Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)

Citation
CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
Parent Document
CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2000-08-23

Other Sections in This Document (53)

Full Text

1,171 chars
If a timely response is received from the landlord or the current tenant, the Board will attempt to resolve the dispute informally. If the informal process fails, "any landlord, current tenant, or the Board Administrator may petition for a hearing to establish the correct rent" pursuant to Costa-Hawkins and regulation 3301. (Reg.13008, subd. (c)(2).) If no petition is filed within 30 days of the notification by the Board that a question of fact still exists as to the lawful MAR, the Board's official records will reflect the maximum allowable rent as set out in the Board's notice. (Reg.13008, subd. (d).) Where a petition is filed, a hearing will be set. "Any party to a hearing under this subsection shall have the right to introduce into the record any relevant evidence regarding the establishment of the rental rate and the correct rent level. The hearing officer to whom the case is assigned shall have the affirmative duty to seek and introduce into the record all available evidence regarding the establishment of the rental rate and the correct rent level." (Reg. 13008, subd. (f).) This case arose from this statutory and regulatory scheme. Factual Summary