###

A local landlord being sued for trying to implement illegally high rent increases fought back in court this morning, taking the stand to read a prepared statement in which he accused plaintiffs and their attorneys of submitting false and misleading information to the court.

Anil Dwivedi, the landlord who purchased the Hillsdale Apartments in January through his corporation Dwivedi Tower, LLC, testified that he agreed to rescind the illegal rent increases before this case was filed, and he alleged that plaintiffs’ attorneys had submitted into evidence a lease agreement supposedly pertaining to Don Swall, one of the two primary plaintiffs, when in fact it belonged to another tenant altogether.

Speaking with conviction directly into the witness stand’s microphone, Dwivedi quoted passages from the class action compliant, insisting that they were false, and he alleged these false statements have caused irreparable harm to his business and his hard-earned reputation in the community.

“I have received hateful comments, calls, messages and death threats, as well as acts of physical aggression when walking on public streets and in stores,” Dwivedi said. “I no longer feel safe leaving my home to walk outside given the high likelihood of being harassed or attacked.”

He said that Swall and fellow plaintiff Vanessa Vachon admitted that their rent increases had been rescinded in an interview with the Outpost, for a story published on Feb. 18, at which time they were being represented by the nonprofit Legal Services of Northern California.

“This only further proves that the plaintiffs and their attorneys fabricated this entire case,” Dwivedi said.

He also objected to the lawsuit’s continued inclusion of another property he owns, the Eureka Central Residence, at 333 E Street, even though it has nothing to do with the case.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys, Jeffrey Slack and Megan Yarnall with the Eureka firm of Janssen Malloy LLP, denied misrepresenting any of the facts in their complaint, which accuses Dwivedi of manipulating Hillsdale Apartments tenants into signing new leases with rent increases of 30% - 60% or more, in violation of the California Tenant Protection Act.

Yarnall apologized to Dwivedi for any and all harassment he has faced, but she and Slack pushed forward with their case, asking Judge John T. Feeney Canning to grant their request for a preliminary injunction barring Dwivedi from any further violations of state law.

In his comments at the outset of today’s hearing, Slack said Dwivedi is still trying to charge excessive rents, despite a restraining order issued last month. Specifically, he said Dwivedi raised fees for storage lockers at the Hillsdale Apartments building. Slack also alleged that Dwivedi failed to adequately notified tenants about their new leases by failing to mention the storage fee increase and by not disclosing their rights under the Tenant Protection Act. 

“Therefore, these tenants still need protection … [and] irreparable harm will continue to occur unless the defendant is enjoined from violating the law,” Slack said.

Dwivedi’s attorney, Randall Davis, echoed his client, saying a preliminary injunction is unnecessary at this point because Dwivedi already retracted his attempt to increase tenants’ rents by more than the 8.8 percent maximum currently allowed in any 12-month period for established tenants under the Tenant Protection Act. 

“[Dwivedi is] no longer trying to, essentially, do what he did before,” Davis said.

As for the storage units, Davis said tenants who are already renting space won’t have their fee increased, while tenants who wants to start renting space will essentially be signing up for a new service, which is not part of their existing lease agreement. He compared the situation to a landlord who offers to deliver fresh strawberries to tenants a few times per month for an extra fee.

Yarnall reiterated that the plaintiffs have done no fabricating in the case and said that while Dwivedi has taken steps toward complying with the law, “We’re not there yet.”

“We just want defendants to comply with the law with respect to the [Tenant Protection Act], and we want them to give proper notice to tenants … ,” she said. “We want them to serve the notice properly, and we want the amounts to be correct.”

Yarnall said tenants at the Hillsdale Apartments have contradicted Dwivedi’s assertions. These renters say their landlord has, in fact, started charging them more for their existing storage spaces, and a couple of former tenants moved out in response to the threatened rent increases.

Davis, Dwivedi’s attorney, closed by saying his client has provided evidence demonstrating that there has been no actual harm caused — except to Dwivedi himself.

“You know, he tried to do something that pushed up against the law and learned very quickly from his mistake and is moving forward accordingly,” Davis said.

Slack disagreed, saying there has, in fact, been evidence showing that Dwivedi violated tenants’ rights — and evidence of ongoing violations. He again argued for a preliminary injunction.

Judge Feeney Canning condemned the “hateful messages” that have been directed toward Dwivedi and said he’ll take the matter under submission. He has 90 days to decide whether or not to issue a preliminary injunction, though he said he’ll try to reach a decision sooner rather than later.

The previously issued restraining order — which simply prevents Dwivedi from violating tenants’ rights — will remain in effect during his deliberations.