Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Parreco v. District of Columbia Rental Housing Commission, 885 A.2d 327 (2005)

Citation
Parreco v. District of Columbia Rental Housing Commission, 885 A.2d 327 (2005)
Parent Document
Parreco v. District of Columbia Rental Housing Commission, 885 A.2d 327 (2005)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
2005-12-06

Other Sections in This Document (99)

Full Text

793 chars
mination that the rent increase was illegal, as well as the sufficiency of the evidence of willfulness necessary to sustain imposition of the fine for not having abated the rent when the heat was off for two days. The landlord argued that the examiner’s reasoning was flawed because it relied on an outdated regulation in finding the notice of rent increase insufficient. The landlord also noted a violation of his due process right by the examiner’s introduction of this issue into the case, and argued that there was no evidence that the violations (assuming they were violations) were committed willfully, as required by statute, to justify imposition of a fine. The examiner reaffirmed his decision, holding that even under the current regulation the notice of rent increase was invalid, 8