Legal Question in Landlord & Tenant Law in California

un;awful detainer
i am def pro per prevailed ud trial plaintiff in breach of warrenty of habitability and service of notices to vacate not conform to law. trial was june 07, and judgment entered march 08. def, me, was to prepare judgment and took 3 x submitting to court until accepted and entered. each x copy to court and copy to plain. atty. default in rent never case as my rent paid in full on time every month. dec 07 received rent increase effective feb 08. have paid increased amt since. judgment entered march 08, would that increase be protected cc1942.5(a)5(c)? aware judgment supposed to be entered 10 day after trial and even talked to plaintiff atty trying to get help in prepare correctly. now that i serve plaintiff small claims for retro, rent per abatement and increase rent i pay , i receive letter from pl. atty states;i purposefully delayed filing judgment until after receiving rent increase. how in the heck would i know about that? atty says increase not violate protection 1942.5, says increase applied to all tenants(not true)& beyond 180 day protective window. your comments please.

Asked on 6/13/08, 7:13 pm

Robert L. Bennett Law offices of Robert L. Bennett

0 users found helpful

0 attorneys agreed

Re: un;awful detainer

I could give lots of comments, but I don't want to spend too many hours a day on pro bono (free) matters.

Please resubmit with question(s).

Answered on 6/13/08, 10:18 pm

Keywords

Match Any Match All

Country

State

Area of Law