Before the
Commission on
Landlord-Tenant Affairs
Montgomery County
, Maryland



In the Matter of:

Patricia John, et al

          Complainant

          vs.

Chukwujindu Victor Mbakpuo

          Respondent

Case #:  13288

Rental Facility:  575 Thayer Avenue, #606
Olney, Maryland; and 3301 Hewitt Avenue, #407
Silver Spring, Maryland

Rental Facility License #s:  (revoked)

 

 

DECISION AND ORDER

 

            The above captioned case having come before the Commission on Landlord-Tenant Affairs for Montgomery County, Maryland (the “Commission”), pursuant to Sections 29-10, 29-14, 29-41, 29-44 and 29-47 of the Montgomery County Code, 2001, as amended (County Code”), and the Commission having considered the testimony and evidence of record, it is therefore, this 11th day of October, 2002, found, determined, and ordered, as follows:

 

BACKGROUND

 

            By an Order dated February 25, 2002, the Commission affirmed the decision of the Montgomery County Department of Housing and Community Affairs (the “Department”), revoking the Rental Facility License of Chukwujindu Victor Mbakpuo (the “Respondent”) for 575 Thayer Avenue, #606, Silver Spring, Maryland, as well as revoking the Rental Facility Licenses of the Respondent for 3301 Hewitt Avenue #407, Silver Spring, Maryland, and 8830 Piney Branch Road, #204, Silver Spring, Maryland.

 

            On March 27, 2002, Patricia John and her daughter, Tricia John (the “Complainants”), filed a formal complaint with the Office of Landlord-Tenant Affairs, within the Department, in which they alleged that the Respondent, owner of 575 Thayer Avenue, #606, Silver Spring, Maryland (hereinafter referred to as “575 Thayer Avenue”), a condominium unit at Thayer Towers Condominium (“Thayer Towers”), attempted to rent them 575 Thayer Avenue and demanded and accepted from them $2,570.00 in rent, application fees, a condominium fee and a security deposit.

 

            The Complainants are seeking an Order from the Commission for the Respondent to refund the $2,750.00 they paid to the Respondent for the rental of 575 Thayer Avenue.

 

            After determining that the complaint was not susceptible to conciliation, the Department duly referred this case to the Commission for its review, and on May 14, 2002, the Commission voted to hold a public hearing, which was subsequently scheduled for August 6, 2002.  However, on August 6, 2002, the Complainant, Patricia John, requested that the hearing be continued due to an unforeseen emergency.  Pursuant to Section 4.10 of Appendix L, Regulations on the Commission on Landlord-Tenant, of the County Code,[1] the Complainants’ motion for a continuance was granted, and the hearing was re-scheduled for September 3, 2002, at 6:30 PM.

 

            The public hearing in the matter of Patricia John, et al. v. Chukwujindu Victor Mbakpuo, relative to Case No. 13288, commenced on September 3, 2002, and concluded on that date.  The record reflects that the Complainants and the Respondent were given proper notice of the re-scheduled hearing date and time.  Present at the hearing and presenting testimony and evidence were the Complainants, Patricia John and Tricia John.  The Respondent failed to appear at the hearing after receiving proper notice (See pages 54 through 58 of Commission’s Exhibit No. 1).  Also present and providing testimony and evidence were three witnesses called by the Commission, Inspector Kevin Martell from the Department’s Division of Housing and Code Enforcement, Investigator Michael Denney, from the Department’s Office of Landlord-Tenant Affairs, and Joe Giloley, Chief of the Department’s Division of Housing and Code Enforcement.

 

            Without objection the Commission entered into the record of the hearing the contents of Case File No. 13288 compiled by the Department, identified as Commission’s Exhibit No. 1, and the audio recording of the July 9, 2002, District Court trial captioned State of Maryland vs. Victor Mbakpuo, identified as Commission’s Exhibit No. 2.

 

FINDINGS OF FACT

 

            Based on the testimony and evidence of record, the Commission makes the following findings of fact:

 

                  1.            The Respondent is the owner of 575 Thayer Avenue, #606, Silver Spring, Maryland, a condominium unit at Thayer Towers Condominium.

 

                  2.            On January 3, 2002, the Department issued notice to the Respondent that the Rental Facility License for 575 Thayer Avenue, as well as the Rental Facility Licenses for two other rental condominiums he owns in Montgomery County, had been revoked as a result of his failure to correct numerous violations of Chapter 26, Housing and Building Maintenance Standards, of the Montgomery County Code, 1997, as amended (“Housing Code”).

 

                  3.            The Respondent filed a formal appeal of the license revocation to the Commission and a public hearing was convened on January 17, 2002.  Following the hearing, on February 25, 2002, the Commission issued its Decision and Order affirming the Department’s revocation of the Rental Facility Licenses for 575 Thayer Avenue, 3301 Hewitt Avenue, #407, Silver Spring, Maryland, and 8830 Piney Branch Road, #204, Silver Spring, Maryland.

 

                  4.            By a letter dated February 25, 2002, the Department advised the Respondent that to comply with the Commission’s Order he was to issue notice to all his tenants at his three Montgomery County rental properties, including those tenants at 575 Thayer Avenue, to vacate by April 30, 2002, and he was to discontinue operating those three properties, including 575 Thayer Avenue, as rental facilities.

 

                  5.            On or before February 25, 2002, the Complainants contacted the Respondent in response to an advertisement the Respondent had placed in the Washington Post newspaper regarding the availability of a rental unit he owned in Montgomery County, Maryland.

 

                  6.            On February 25, 2002, the Respondent showed the Complainants the residential condominium unit at 3301 Hewitt Avenue, #407, Silver Spring, Maryland (hereinafter referred to as “3301 Hewitt Avenue”), and advised them that it was available for rent.

 

                  7.            On February 25, 2002, the Complainants paid to the Respondent $700.00 cash, which the Commission finds constituted a security deposit, to rent 3301 Hewitt Avenue.

 

                  8.            The Commission credits the testimony of Complainant Patricia John that on February 26, 2002, she informed Respondent that she believed 3301 Hewitt Avenue was unsafe and therefore, she did not intend to rent it.  The Commission also credits the Complainant Patricia John’s testimony that in response to her notification, the Respondent stated that he would return her $700.00 security deposit.

 

                  9.            The Commission finds that the Respondent never returned the $700.00 security deposit he received from the Complainants for 3301 Hewitt Avenue.

 

              10.            The Respondent subsequently showed to Complainants 575 Thayer Avenue as available for immediate rental, and advised the Complainants that certain needed repairs would be made to the unit before the Complainants took possession.

 

              11.            The Commission credits the testimony of Complainant Patricia John that she and the Respondent agreed that the rent for 575 Thayer Avenue would be $1,300.00 per month.

 

              12.            On March 1, 2002, the Complainants paid the Respondent $35.00 in cash for an application fee for Complainant Patricia John.

 

              13.            On March 4, 2002, the Complainants paid the Respondent $1,035.00 in cash, consisting of $1,000.00 rent for 575 Thayer Avenue and $35.00 for an application fee for Complainant Tricia John.

 

              14.            On March 5, 2002, the Complainants paid the Respondent an additional $700.00 in cash.  The Commission finds based on the evidence and the testimony that this money appeared to have been partially for rent for 575 Thayer Avenue and partially as a security deposit.

 

              15.            The Commission credits the testimony of the Complainants that on or about March 5, 2002, they paid to Respondent $100.00 in cash as a condominium fee.

 

              16.            The Commission credits the testimony of the Complainants that they verbally requested to see a copy of the lease, and in response the Respondent stated he needed to make certain adjustments to the lease and that he would bring the lease to the Complainants after they moved into 575 Thayer Avenue.

 

              17.            The Commission finds that no written lease was ever signed between the parties for the rental of 575 Thayer Avenue.

 

              18.            On March 6, 2002, the day the Complainants were scheduled to move into 575 Thayer Avenue, Inspector Martell conducted an inspection of that unit and condemned it as unfit for human habitation.  The Commission credits the testimony of Inspector Martell that on March 6, 2002, 575 Thayer Avenue lacked a hard-wired smoke detector as required by the Housing Code.

 

              19.            On March 6, 2002, Inspector Martell also noted other violations of the Housing Code at 575 Thayer Avenue, including, but not limited to, the following:  the stove and the dishwasher were inoperable (the dishwasher was sitting in the middle of the kitchen floor), the disposal and the kitchen sink were not connected to the plumbing system, and the counter tops were in disrepair.

 

              20.            On March 6, 2002, Inspector Martell met with the Complainants in the vicinity of 575 Thayer Avenue and informed them that Respondent no longer had a Rental Facility License for that unit, and that 575 Thayer Avenue had been condemned as unfit for human habitation.

 

              21.            On March 7, 2002, Inspector Martell issued to Respondent two (2) Class A civil citations and $500.00 fines, one for operating a rental facility without a license (Citation #4Z33654548), and the other for failure to comply with the Commission’s February 25, 2002 Order (Citation #4Z33654548).  On July 9, 2002, in the matter of State of Maryland vs. Victor Mbakpuo, the referenced citations were adjudicated in the District Court of Maryland.  The Court found the Respondent guilty, imposed fines, and issued an Order of Abatement (See pages 59 to 65 of Commission’s Exhibit No. 1).

 

              22.            Based on the fact that 575 Thayer Avenue was not licensed as a Rental Facility as of March 6, 2002, and had been condemned by the Department as unfit for human habitation, the Complainants did not move into or take possession of 575 Thayer Avenue.

 

              23.            The Commission credits the testimony of the Complainants that since approximately March 6, 2002, they have made repeated requests to the Respondent for the return of all monies paid to him in connection with the prospective rental of 575 Thayer Avenue, that the Respondent has failed to respond to these requests and, as of the date of this hearing, had failed to refund any portion of the $2,570.00 they paid him.

 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

 

Accordingly, based upon a fair consideration of the testimony and evidence contained in the record, the Commission on Landlord-Tenant Affairs concludes:

 

                  1.            Because the Respondent had no Rental Facility License for 575 Thayer Avenue he could not rent the property to the Complainants in March 2002, and his attempt to rent 575 Thayer Avenue without a Rental Facility License violates Chapter 29, Article III, “Licensing of Rental Housing,” of the County Code and violates the Commission’s February 25, 2002 Decision and Order affirming the revocation of his Rental Facility License, and has caused a defective tenancy.

 

                  2.            Because 575 Thayer Avenue contained serious violations of the Housing Code and had been condemned by the Department as unfit for human habitation, because the Respondent had no Rental Facility License, and because the Respondent should not have been operating 575 Thayer Avenue as a rental facility, the Complainants were within their rights to decide not to take possession of the 575 Thayer Avenue once they learned of the above facts.

 

                  3.            The Respondent’s demand for and collection of application fees, rent, a security deposit, and a condominium fee from the Complainants for 575 Thayer Avenue and his demand and collection of a security deposit for 3301 Hewitt Avenue, when he had no Rental Facility License for either Property, constitutes the operation of a rental facility without a valid Rental Facility License, in violation of Chapter 29, Article III, “Licensing of Rental Housing,” of the County Code, and has caused a defective tenancy.

 

ORDER

 

            In view of the foregoing, The Commission on Landlord-Tenant Affairs hereby orders that the Respondent must pay the Complainants $2,570.00, which sum represents the entire amount of the Complainants’ security deposit, rent, condominium fee, and application fees.

 

            Commissioner Daryl Steinbraker, Commissioner Kwaku Ofori and Commissioner Jeffrey Burritt, Panel Chairperson, concurred in the foregoing decision unanimously.

 

            To comply with this Order, Respondent, Chukwujindu Victor Mbakpuo, must forward to the Office of Landlord-Tenant Affairs, 100 Maryland Avenue, 4th Floor, Rockville, MD 20850, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of this Decision and Order, a check made payable to Patricia John and Tricia John, in the full amount of $2,570.00.

 

            The Respondent, Chukwujindu Victor Mbakpuo, is hereby notified that Section 29-48 of the County Code declares that failure to comply with this Decision and Order is punishable by a $500.00 civil fine Class A violation as set forth in Section 1-19 of the County Code. This civil fine may, at the discretion of the Commission, be imposed on a daily basis until there is compliance with this Decision and Order.

 

            In addition to the issuance of a Class A civil citation and $500.00 civil fine, should the Commission determine that the Respondent has not, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date

of this Decision and Order, made a bona fide effort to comply with the terms of this Decision and

Order, it may also refer the matter to the Office of the County Attorney for additional legal enforcement.

 

            Any party aggrieved by this action of the Commission may file an administrative appeal to the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision and Order, pursuant to the Maryland Rules governing administrative appeals. Be advised that pursuant to Section 29-49 of the County Code, should the Respondent choose to appeal the Commission’s Order, he must post a bond with the Circuit Court in the amount of the award ($2,570.00) if he seeks a stay of enforcement of this Order.

 

 

 

____________________________________

Jeffrey Burritt, Panel Chairperson

Commission on Landlord-Tenant Affairs


 

Top of Page

Index of License Revocation Cases


 


[1] Appendix L, “Regulations on the Commission on Landlord-Tenant Affairs,” subsection 4.10, Postponement of hearing date, states, “Any party for good cause shown may request a postponement of hearing date. Said request of a hearing date shall be in writing whenever practicable. The chairman of the commission shall rule on the request and advise all parties of his decision.