Inglewood rental board rules reroof at 948 South Inglewood Ave not a capital improvement after tenant complaints

At a meeting of the Inglewood Rental Housing Board, members voted to adopt a finding that a recent reroof at 948 South Inglewood Avenue does not meet the board's capital-improvement criteria, a determination the board said requires the new improvement to have a useful life of five years or more.

The petition (Case 25O0004) was submitted by Yaakov Greenspan of Westland Real Estate Group. Board liaison Amari Watson told the board the property's total capital expenditure was $108,340.30, with a maximum eligible reimbursement of $54,170.15, and that the building contains 22 units. An applicant representative said the roof was replaced to stop persistent leaks and that the contractor and warranty were selected based on price and warranty considerations.

Tenants at the property disputed the applicant's framing. A tenant identifying themselves as a resident of Apartment 17 said they had lived there since 2021 and described repeated leaks, plumbing problems, mold and damage to personal property. "This was not capital improvement…They only fixed that roof because they had to," the tenant said, adding that previous tenant reports were addressed as "quick fixes" and that they were not reimbursed for damaged items. Rainer Duvet, who said he lives in Unit 12 since 2018, described maintenance requests dating back to 2018 and said he observed brown, moldy water and fungal growth in the ceiling during the worst incidents.

Board members questioned whether multiple bids were submitted (the applicant said only the chosen bid was in the packet), whether tenant correspondence was on file (staff said no tenant correspondence appeared in the department record for this case), and whether leaks had occurred after the reported completion date of Dec. 31, 2024. The applicant said the property manager relies on tenants to submit work orders to know about post-repair maintenance needs.

After discussion, the board chair asked the secretary to read the summary of the board's determination that the petition did not meet the capital-improvement criteria (which the board summarized as requiring a useful life of five years or more). A motion to adopt that finding was made and seconded. The transcript records recorded votes with Hamilton, Evans and Chairperson Haney voting in favor and Fragoso recorded as abstaining; the motion carried.

The board moved on to other agenda items after the vote; no reimbursement was approved at the meeting for Case 25O0004.