Section 2
- Citation
- Section 2
- Parent Document
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Jurisdiction
- Vermont (state)
- Effective Date
- 2015-08-11
Other Sections in This Document (94)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
- Section 2
Full Text
799 charsJoshua responded to the July Notice of Annual Recertification and scheduled an appointment. Both Defendants met with Plaintiff’s manager on July 29, 2014. Joshua again signed releases authorizing third-party verification. The next day, Plaintiff’s manager received a fax from ARIS with a complete printout of detailed payroll information for the period of his employment, from January 16, 2014 through July 30, 2014. His total wages during that period were $20,141.64. His monthly average was $3,000, which was well over the $2,666 ($2,465 + 200 = $2,666) amount that would trigger review based on the May 1 letter. Plaintiff could have immediately given notice of a rent increase to market rent that could have become effective as early as September 1, but did not give any notice of rent increase.