RETALIATION DOESN’T END WELL FOR OREGON LANDLORD

RETALIATION DOESN’T END WELL FOR OREGON LANDLORD

An Oregon landlord was recently hit with a judgment for $32,000, after a jury found that he had retaliated against the tenant for not paying a bill. Of course, Oregon law is different than Arizona; however there are still important lessons to be gleaned from the case.

FACTS:

According to the facts as presented in court, an Oregon tenant reported an issue with an electrical plug. The landlord believed the tenant caused the problem, and charged the tenant $287, for the work, which the tenant refused to pay. Shortly afterwards, the landlord increased the rent $100/month. The tenant claimed it was retaliation. The landlord alleged it was their normal practice. The tenant filed suit, claiming that the landlord was retaliating. The jury awarded the tenant $16,000, which is doubled under Oregon's laws.

WHAT YOU, AS AN ARIZONA OWNER/MANAGER CAN LEARN FROM THIS:

In Arizona, there is a statute prohibiting retaliation. It says a landlord cannot retaliate against a tenant for exercising certain rights, including (1) complaining to a government agency about a health or safety code violation, (2) complaining to the landlord about a habitability issue, (3) joining a tenants' union, or (4) complaining about wage-price stabilization violations.

The landlord cannot raise rent, cut services, or file (or threaten) an eviction.If the tenant complained within the prior six months, the law presumes the landlord's later action was retaliatory, shifting the burden to the landlord to prove otherwise, unless the complaint came after a termination notice was already given. Finally, a tenant who proves retaliation can recover the greater of two months' rent or double actual damages (A.R.S. § 33-1367), plus possession or lease termination.

Lesson: document legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons before raising rent on, or acting against, a tenant who recently complained. This applies for any increase in rent, service of a noncompliance notice or a non-renewal notice. It is important that managers follow policies and standard timelines for when they act. If a tenant claims that a manager is retaliating by serving a non-renewal notice, it is important that the manager have documented letters/notices in the file, reflecting the issues that the tenant has been causing on property - those issues are valid reasons for termination. The hardest retaliation case to defend against, is when the manager has no notes and no notices in the file. If a tenant has never received any kind of notice, and they pay on time, the general presumption is that they would be renewed - therefore, if you non-renew them it raises questions.

It is best to have documented reasons for your actions, even if you don't share those reason with the resident. If they ask why you are non-renewing them, you merely state, "It is a business decision." It is only when you are in a lawsuit or FH, that you delve into the reason and the documentation.

This newsletter is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.