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

923 chars
The RHC bases its argument of implied consent on the landlord’s statements on cross-examination that he decided to raise the tenant’s rent in order to recoup his added collection costs caused by the tenant’s delinquency and litigiousness. Neither the tenant nor the examiner questioned the landlord about the adequacy of the rent increase notice or the rent ceiling on which it was based. RHC’s argument is that the landlord’s replies to the examiner’s questions about his reasons for raising the tenant’s rent opened the door to questions about the validity of the rent increase notice, because such notices are supposed to state the basis for the authorization of the rent ceiling on which the increase is based, and the reason given by the landlord — recouping the cost of rent collection — is not a statutorily-recognized basis on which RHC grants rent ceiling increases. See D.C.Code § 42-3502.07 (providing bases *336