Comments
RENT GOUGING - A family displaced by the devastating Eaton Fire has filed what attorneys describe as the first private civil lawsuit brought by wildfire victims seeking to enforce California and Los Angeles anti-price-gouging laws against landlords accused of dramatically inflating rents during the region’s housing crisis.
The lawsuit, Renick, et al. v. Sundance Group, LLC, et al., was filed this week in Los Angeles County Superior Court by Randall and Candy Renick, whose Altadena home became uninhabitable following the January 2025 Eaton Fire. The suit alleges that landlords Terrence and Catalina Chow charged nearly three times the lawful rent for a temporary rental home in Glassell Park — and continued collecting the inflated payments for months even after receiving written warnings from both the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office and Los Angeles County.
According to the complaint, the Renicks evacuated their Altadena home on January 7, 2025, fleeing with their dogs and only the belongings they could carry. Their residence, occupied for eighteen years, allegedly suffered severe smoke contamination requiring extensive remediation before it could be safely occupied again.
While searching Zillow for temporary long-term housing, the couple found a three-bedroom home on Toland Way in Glassell Park. The property had reportedly been listed for rent just nine days after the Eaton Fire began.
Under California Penal Code Section 396, the maximum lawful rent for the property was allegedly limited to $5,032.50 per month. Instead, the lawsuit claims the landlords charged the Renicks $14,938.50 monthly — nearly triple the legal limit. Attorneys for the family estimate the alleged overcharges totaled more than $95,000 during the tenancy.
The lawsuit states that less than three weeks after moving into the home, the Renicks received a formal “Notice of Potential Violation” from the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office directed to the landlords, demanding the rent be reduced and overcharges refunded with interest. A second warning later came from Los Angeles County officials.
According to the complaint, neither notice resulted in any rent reduction or reimbursement.
“We were just trying to find somewhere safe to live while we figured out what came next,” Plaintiff Candy Renick said in a statement. “Instead, we ended up being overcharged almost $10,000 every month — and our landlords wouldn’t stop even after the City told them to.”
The lawsuit seeks restitution, damages, civil penalties, attorneys’ fees, and other relief.
The filing comes as Los Angeles County’s wildfire-related emergency price-gouging protections are scheduled to expire May 29 after the Board of Supervisors declined to extend them earlier this month. The expiration arrives as Southern California enters another wildfire season following the catastrophic Eaton and Palisades fires, which destroyed more than 16,000 structures and displaced more than 100,000 residents in January 2025.
Tenant advocates argue that despite thousands of complaints filed during the wildfire emergency, enforcement actions have been limited.
“Tenants should never have been put in the position of having to enforce disaster protections themselves,” said Chelsea Kirk of The Rent Brigade. “After thousands of reports and virtually no meaningful action from the City Attorney or County and State agencies, people have realized they can’t rely on government enforcement to protect them from exploitation.”
Attorney Josh Nuni of The People’s Law Project: Los Angeles, representing the Renicks, said the case could set an important precedent as California enters another potentially dangerous wildfire season.
“The State and the City’s price-gouging laws exist because we know people will be taken advantage of without them,” Nuni said. “This case is about making sure those laws are more than just words on a page.”
###
