Apartment Ass'n of Greater Los Angeles v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 24 Cal. App. 4th 1730 (1994)

Citation: Apartment Ass'n of Greater Los Angeles v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 24 Cal. App. 4th 1730 (1994)
Parent Document: Apartment Ass'n of Greater Los Angeles v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 24 Cal. App. 4th 1730 (1994)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1994-05-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2263659/apartment-assn-of-greater-los-a... ↗

Full Text

890 chars

owners who will seek adjustments only on the basis of market levels. We have already held that there is no constitutional entitlement to have base rents reflect market conditions, and owners in Santa Monica have limited ways of challenging the presumption that rents on the base date were providing the landlord with a just and reasonable return on their investment. (Reg. No. 4103, subds. (b)(2), (3).) In light of that, there is no reason to preclude a post-rent-control owner in an unusual situation who might be entitled to a base rent increase under the RCL from seeking such an increase. Rent control regulations can have a confiscatory effect if no rent adjustment mechanism is provided, and a regulation may be invalid on its face when its terms will not permit those who administer it to avoid confiscatory results in its application to the complaining parties. (Birkenfeld, supra,

Other Sections in This Document (64)

Full Text