a drug addict--of her five children in February, she willingly took in two of them.

“I love children, and the condition these kids were in is too horrible to mention. Somebody had to take care of them,” she said.

Thompson and her attorneys say her troubles really began a few weeks earlier when her new landlord, Lynda K. Starling, announced to the 10 tenants in the South Los Angeles building that rents were being increased. The rent for Thompson’s simple but neat two-bedroom apartment was hiked to $278--a $70 increase.

Legal Aid Foundation Contacted

Thompson paid the increase but took the matter to the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles. Her only income is from disability benefits she receives because of high blood pressure and spinal problems, she said, and she could not afford the increase.

The landlord then rescinded the hike, saying it was a mistake. But two weeks later Starling served Thompson with another notice, this time claiming that she was violating her tenancy by allowing the children to live with her. Starling warned that if Thompson did not remove the “illegal occupants” within three days, she would be evicted.

“I was shocked. I bawled and cried when I read the notice. I raised my two nephews in this same apartment. So why should these people have a problem with two poor babies?” Thompson asked.

Starling did not return several calls from a reporter. Her lawyer, E. E. Touceda III, declined comment on the dispute.

Thompson does not have a written lease. A 1979 application to rent filed with the previous owner of the building stipulated that the three occupants of the apartment would be Thompson and her two nephews, who have not been living there since last year.

An official of the city’s Rent Stabilization Division said the landlord could make a legitimate claim that the agreement was violated because two new tenants were brought in to replace the nephews. “This is a common problem when the landlord wants to up the rent. In many cases, we recommend that the landlord accept 10% per new person to deal with the conflict,” said the official, who declined to be quoted by name.

Thompson’s attorney, Steven Zrucky, charged in court papers that Starling retaliated against his client because she had filed a complaint with the Rent Board about an illegal rent increase. He contended that Starling waived her right to take legal action since she accepted rent payments with full knowledge that the children were living there. The landlord, Zrucky said, is also discriminating against children.

“The way we see it, if the landlords get her out, they can get at least three times the rent when a new tenant moves in. . . . In my nine years of handling cases like these, this is the most outrageous one I’ve encountered, “ he said.

Zrucky added that Thompson would be willing to pay an additional 10% rent per child to settle the matter.

Thompson was in tears in explaining the turn of events. She said she had received Starling’s explicit approval to take in the two children. “When they heard about it, Mrs. Starling and her husband told me it was a good deed and how it would good for me. Now they’re saying something else,” she said.

Thompson said she plans to fight to keep the children’s new home. “This is the only home they know. They both call me ‘Mammie,’ ” she said, as she displayed new clothes and toys she had bought.

“Mammie,” murmured little Diane, dressed in a lavender suit and Mickey Mouse shoes, pawing Thompson on her cheeks.

A hearing into Starling’s suit is set for Monday in Los Angeles Municipal Court. Thompson said she plans to “dress up my babies and take them to court.”