Thomas Breen photo
Palja Stanovic outside courthouse.
A New York-based landlord found out that he needs to take extra steps if he wants to both accept government subsidies and then evict nonpaying tenants.
The landlord, learned that lesson when a judge threw out his bid to evict his Newhallville tenant, on the grounds that a property owner has to file the right paperwork and notify the right parties if they want to evict a low-income renter during the pandemic.
That was the outcome of a court hearing in the eviction case Palja Stanovic v. John McElveen.
In a third-floor courtroom at the state courthouse at 121 Elm St. this past Tuesday, Superior Court Judge John Cirello dismissed the eviction lawsuit because of a number of defects with the original notice to quit that Stanovic served to his Read Street tenant on Feb. 2.
Namely, Stanovic failed to put a case number for the UniteCT statewide rent relief program on the eviction notice, which was a requirement at the time under Gov. Ned Lamont’s then-in-place executive order 12D.
The landlord also failed to notify the Housing Authority of New Haven about the eviction. In a Tuesday motion to dismiss in the case, New Haven Legal Assistance Association (NHLAA) attorney and tenant representative Yonatan Zamir argued that Stanovic legally had to let the housing authority know about his intention to evict McElveen because that tenant is a recipient of a federal Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher subsidy.
Thomas Breen file photo
Judge Cirello.
“If you don’t follow the rules in certain ways, then the court doesn’t have jurisdiction,” Cirello said with sympathy on Tuesday. “I can imagine how frustrating that is” to hear, he said to Stanovic.
“I was a landlord at one time,” the judge continued.
Nevertheless, he noted, Stanovic must follow the law when filing to evict one of his tenants.
So “I have to apply now from the beginning” in order to move ahead with an attempted eviction of this tenant for alleged nonpayment of rent? Stanovic asked.
That’s right, Cirello replied.
With that, he dismissed the case.
Landlord: "It's Not Right"
Read Street apartment building at the center of this case.
Stanovic filed the original lawsuit against his tenant because, he claimed in the March 14 complaint, the tenant failed to pay his monthly $1,050 rent on Jan. 1.
According to court records, Stanovic served the tenant with the notice to quit on Feb. 2, letting him know he had to leave his apartment in the 12-unit apartment building on Read Street by March 9.
After Cirello threw out Stanovic’s lawsuit on Tuesday, the landlord swung by the housing court clerk’s office on the second floor of the Elm Street building to pick up a new set of paperwork to file the eviction once again.
He also spoke with the Independent about his frustrations with what he saw as a cumbersome process difficult to navigate for a landlord looking to evict a tenant without the help of a lawyer.
“No good. It’s not right,” said Stanovic, who lives in upstate New York and is an immigrant from the former Yugoslavia.
He said it wasn’t fair that his case was thrown out for not having a UniteCT case number on it — because that pandemic-era statewide rental relief program stopped accepting new applications as of Feb. 15. “There’s no money there for the government to help,” he said.
(As Cirello pointed out, at the time when Stanovic served his tenant with the original notice to quit on Feb. 2, the governor’s executive order requiring the inclusion of a UniteCT case number on a notice to quit was still in place.)
Stanovic also claimed that his tenant hasn’t paid rent in a year.
Isn’t he getting part of the rent for this unit and tenant from the Section 8 federal housing subsidy program?
“I get a few pennies,” he said, without disclosing how much of this tenant’s $1,050 monthly rent is covered by Section 8.
Stanovic said he owns “plenty of properties in New York,” and that, even with his frustrations with the New Haven housing court system, he still thinks it’s easier to be a landlord in Connecticut than in New York. It’s harder to evict someone in New York, he said, especially during the pandemic.
“I have to pay everything,” he said, in order to keep his property up to snuff. “If I’m not 100 percent, tenants [don’t] pay.”
Tenant's Attorney: "A Few Simple Rules"
Thomas Breen photo
Legal aid's Yonatan Zamir.
In his Tuesday motion to dismiss in this case, Zamir made the argument for why Stanovic’s failure to notify the public housing authority of his intention to evict his Section 8 tenant was such a legal mistake — and one worth sinking this particular lawsuit.
“This case should be dismissed because of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with federal regulations regarding the eviction of tenants subsidized by the federal Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program,” Zamir wrote in that motion.
“The instant tenancy is subsidized by a federally-subsidized Housing Choice Voucher (HCV or “Section 8 voucher”) and as such, the Plaintiff entered into a Housing Assistance Payments contract with the Housing Authority of New Haven,” he continued. “Accordingly, the tenancy is subject to the federal rules and regulations of the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Under federal law, a landlord who wishes to evict a tenant with a HCV must provide the public housing agency administering the voucher with a copy of the notice to quit.”
In a Tuesday afternoon phone interview, Zamir elaborated on the importance of a landlord notifying the administrator of a rental subsidy — in this case the city’s housing authority — before moving ahead with an eviction.
“The reason,” Zamir said, is “there’s a good chance, if he doesn’t give [the housing authority] notice, they may not know [the tenant] is under eviction. They may continue paying” the landlord on the tenant’s behalf — even if that landlord was no longer housing that tenant at his property.
When a landlord agrees to accept a Section 8 rental subsidy, he continued, that landlord enters into a contract with the administrator of that subsidy.
“In exchange for participating in this program, whose primary goal is to make sure people have housing, the landlord has to follow a few simple rules.” In addition to letting the administrator of the subsidy know when an eviction is taking place, those rules include opening up the property to frequent inspections.
“They give [the landlord] multiple chances to fix egregious conditions,” Zamir said. “When he doesn’t comply, they stop paying.”
How does he feel about Stanovic’s promise to pursue another eviction against the same Read Street tenant?
“My hope is that he’ll not waste everybody’s time,” Zamir said. “My goal is to try to resolve things so that people don’t have to have a knockdown, drag-out” fight before a judge. “My only hope would be that he does things correctly.”
Other recent stories about New Haven eviction cases working their way through housing court so far in 2022.
• Family Feuds Fill Eviction Court
• Rent Help Winds Down. What’s Next?
• Eviction Withdrawn After Rent Catch-up
• Hill Landlord Prevails In“Lapse” Eviction
• Landlord Thwarted 2nd Time On Eviction
• Church Evicting Parishioner
• Hard-Luck Tenant Hustles To Stay Put
• Eviction Of Hospitalized Tenant, 74, Upheld
• Judge Pauses Eviction Amid Rent-Relief Qs
• Amid Rise In“Lapse-of-Time” Evictions, Tenant Wins 3‑Month Stay
• Leaky Ceiling, Rent Dispute Spark Eviction Case
Tom/Paul, an editorial question. The article quotes Mr. Stanovic as saying “if I am not 100%, tenants no pay.” Undoubtedly, that his exactly what he said. Quoting a speaker literally often makes them appear ignorant. But having the reporter modify what they say runs the risk of misinterpretation. How does the NHI deal with this situation?
BTW, Mr. Stanovic’s English is far better than my Serbo-Croatian. The only words I picked in my travels in Croatia and Slovenia were “beer”, “please”, and “thank you”.