‘Bootlegged’ apartment not part of rent control inventory
What’s the going rent for a “doghouse” in Santa Monica?
With housing prices what they are in this city by the sea, even human beings may find a 200-square-foot doghouse suitable for $768 a month.
One man did. But it didn’t take long after he moved in for the city to realize the apartment he was renting on the roof of an apartment building located at 651 Grant St. was approved as a doghouse in 1962.
City building inspectors in December ordered the landlord, Cassius Blakely, to demolish the converted studio apartment, which was listed as a rent controlled unit. As a result, the tenant who had signed a year lease this past July, was forced to move out.
But Blakely refused to pay the tenant to relocate, which is required under city law, officials said.
Laws require that if an apartment is taken off the rent control inventory list, the landlord must pay the tenant to move elsewhere. Since the apartment — complete with a kitchen and plumbing — was demolished in February, it no longer exists and was removed from the inventory.
Blakely was fined $500 and forced to pay $3,400 to the tenant in relocation benefits as part of an out-of-court settlement with the city, officials said.
The city alleges that Blakely refused to speak with the tenant who was wanted his security deposit after he moved out. But when it came time for Blakely to apply for a demolition permit with the building department and remove the property from the rent control list, he was asked to provide details on his tenant’s relocation assistance.
However, Blakely provided documents with a fictitious name of his former tenant, officials allege. The city’s investigation revealed that the tenant’s last name is “Figueroa,” not “Piguono” as Blakely had reported. Blakely also provided altered photocopy documents, including the purported lease for the unit, with the fake name of the tenant, officials said.
4BE,“It appears that the documents were altered specifically to make it harder for the city to locate the real tenant and help him get money he was entitled to,” said Deputy City Attorney Adam Radinsky. “It’s bad enough that the landlord was getting $768 a month for this unit but altering documents to try to cheat the tenant out of his benefits, that’s outrageous.”
“It’s bad enough that the landlord was getting $768 a month for this unit but altering documents to try to cheat the tenant out of his benefits, that’s outrageous.” — — ADAM RADINSKY Deputy City Attorney
Blakely couldn’t be reached for comment.
The unit, which is classified as a “bootlegged” rent control apartment because it was illegal to begin with, was registered with the city in 1979, according to Rent Control staff attorney Keith Kresge.
Blakely was initially cited by the building department, which was tipped off by another tenant in the building, because the access to the roof was deemed unsafe, Kresge said. The only way to reach the unit was by an open stairway from the landing of the second floor, which led to the roof through a hole cut in the ceiling.
“This is a unit on the roof of the building with an unsafe exposed ladder to get up there,” he said. “It was for the most part, unsafe. He was never in a position to get what is considered market rent anyway.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on March 12, 2003. Read the original PDF.