Rent Stabilization Commission affirms remand decision in D-4930, records MAR at $1,469.88

The West Hollywood Rent Stabilization Commission on Feb. 12 unanimously affirmed the hearing examiner’s second-remand decision in appeal D-4930, a dispute over the maximum allowable rent (MAR) and alleged rent overcharges. The commission adopted a resolution that also records the MAR finding of $1,469.88.

The case has been before the commission multiple times. Legal counsel Kellen Marts told commissioners that prior commission decisions did find a rent overcharge of about $7,600, but a subsequent remand hearing reviewed additional noticed rent increases and concluded there was no overcharge. “On the last remand for additional review, the hearing examiner reviewed all the evidence and found that there was no rent overcharge,” Marts summarized during the meeting.

Tenant representatives argued the landlord, Scott Properties, failed to perform required exterior painting and other maintenance ordered in hearing determination 438, and that rent increases applied while a rent decrease was in effect were therefore invalid. John Ainsworth, speaking for the tenant interests, said Scott Properties “remains in violation of West Hollywood rent stabilization ordinance and regulations due to their refusal to perform the required exterior painting of the building” and urged the commission to remove alleged overcharges and return the account to zero.

Scott Properties’ representative replied that the reductions granted for the unperformed work were properly applied and that the property was, in the representative’s view, within the framework permitting increases so long as the correct reduction remains in place. The representative told the commission the owner had obtained approval to paint and planned to paint the building “within 10 or 11 days.” When asked whether a $6 pass-through fee was included in MAR calculations, the representative answered the fee was not included.

Legal counsel explained the remand review was a record review rather than a new hearing and that a hearing examiner may, at their discretion, decide a remand on the existing record without reopening evidence. Counsel also reiterated the ordinance standard that a landlord who has provided the required rent reduction in the correct amount may, under the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, take annual adjustments so long as they are in substantial compliance with the ordinance.

During deliberations several commissioners said the hearing examiner’s second-remand review resolved earlier gaps in the record and that the current decision was supported by the evidence before them. Commissioner Tobshin moved to adopt the resolution as drafted but with an added line affirming the MAR finding of $1,469.88; Commissioner Copeland seconded. The commission approved the motion by roll call, 7–0 (Commissioners Bass, Copeland, Kerpies, Macafferty, Toppen, Vice Chair Goldman and Chair Rory voting yes).

The resolution and the hearing-examiner decision remain the operative documents for this appeal. Staff provided parties with contact information for follow-up: Rent Stabilization Division, 323-848-6450, and the department email listed in the meeting packet.

The commission’s action affirms the hearing examiner’s interpretation of the record and the MAR calculation for D-4930. Parties to the appeal may follow up with the Rent Stabilization Division for procedural or implementation questions.