Oral Agreement Could Benefit Tenant

QUESTION: To move into the North Hollywood apartment in which I am living, all I had to do was fill out a very simple “rental application.”

When I asked about a lease, I was told that there isn’t one. I’m concerned about how much protection is available to me under the Los Angeles Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) without any kind of written agreement. Am I protected?

ANSWER: If your apartment unit is covered by the RSO and you are a tenant, you are protected by the law whether you have a written or oral rental agreement with your property owner.

Your rental unit is covered by the RSO unless it is exempt for any of the following reasons:

1--New Construction--Defined as a building that had its first certificate of occupancy issued after Oct. 1, 1978.

2--Single family dwellings where two or fewer dwellings exist on a lot unless attached, such as a duplex.

3--Luxury Housing--City exemption certificate and rent levels at least at the following rent rates as of May 31, 1978: $302-0 bedrooms, $420-1 bedroom, $588-2 bedrooms, $756-3 bedrooms and $823-4 or more bedrooms.

4--Substantial Renovation--City exemption certificate required after significant sums of money expended on renovation of a unit. (This exemption was eliminated effective Oct. 4, 1989.)

5--Government Subsidized Housing--(Section 8 or units subject to the certificate program, or HUD), nonprofit accommodations or nonprofit housing.

According to Ralph Esparza, director of the City of Los Angeles’ Rent Stabilization Division (RSD), “About 60% of the city’s rental housing stock is covered by the RSO. For information regarding registration call (213) 485-7173.”

As far as your relationship with your landlord goes, a written lease or rental agreement protects his interests far more than it does yours. No matter how wrong it may seem, you’re probably better off without anything in writing.

For instance, a written agreement often limits the number of residents who are able to occupy a unit.

Similarly, rental agreements often prohibit pets, limit the amount of time guests may stay with you (for example, one week) or spell out late fees for rents paid late.

While these issues are usually clearly enunciated in a written agreement, generally they are not included in an oral agreement.

In other words, it’s difficult for you to argue that a written agreement does not mean what it says. For example, you would be hard-pressed to assert that new roommates were authorized by the owner when the agreement specifically names the residents and prohibits any new ones.

Conversely, with an oral agreement the landlord’s burden of proving that “tenants” does not include new roommates is very tough.

Manager May Not Be Answer to Rowdiness

Q: I have a question about the Los Angeles apartment complex in which I live.

The 10-unit apartment building I live in is connected to an identical 10-unit building, one on each side of the property with a swimming pool and courtyard in between. They are connected by a fence in the back and a gateway in front but each have different addresses.

I have read in your column in the past that state law requires an on-site property manager in rental properties with 16 or more units. My first question is, does the law apply to this complex? The owners claim that these are two, separate, 10-unit properties and they don’t need a manager. Is that right?

The problem is that some of the tenants here like to have parties in the courtyard that last into the wee hours of the morning and they don’t respond to reasonable requests for quiet.

I believe these rude neighbors would respond better to an on-site manager, who could keep the noise and late-night parties in check. What do you think?

A: The property at which you live may very well need an on-site resident manager under state law. If both of these structures are on the same lot, they are considered as a 20-unit property by the state, and an on-site manager is required.

If, on the other hand, they are on separate lots, they are classified as two 10-unit structures and no manager is mandated by the state.

Although you may be able to compel the owner to get a manager at the property, his presence will not ensure serene surroundings.

While most written rental agreements contain rules about excess noise and tenants’ use of the common areas of the property, such as the courtyard, there is nothing, except the owners, to compel managers to enforce these rules.

Those are, of course, the same owners whom you forced to hire the manager in the first place. They’ll probably keep that in mind when instructing the manager about which rules to enforce and when to enforce them.

I agree with you that tenants usually respond better to complaints from a manager than those from tenants, but there is nothing that requires a manager to intervene in a tenant-tenant dispute. In fact, the Apartment Assn. of Greater Los Angeles’ (AAGLA) rental agreement specifically negates any such managerial obligation.

A better approach than forcing the owners to hire a manager might be for several of the unhappy tenants to let the owners know how they feel about the situation. Tell them, in the nicest way possible, that while they like living at the property, they may have to consider moving if things don’t improve.

With today’s high vacancy factors, ranging from 6%-9% across town, most owners are unwilling to lose good rent-paying tenants because of a few rowdy ones.