Answer to Paying Power Bills Lies in the Wires
QUESTION: I am a Los Angeles landlord with a problem just the opposite of the tenant paying for the water, power and gas of a communal, coin-operated washer and dryer in a Long Beach apartment house (“Answer to Washer Woes Isn’t Cut and Dry,” Sept. 8).
While constructing an apartment building 25 years ago, I discovered that by relocating the building’s laundry room, a large den and full bath could be added to an adjacent, two-bedroom apartment unit. Unfortunately, because it was too late to change the electrical work, the power for the revised space remained hooked up to the “house” electrical system.
Consequently, without fail, the unit’s ensuing tenants have selected this area for TV, computers, stereo systems and every other imaginable power-consuming gadget. The way it works out, regrettably, is that the owner, yours truly, pays the lion’s share of the unit’s electrical bill.
Naturally, my internal antenna perked up when your column’s banner caught my eye. Is there a remedy for this ailment?
ANSWER: There is a remedy for your ailment. Assuming your unit is rent-controlled, when your tenants moved into it, in general, they got all the amenities that were included with the unit at that time, and none of those amenities can be eliminated without a corresponding rent decrease. But is this free electricity an amenity?
According to Ralph Esparza, director of the Los Angeles Rent Stabilization Division, “The landlord can be as giving as he wants to. Unless there was an agreement that the landlord would pay for the tenant’s electricity, he could rewire the rooms to the unit. At that point, the tenant would pay his own electricity for the two rooms as well as the rest of the apartment.”
Esparza added, “However, if the landlord rewires and the tenant must pay for that electricity, the landlord would probably not be eligible for a capital improvement (a rent increase based upon an improvement to the unit or property).”
Go to Court to Get Deposit Refunded
Q: I am relocating from Florida and recently gave a man a $1,000 deposit on a house in La Jolla that he was renting. I then returned to Florida to pack up my belongings.
While I was there, he sent me a six-page lease with ludicrous terms and a different rent than we had agreed upon. I would not sign the lease and asked for the return of my $1,000. He refuses to give me any refund. What recourse is there for me besides small claims court?
A: Small claims court is the only recourse of which I am aware in your situation. It’s relatively easy and inexpensive to file at the court, and according to Trevor Grimm, general counsel to the Apartment Assn. of Greater Los Angeles, you have a pretty good case.
Grimm said, “It sounds as if the prospective tenant made an offer to rent the premises and it was rejected (i.e., “I will rent on terms approved by me, as later written up by you”). The prospective landlord sent unacceptable terms back, which constitute a counteroffer, which was not accepted. As such, no deal. The landlord should refund the deposit.”
Water Co. Adjusts Use Total to Match Period
Q: I read your column, “Getting the Lowdown on High Water Bills” (Aug. 11), and it made me aware of a potential water-billing problem at the North Hollywood apartment building I own.
The meter was read on Aug. 3. The bill shows the meter was read on Aug. 6, which would be a 61-day billing period. That’s all well and good, but I’m concerned about the next billing period.
If it’s recorded as a 61-day period, but is actually a 64-day interval because of the extra three days from the previous bill, how am I going to meet my water quota under the city’s water rationing law? Can you recommend any solutions to this potential predicament?
A: According to DWP public affairs spokesperson Mindy Berman, “In the wake of the water rationing law, this is a common concern of DWP customers. It need not be. If the next billing period turns out to be 64 days, you will automatically get the extra three days’ water enrollment.”
Elevation, Demand Affect Apartment Rent
Q: I live in a 1-bedroom apartment in Los Angeles. When I moved in 1 1/2 years ago I signed a six-month lease, which has since expired and turned into a month-to-month rental agreement.
After I had been living here for one year, the landlord upped the rent by $20 per month, which, I understand, is legal. Recently, a 1-bedroom apartment one floor below me just became available. The unit is identical to mine but the landlord is asking $130 less for its monthly rent than I pay.
Is it legal for me to be paying more for the same size apartment?
What determines how much money the landlord can charge in a case like this? If I should not be paying more rent than the apartment below me, how do I go about remedying this situation?
A: It is legal for the landlord to charge different rents for identical apartments, even under rent control. Rents, in general, are determined by the market forces, supply and demand.
Unless you have been inside the downstairs apartment, it is difficult to determine whether or not it is truly identical to yours. Even if the floor plan is indistinguishable from yours, most people feel considerably more secure in upper apartments than in lower ones.
Factor in the extra “view” you usually get with second-floor apartments, and the price difference may not seem so far out of line to you.
Postema is the editor of Apartment Age Magazine, a publication of the Apartment Assn. of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA), an apartment owners’ service group. Mail your questions on any aspect of Apartment living to Apartment Life, AAGLA, 612 South Westmoreland Avenue, Los Angeles, Calif. 90005-3995.
