§ 1805
- Citation
- § 1805
- Parent Document
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-07-14
Other Sections in This Document (44)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- Bisno v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441 (2005)
- § 1803
- § 1803
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
- § 1805
Full Text
829 charsFinally, Regulation 3304 does not conflict with the RCL’s limitation of landlords to a fair return on investment or its antispeculation provisions (those denying rent increases when a landlord’s negative cash flow was reasonably foreseeable), nor does it provide landlords with a windfall. Functionally, Regulation 3304 briefly removes from some protections of the RCL those tenants it was not intended to protect. Once a decontrolled rental rate has been established, Regulation 3304 restores all of the protections of the RCL to the tenant. Inasmuch as plaintiff or any other affected tenant is, as a matter of law, not entitled to the RCL’s protections, temporarily removing some of them cannot conflict with any provision of the RCL, cannot reward a landlord for a speculative investment, and cannot give him a windfall. *824