Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-28-2019, 04:37 PM
 
2 posts, read 3,923 times
Reputation: 10

Advertisements

I moved into a apartment in Long Beach CA a year and 4 months ago with a 6 month lease that included a parking garage at a price included into the rent. The property is now under new management and the rent itself was increased exactly 10% with proper 30 day notice. However they are now charging a seperate cost for the shared garages that are connected to the building but under the units on on the back side of the same building. This amounts to an additional 150 dollars on top of the 10% increase in actual rent when before the garage was included in the original rent. No new lease agreement was made only a 30 day notice from new owners.

Question being: Can they seperate the garage and charge $150 and increase rent 10%

Thank you in advance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-28-2019, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Business ethics is an oxymoron.
2,347 posts, read 3,333,328 times
Reputation: 5382
Most likely, yes. They can. That's just a preview of how to circumvent so-called "gouging" laws and "rent caps".

Keep the base rent in line, but tack on additional fees for amenities that previously were included.

Basically the same thing that the airlines do. Charge a low base fare then pile on a dune of add on and accessorial charges.

If an airline tried to charge $500 for a ticket to, say, New York, no one would buy it. But if they advertised a base "fare" of $250 but then charged 'confirmation', 'fuel surcharge', 'carry on', etcetera fees totalling $250, people will buy it all day long. So the same ticket still cost you $500 even though you "think" you paid "only" $250.

Either way, they're going to get your money. To them, it's just line item semantics. And my gut hunch says that's exactly what this landlord company is doing. And it's legal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2019, 05:18 PM
 
2 posts, read 3,923 times
Reputation: 10
Not what i wanted to hear but it is what it is. Finding this out for sure is very difficult with out council. Thanks for your input.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2019, 11:42 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
4,627 posts, read 3,393,640 times
Reputation: 6148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Des-Lab View Post
Most likely, yes. They can. That's just a preview of how to circumvent so-called "gouging" laws and "rent caps".

Keep the base rent in line, but tack on additional fees for amenities that previously were included.

Basically the same thing that the airlines do. Charge a low base fare then pile on a dune of add on and accessorial charges.

If an airline tried to charge $500 for a ticket to, say, New York, no one would buy it. But if they advertised a base "fare" of $250 but then charged 'confirmation', 'fuel surcharge', 'carry on', etcetera fees totalling $250, people will buy it all day long. So the same ticket still cost you $500 even though you "think" you paid "only" $250.

Either way, they're going to get your money. To them, it's just line item semantics. And my gut hunch says that's exactly what this landlord company is doing. And it's legal.
Yep, you are seeing the same tactic in the hotel business. More and more hotels are charging "resort fees" or "destination fees" just to stay at the hotel.

Granted these sort of fees are justifiable for true resort properties with numerous services and amenities. But you are starting to see these fees in typical urban sub-markets with relatively minimal on property amenities. A sort of slight of hand to the consumer.....a more opaque way to get the consumer to pay more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2019, 04:55 AM
 
Location: Southern California
4,453 posts, read 6,798,610 times
Reputation: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catenatedgoose View Post
I moved into a apartment in Long Beach CA a year and 4 months ago with a 6 month lease that included a parking garage at a price included into the rent. The property is now under new management and the rent itself was increased exactly 10% with proper 30 day notice. However they are now charging a seperate cost for the shared garages that are connected to the building but under the units on on the back side of the same building. This amounts to an additional 150 dollars on top of the 10% increase in actual rent when before the garage was included in the original rent. No new lease agreement was made only a 30 day notice from new owners.

Question being: Can they seperate the garage and charge $150 and increase rent 10%

Thank you in advance.
Why wouldn’t they be able to?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2019, 05:27 AM
 
Location: Redwood City, CA
15,250 posts, read 12,957,322 times
Reputation: 54051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catenatedgoose View Post
I moved into a apartment in Long Beach CA a year and 4 months ago with a 6 month lease that included a parking garage at a price included into the rent. The property is now under new management and the rent itself was increased exactly 10% with proper 30 day notice. However they are now charging a seperate cost for the shared garages that are connected to the building but under the units on on the back side of the same building. This amounts to an additional 150 dollars on top of the 10% increase in actual rent when before the garage was included in the original rent. No new lease agreement was made only a 30 day notice from new owners.

Question being: Can they seperate the garage and charge $150 and increase rent 10%

Thank you in advance.

I actually think the new arrangement is more fair. I understand it doesn't seem that way to you, but what if a tenant didn't need a garage because they had no car? They'd be paying for the garage in their rent anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top