> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Man loses case against real estate agent
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/man-loses-case-against-real-estate-agent/
- Published: 2002-05-08T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-23T00:16:26.000Z
- Author: Carolyn Sackariason
- Tags: Real Estate & Housing, Santa Monica, #archive-import

*Man buys apartment complex; rent control violation alleged*

The owner of a Santa Monica apartment complex lost his lawsuit last week against a real estate agent who he alleged was in “cahoots” with the building’s seller by allowing a tenant to sublet a rent controlled apartment.

Giulio Della Rocca sued Coldwell Banker real estate broker Christine Taylor in Santa Monica Small Claims Court, arguing that the rent control violation was a breach of his agreement when he negotiated the purchase of the four-unit building at 2218 20th St. last year.

But Judge Pro Tem Craig Mordoh ruled against Della Rocca’s $5,000 claim. Mordoh said Della Rocca sued the wrong person — he should have instead sued the seller of the building, Richard Arlem, a senior citizen who lives in Mammoth Lakes.

“I’m not sure you have any damages,” Mordoh said. “But you may have a claim against the former owner.”

Taylor represented Arlem in the sale. She said she wasn’t aware that one of the building’s tenants was sub-letting his rent-controlled apartment to another man.

Della Rocca said the purchase agreement specifies that he be notified of any changes to the building or its tenants before the sale is final. He argued that the change in tenancy was a violation of the agreement.

Della Rocca didn’t intend to rent out any of the apartments. Under the state’s Ellis Act, Della Rocca is allowed to evict the tenants if he uses the entire building as his own home. But the law requires that tenants who fall under rent control be paid a relocation fee if they are “Ellised” out of the building and their annual income is less than $24,900.

The “Ellis Act” is a state law which says that landlords have the unconditional right to “go out of business.” For an Ellis eviction, the landlord must remove all of the units in the building from the rental market and convert them into condominiums.

Della Rocca argues he shouldn’t have to pay Wagerman’s relocation fee of $4,200 because Wagerman was illegally using the $486-a-month apartment.

“He should have been evicted,” Della Rocca said. “Because (Taylor) wanted to close the deal and she was told that there was a sub-letter but she didn’t do anything.”

Della Rocca hasn’t paid Wagerman, which prompted Wagerman to sue Della Rocca in another small claims case. The matter was heard about a month ago and a small claims judge ruled against Della Rocca. Della Rocca is appealing the judge’s decision. The case will be heard on Friday.

Wagerman was unavailable for comment.

Della Rocca argued real estate agent Taylor knew about Wagerman’s deal with the sub-letter because another renter in the building told her about it during the purchase negotiations.

394,“We didn’t particularly like what Kent did,” the witness said. “We told her it was going on for a year and once it was up for sale, Kent moved back in.”

Taylor said she and her client, Arlem, weren’t aware that someone other than Wagerman was living in the unit. And once the complex went up for sale, Arlem registered the building with the state, with the help of local attorney Rossario Perry.

Taylor said she didn’t do anything wrong and Della Rocca’s suit against her was nothing more than an attempt to recoup the money for Wagerman’s relocation.

She added that Arlem had eight offers on the building but he chose Della Rocca over other buyers because he was a small investor who intended on keeping the renters there.

“I did everything right and he thought I was in cahoots with the owner,” she said. “But he told us that he wasn’t going to Ellis the building and (Arlem) wanted to keep the tenants in there.”

Perry said the case is a classic one for many investors in Santa Monica who don’t realize how complicated it can be to purchase an apartment building in the city because of its rent control laws.

“Personally, I think the buyer has to pay the relocation fee but no one is happy about it,” Perry said. “It’s not easy to buy an apartment in Santa Monica because buyers don’t understand how complicated the laws are.

> “It’s not easy to buy an apartment in Santa Monica because buyers don’t understand how complicated the laws are.” — — ROSSARIO PERRY Local attorney

“There is a lot of subletting going on without the owners knowing.”

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 8, 2002.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/050802.pdf?ref=smdp.com)