Section 2

Citation: Section 2
Parent Document: Highgate Housing Limited Partnership v. Macaulay-Fisher (2015)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2015-08-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4489499/highgate-housing-limited-partne... ↗

Full Text

1,084 chars

Plaintiff argues that it is unreasonable for Defendants to have been earning
income throughout 2014 at a level that should have resulted in market rent with no
subsidy, and to have paid only $500 during that period. Plaintiff participates in a
government subsidy program with many procedural requirements that it administers,
requiring the use of a lease with procedural protections for both parties. As the Findings
show, it had the opportunity to protect itself fully in several ways: (1) by acting on the
releases in a more timely fashion and giving 30-day notice as early as February 1, which
could have been effective as of March 1, or at various later times; or (2) by relying on
¶ 16(b) of the Lease as a basis for delaying the Interim Certification until June, at which
point it had grounds and information for sending 30-day notice of retroactive market rent
due for March, April, May, and June, which, if not paid within 30 days, could have
supported eviction. Plaintiffs also had the opportunity to document any efforts to require
Defendants as tenants to provide paystubs.

Other Sections in This Document (94)

Full Text