Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 1805

Citation
Section 1805
Parent Document
Santa Monica Properties v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 203 Cal. App. 4th 739 (2012)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2012-02-16

Other Sections in This Document (60)

Full Text

904 chars
The issue in Ocean Park, reduced to its essence, was whether substantial evidence supported RGB’s rent reduction order. It did. The issue in SMP’s current case is a little different, namely, as an issue of interpretation, does section 1805(e) give RGB the power to reduce rents based on any reduction in services. It does not. Even assuming that Ocean Park may be read to support the proposition that an unfair return may be presumed when a landlord “tears out existing facilities,” such a presumption may not be applied where, as here, SMP did not tear out any facilities in its apartment building. RGB may not order a rent decrease based solely on a landlord’s act of changing the temperature of a hot tub or sauna, without a finding, supported by substantial evidence, that the temperature changes affected the landlord’s return or the fairness of the rent paid by tenants. III. Reinstatement of Rents