Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)

Citation: Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Parent Document: Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1976-06-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1193965/birkenfeld-v-city-of-berkeley/ ↗

Full Text

985 chars

distinguished from ordinary repair, replacement and maintenance; (d) increases or decreases in living space, furniture, furnishings or equipment; (e) substantial deterioration of the rent-controlled unit other than as a result of ordinary wear and tear; and (1) failure on the part of the landlord to provide adequate housing services.” (§ 5.) It is argued that this listing of factors does not adequately inform either the Board or a court reviewing the Board’s actions just how the presence of the factors under particular circumstances is to be translated into dollar increases or decreases in rent. Another criticism is the omission of factors that might have prevented the base rent from reflecting general market conditions such as a seasonal fluctuation in the demand for the kind of housing involved or the existence of a special relationship between landlord and tenant resulting in an undercharging of rent. (See Hillcrest Terrace Corp. v. Brown (Em.App. 1943) 137 F.2d 663.)

Other Sections in This Document (374)

Full Text