Digging around this week in videos of Paul Krekorian’s Budget Committee hearings last month, I stumbled across this discussion with Housing Department officials about code violations in the city’s nearly 800,000 apartment units.
The committee’s interest spurred by Mitch Englander appeared to be whether there was more money to be squeezed out of the four-year cycle of all the units, inspections that the city charges landlords a modest $43.32 to inspect.
What Krekorian found sobering, you might find shocking:
- Some 300,000 citations are issued each year.
- About 90 percent of the nearly 200,000 units inspected each year are cited for violations.
- Only 10 percent are violation free.
- Less than 1 percent of landlords face any form of prosecution.
You have to wonder why this has never come up before.
Oh give me a break. Code enforcement inspectors cite owners for things that tenants do. Removing smoke detectors, missing window screens. I have records showing repeating violations, and repeated replacement. But no matter, it’s a cost of doing business. But beyond that, most owners are diligent about fixing violations within the time period given via the law. You aren’t hearing about anything because it’s not a big deal. The system works. Inspectors go in, find stuff here and there, owners fix what’s found, the housing stock is kept habitable, everyone is happy.
Does the City make money off the citations?
No. Not unless the landlord fails to correct the violations. In which case rent may be escrowed until the corrections are made. Landlords pay about $40 per year per unit and, in my experience, units are examined every three to four years. There is no money directly to the city. However, inspectors will, by default, cite landlords for violations that are caused by actions of tenants. This can be frustrating for landlords, we’d like a little more balance in giving inspectors direction to cite tenants directly, but overall the program works pretty well. The really bad landlords are forced to keep their units habitable at no cost to the city, and the not so bad landlords simply have to deal with nits and picks from inspectors who feel they have to find _something_ at each property. I can live with that.
I suspect the number of violations actually measures the extent of corruption at LA Housing and not the number of violations. This town is all corruption all the time.
From my last SCEP inspection at a duplex I own I was cited for
1) Missing carbon monoxide detectors
2) Missing smoke alarms
3) A leaking shower faucet
4) A leaking toilet
5) A kitchen drawer that did not function well
6) An electrical panel cover that needed repair.
7) A double-cylinder deadbolt.
Items 1 and 2 were subsequently admitted to having been removed
by the tenant. Items 3, 4 and 5 were never reported by the tenant
or they would have been fixed promptly. And item 6, was simply
something that was never noticed by anyone and is also in the
process of being fixed. Item 7 was also admitted to having been
installed by the tenant and even if I did monthly inspections I would
not have caught that because I did not know it was a violation. Most
likely neither did my tenants.
I was cited for items 1, 2 and 7 even though I had no control over
what the tenant did in this case. Items 3, 4, 5, and 6 were fixed
the minute they were brought to my attention.
This is typical. I am not a slumlord. I have a property management
company that takes calls and makes repairs promptly when notified
by tenants. Sometimes stuff slips through the cracks for a variety
of reasons. There’s nothing sinister here.
Now how again is the system not working? And which of these
items should I prosecuted for?
Krekorian looks STUNNED that 90% of units get a FAILING grade from the teacher (inspector). What does it say about a teacher who gives 90% of students a failing grade? What standard of measure is the inspector using? Sound like Systematic Code Enforcement is like the grim reaper showing up to your door. There is a purpose…and it’s to write you a violation. And it appears they can always seem to find SOMETHING. Either that, or L.A. is a third world dump, based on these numbers.