September 17, 2025 Update
(Commentary)
“In 2025 the LA City budget allocated $904 million to combat homelessness. In 2025 Los Angeles had 43,699 unhoused people (on a given night), 7,396 of whom eventually received permanent housing, while 21,915 were enrolled in interim housing. In contrast, Los Angeles needed 267,365 affordable rental homes to house the homeless, but the city only permitted 21,102 new housing units, while landlords attempted to evict 84,870 tenants.” (Source: Citywatch August 28 2025 by author DP.
“Mystery solved: Why LA Spends So Much Money On Homelessness And Gets Lousy Results”).
(Editor:) I am reminded that the HUD defines housing as including housing services. It is hypocritical for the city to claim it is building affordable housing yet still act in concert with property owners to deny housing services. Recently the LA Housing department received over 10,000 complaints under the city harassment by landlord ordinance.While some of those complaints were referred to the city attorney office, 99% of the complaints did not result in any action against landlords and IMO all such complaints were directly or indirectly involve housng services like denial of peaceful enjoyment of the premises. I am in a court proceeding against a landlord (small claims) and recently the court hearing (September 16) was continued. (Case 25STSC03297). Why? The property owner tried to appear thru their management company. But the management company owner claimed in writing that he would be unavailable due to a medical operation which he would recuperate by December. So he had an employee appear at the hearing (without written authorization) but the employee told the Judge she knew nothing about the case. The Judge had already in writing denied the defendant request for continuance. But the Judge expressed sympathy for the allegedly sick manager, so she continued the hearing to October. Moral of the story is that the owner of the property is a millionaire, the management company are millionaires, the owner was served 18 days before the hearing. Essentially the owner did not appear and should have faced default judgement (which I saw the Judge hand out a few default judgments due to non-appearance). The Judge demanded the management company appear in October which is a far cry from appearing in December due to an operation. I am sure the Judge was lied to. The crutch of the housing problem just may concern how imbalanced the justice system is.
How the Courts Favor Millionaires
(EDITOR NOTE: Between the property corporate owner and corporate management company, I am sure they employ over 25 people, and would have had someone else qualified to testify September 16, 2025.)
September 16, 2025. Court Minute Order Nature of Proceedings
Commentary about Minute Order of Court.
Cynthia Reynosa the Court claims appeared for Hi Point 1522 LLC. Reynosa is an employee of Power Property Management Inc. Reynosa told the Court she knows nothing about the case. (In truth, Reynosa is the accountant and processes the rent payments. Her name has frequently appeared on email chains about services denied.)
The minute order says “parties submit evidence for the Court’s review.” No evidence was presented by the Defendant. The court allowed the plaintiff to talk about his case and evidence because the Defendant did not have an authorization to appear. The Court allowed the Defendant to gain an authorization to appear; the document supposedly authorizing Reynosa to appear seems to be only signed by Reynosa.
The order says Notice is Waived but the Court never asked the Plaintiff if he waived notice.
The order says, “The Defendant must submit to the Court the denial letter that was given to the plaintiff.” This appears to be the Judge’s ex parte opinion because there was no discussion at the hearing about any denial letter; remember Reynosa said she knew nothing about the case and could not testify.
LOS ANGELES. Filed 8/4/2025. Los Angeles Superior Court Case 25STSC03297. These are publicly accessible documents.
(Excerpt)
(Editor note: This page includes downloads that are best viewed on a laptop or desktop.)
1. I am Plaintiff pro se in this matter.
2. If called to testify, I can do so competently. For all other matters, I testify based on information and belief.
3. I believe the actions of the property owner Hi Point 1522 LLC entitle me to $5,000 in damages relief because of intentional harassment under city Los Angeles Municipal Code section 45.33 and Ordinance 187109.
4. This matter concerns a rental agreement that is for month to month or 30 days. California state law states that only lease agreements for over one year have to be in writing. Month to month rental agreements do not have to be in writing.
5. Housing services provided to tenants do not have to be in the written rent agreement if the agreement is for a period of less than one year.
6. I am a black American entitled to all the privileges and benefits of the contractual agreement as stated under federal state and local law. I have been denied privileges granted to other tenants on different terms, and violation of the California Constitution article I, section (a).
7. I am a disabled tenant.
8. I emailed the owner and management company on July 30, 2025 indicating my demand for housing services.
9. I paid rent on July 1, 2025 and my check says for “Rent, intercom repair and tandem parking.”
10. I have been damaged and my peaceful enjoyment of the premises disturbed because the owner has refused to assign me a tandem parking stall and refused to repair the intercom or provide the parts to use the Akuvox intercom.
11. On June 20, 2025 I gave the owner a money order for $50.00 and signed the change in terms of tenancy the conditions for the tandem parking assignment which includes being first come first served and paying $50.00. The money order cost me $10.00 fee.
12. On June 29, 2025, I emailed the owner and management company recalling that the Power Property Management Inc. said in 2022 that I was entitled to a tandem parking at 1522 Hi Point Street.
13. Since the owner would not fix my Intercom system, and the rent prohibits me from supplying my own housing services, in order to mitigate my damages, on July 30, 2022. I purchased an Intercombox for $25.88.
14. In order to further mitigate my damages on July 27, 2025, I purchased a cell phone in order to use it with the AKUVOX system.
15. On September 27, 2024 by email, I made a demand on the owner for payment of damages.
16. On September 28, 2024 I incurred the expense of faxing my concerns to the owner of the property. The fax service cost me about $10 per month.
17. The rent agreement was signed on February 26, 2010 and included parking as a part of the rent payment.
18. I sought the assistance of the office of Mayor Karen Bass and her staff thru my emails.
19. The certificate of occupancy (“COO”) was issued for the building on April 17, 1973 for the address 1522 Hi Point St. City documents COO show there are 18 apartments and parking for 27 auto spaces, some which are tandem parking spaces.
20. Around 2023 the property owner installed an additional Intercom and door entry system called Akuvox to the front of the building. Mine in my unit was still not repaired.
21. The parking lot at this address includes about 12 single car spaces and seven tandem two car spaces.
22. Over the years I have spent a lot of money sending monthly faxes to the owner explaining my demand for housing services. Total damages: $90.00.
23. Over the years I have also made many phone calls and left voice messages for the owner of the property with my demand for housing services. I used a service that leaves a voicemail. The service is called Call Em all or text em all. Total damages $260.00.
24. All parking spaces are numbered at this location. Tenants who need a space to park their car are assigned a space by number, but the number does not necessarily correspond to the number of their apartment.
25. There are frequently parking stalls that have been empty.
26. A landlord is prohibited from charging rent when housing services have been denied, as evidenced in this case.
(Editor note: In this court, Exhibits are Lodged, Not filed. Included herein is the Exhibits served on the defendant that were lodged with the Court. The Court does not keep copies of the Exhibits. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and staff members are named at exhibit 10.)
25
2
219
51
137
39
615
64
39
21
72
55
72
29
413
1.1K
1
79
3.5K
667
July 26 2025
Editor note: One of my favorite city of Los Angeles laws: “Housing services are services that are connected with the use or occupancy of a rental unit including, but not limited to, utilities (including light, heat, water and telephone), ordinary repairs or replacement, and maintenance including painting. The term also includes the provision of elevator service, laundry facilities and privileges, common recreational facilities, janitor service, resident manager, refuse removal, furnishings, food service, parking and any other benefits, privileges or facilities. (LAMC Sec. 151.02, Definition of Housing Services).” Whether you can get any housing employee or Judge to enforce this, is another story.
My other favorite law: “Unruh CC 51: (California) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, or medical condition are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.” I love that phrase “full and equal”.
1
140
39
Intercom and Parking at Hi Point St 1522
Testing of dial button Akuvox
Intercom-call box-two way communication law Los Angeles
Los Angeles’ building code requirement 11B-708.4 mandates that residential dwelling unit communication systems must support both voice and TTY (teletypewriter) communication between the dwelling unit and a common-use interface at the site, building, or floor entrance. This ensures accessible two-way communication, allowing for users to interact with systems like visitor entry points via both speech and text. This means the dwelling unit must have some type of connecting interface, like indoor monitor, so that the tenant has audible and visual view of potential visitors.
What it means:
- Two-Way Communication: The system needs to function in both directions, allowing someone at the entrance to communicate with someone inside, and vice versa.
- Voice and TTY Support: The system must accommodate both spoken words and text communication (TTY). This is crucial for people with hearing or speech disabilities.
- Residential Dwelling Unit Interface: Inside the dwelling unit, a telephone jack capable of supporting both voice and TTY is required.
- Common Use Interface: This is the external system, like a visitor entry or intercom, that supports voice and TTY communication with the residential unit.
Where it applies:
- This code section, 11B-708.4, applies to the California Building Code (CBC), which Los Angeles adopts and enforces for its buildings and public housing.
- The intent is to provide accessible features in residential buildings to ensure people with disabilities can fully access and interact with their living environments and building entrances. (Source Google AI)
Racism Hi Point Apts
(Nickname: Rumcake – Los Angeles, California)
LA Rent Control (RAC) and Permits (LADBS) 