VNSTA files opposition to Equity Residential's Motion to Dismiss TOPA challenge

On September 25, the Van Ness South Tenants Association filed its formal response to the Department of Housing and Community Development opposing Equity Residential’s effort to dismiss VNSTA’s appeal of Equity’s claim that its proposed transfer of ownership of 3003 Van Ness is not subject to the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA).

VNSTA is challenging Equity’s claim that its merger with AvalonBay did not trigger tenant rights under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA). The merger assigned more than $111 million in value to the ownership interests associated with 3003 Van Ness, and former AvalonBay shareholders emerged as the majority shareholders of the combined company, now known as Vivmark Residential.

TOPA generally gives D.C. tenants the opportunity to purchase their building when it is sold. But TOPA can be important even when tenants do not ultimately buy their building. The process gives organized tenants a seat at the table and can provide leverage to negotiate commitments from owners or buyers—including improvements in living conditions. That leverage is particularly important at 3003 Van Ness, where residents have experienced what VNSTA describes in its filing as a serious deterioration in conditions under Equity Residential’s management.

The filing points out that this is not the first major ownership change involving 3003 Van Ness. When Charles E. Smith purchased the property in 1996, tenants exercised their TOPA rights. VNSTA investigated the proposed buyer, negotiated directly with the company, and ultimately agreed to waive its purchase rights in exchange for a detailed Memorandum of Understanding providing extensive protections and improvements for residents.

Since then, control of the company that owns 3003 Van Ness has passed from Charles E. Smith to Archstone and then to Equity Residential, while the same property-holding company remained in place. Despite those major changes, tenants have not received another TOPA offer in nearly 30 years.

VNSTA argues that the case therefore has implications well beyond 3003 Van Ness. Vivmark now lists 18 apartment communities in the District with approximately 5,500 rental units, and many other large landlords hold individual buildings through layers of subsidiaries and affiliated companies. If ownership can repeatedly change at higher levels of those corporate structures without triggering TOPA, tenants could lose an important voice when ownership of their homes changes.

At its core, the case asks a simple question: Can ownership of a major apartment building change again and again through a corporate structure while the tenants who live there never receive TOPA rights? VNSTA’s filing argues that this question should be decided on its merits rather than dismissed without a hearing.

Read VNSTA’s September 25, 2026 filing.

Also see:

August 25, 2026: Equity Residential’s Motion to Dismiss

July 27, 2026: VNSTA’s Motion for Declaratory Relief

June 10, 2026: Equity Residential’s Notice of Transfer of Ownership Interests

Rental Housing Commission reverses key rulings in 3003 Van Ness rent case

The D.C. Rental Housing Commission has issued a decision reversing important parts of an Office of Administrative Hearings decision in the 10-year rent-control case brought by VNSTA President Harry Gural against Equity Residential.

The case began in 2016, when Gural and other tenants were fighting efforts by Equity Residential to impose extremely large rent increases on residents, some exceeding $1,000 per month. Equity justified those increases by claiming that the residents had only temporarily received a large discount (“concession”) from the actual rent, and calculating subsequent rent increases on the basis of the “pre-concession rent,” which was far above actual market prices.

In order to help stop the practice, in August 2016 Harry Gural filed a tenant petition in the DC Office of Administrative Hearings, arguing that Equity had overcharged him by basing an annual rent increase on a fictional amount that was substantially higher than the actual rent paid.

At the same time, the Van Ness South Tenants Association blew the whistle on this practice to DC Attorney General Karl Racine, who subsequently filed suit against Equity Residential. In 2022, a Superior Court judge decided against Equity, awarding $1 million to residents of 3003 Van Ness.

OAH ruled against Gural in 2017 but he subsequently appealed to the Rental Housing Commission, which overturned the OAH decision and remanded it for further hearing. OAH subsequently decided in favor of Gural, but ruled that Equity had not deliberately overcharged him, therefore penalties would be limited to the cumulative amount of the overcharges.

Gural appealed an OAH decision for a second time in 2025, arguing that Equity’s overcharges were obviously in bad faith and therefore subject to triple penalties because they continued for several years after Equity lost several court decisions on the issue.

In its Sept. 25, 2026 decision, the Rental Housing Commission ruled that OAH improperly limited its consideration of whether Equity acted in bad faith by continuing to demand the disputed rent for years after the Commission had rejected Equity’s interpretation of D.C. rent law.

The Commission also reversed OAH’s ruling concerning Equity’s 2016 eviction lawsuit against Gural over approximately $300 in disputed rent. Because Gural had been actively advocating for other residents over rent increases, D.C. law created a presumption of retaliation. The Commission found that Equity had not presented substantial evidence that it routinely filed eviction cases over similarly small amounts.

The case now returns to OAH to determine whether Equity’s continued rent demands warrant treble damages and whether the filing of the eviction case constituted willful retaliation subject to a civil penalty.

The full decision and additional background on the case are available at FairRentDC.org, a website dedicated to explaining how DC landlords used “rent concessions” to circumvent rent stabilization laws and overcharge tenants.

Read the Rental Housing Commission Decision and Order - Sept. 25, 2026

Equity Residential Seeks Dismissal of VNSTA TOPA Challenge

Equity Residential has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Van Ness South Tenants Association’s challenge to Equity’s claim that the proposed transfer of ownership involving 3003 Van Ness is exempt from the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA).

Equity argues that VNSTA lacks standing to challenge the transfer of ownership to Vivmark Residential, the new company resulting from the merger of Equity Residential and AvalonBay. It also argues on the merits that the transaction is not a “sale” under TOPA because Equity owns interests in numerous properties and 3003 Van Ness is not its “sole or principal asset.”

VNSTA disputes both arguments. Equity’s own Notice of Transfer states that it owns approximately 97.6% of Smith Property Holdings Van Ness LP that owns 3003 Van Ness, that former AvalonBay shareholders are expected to own the majority of the combined company after the merger, and that the transaction assigns approximately $111.5 million to the ownership interests associated with 3003 Van Ness.

VNSTA will file a response opposing Equity’s request for dismissal and asking that its TOPA challenge be heard. The deadline for the filing is September 25.

Attorney Richard W. Luchs of Greenstein DeLorme & Luchs, who for decades has handled TOPA cases and sought ways around TOPA for industry interests, will represent Equity Residential.

Read Equity Residential’s Motion to Dismiss.

Tenant association challenges Equity's proposed transfer of ownership of 3003 Van Ness

The Van Ness South Tenants Association today filed a Petition for Declaratory Relief to the DC Department of Housing and Community Development, challenging Equity Residential’s claim that it can transfer ownership interests associated with 3003 Van Ness without giving residents their legal right to consider purchase of the property via the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA). Under TOPA, when an apartment building is put up for sale, a tenant association general must be given the first opportunity to purchase it.

The introduction to the Petition states:

“The Van Ness South Tenants Association and Harry Gural, individually, hereby challenge Equity Residential’s claim that the proposed transfer of ownership interests associated with the 625-unit apartment complex at 3003 Van Ness Street, NW, does not constitute a sale under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA). If Equity’s claimed exemption is upheld, residents will be denied the rights that TOPA provides when an apartment building is sold.”

The apartment building at 3003 Van Ness is owned by Smith Property Holdings Van Ness, a limited partnership. Smith is owned by another company, which is owned by another, which is owned by another, which is owned by another, which is owned by another (etc.), which is owned by Equity Residential.

Equity Residential is undergoing is undergoing a. merger with AvalonBay Communities, which will together form a rental housing giant under the name Vivmark Residential. Equity hopes to transfer ownership to the newly merged company, assigning a value of $111 million to the property, with current AvalonBay shareholders owning the majority of shares in the merged company. Nevertheless, Equity claims that the transfer is not a sale.

The Van Ness South Tenants Association’s Petition argues that the transaction constitutes a sale under TOPA and that residents therefore must be afforded the rights provided under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act.

Read the Petition for Declaratory Relief.

Tenant association files notice of intent to challenge Equity's proposed transfer of ownership

The Van Ness South Tenants Association today filed a Notice of Intent to File Petition of Relief with the DC Department of Housing and Community Development. The notice announces the tenant association’s intention of challenging Equity Residential’s proposed transfer of the ownership rights of 3003 Van Ness, which Equity claims is not a sale under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA).

Tenant associations often use their TOPA rights to negotiate for for better living conditions. Given the serious and chronic problems residents of 3003 Van Ness have experienced under Equity Residential’s management, they hope to see substantial improvements - whether under a new owner, or if they purchase the building themselves.

The Notice of Intent to File Petition of Relief states:

“The Van Ness South Tenants Association hereby gives notice of its intent to file a timely Petition for Relief challenging the claimed exemption from the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) contained in the Notice of Transfer of Ownership Interest dated June 10, 2026 (attached).”

“We believe that the claimed exemption from TOPA raises substantial questions regarding whether the proposed transaction constitutes a sale under the Rental Housing Conversion and Sale Act.”

Read the entire Notice of Intent to File Petition of Relief.

Equity Residential announces that it plans to transfer ownership of 3003 Van Ness

Equity Residential today placed Notices of Transfer of Ownership Interest in front of the apartment doors of residents of 3003 Van Ness, announcing that it plans to transfer ownership of the building to the new company that will be formed as the result of Equity’s planned merger with AvalonBay Communities. Residents were largely suprised and puzzled by the meaning of the announcement.

3003 Van Ness is actually owned by Smith Property Holdings Van Ness, a limited partnership. Equity owns layers of companies that ultimately own Smith. Equity tells the tenant association that the proposed transfer of ownership interests in 3003 Van Ness is just a formality.

However, the Notices of Transfer distributed to residents today actually is announcement that Equity is claiming an exemption from the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act, a DC law which states that a tenant association generally must be given an opportunity to purchase an apartment property before it is sold.

The Van Ness South Tenants Association plans to study the Notice of Transfer to see if the proposed transfer actually qualifies for an exemption from TOPA.

Read Equity Residential’s June 10, 2026 Notice of Transfer of Ownership Interest.

Court finds that Equity Residential overcharged tenant president by almost $47,000 — orders restitution

The Office of Administrative hearings yesterday issued a final ruling in the case of Harry Gural v. Equity Residential / Smith Property Holdings Van Ness LP, ordering Equity Residential to VNSTA president Gural $46,798 plus $13,090 in interest — a total of $59,888.

Gural followed his complaint against Equity Residential in August 2016, claiming that the company was charging him $297 per month more than DC law allows in a rent-stabilized building. The increase demanded by Equity was almost 20%, whereas the maximum legal increase that year was only 3.5%.

The reason Gural filed his initial complaint in the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) is that almost 100 residents of 3003 Van Ness came to him asking for help fighting extremely large rent increase demands by Equity Residential, some almost as high as $1,500 per month. After much negotiation between those tenants and Equity, the company usually offered a large “discount” — which it called a “rent concession” — so that the actual rent increase would be much lower. However, the effective rent increase was often substantially higher than allowed by DC law.

Because so many residents and members of the tenant association reported such problems with the $27 billion Equity Residential, Gural refused to sign a new lease with a fraudulent, inflated amount listed as the “rent.” Equity subsequently filed suit against him in the Landlord and Tenant Branch of DC Superior Court, getting the judge to force Gural to pay $297 per month under a “protective order,” which (wrongfully) assumed that Equity’s argument was correct. Over the course of eight years, Gural has been forced to pay out of pocket $29,474 into court escrow.

The Office of Administrative hearings ruled in favor of Equity Residential in 2017, accepting the corporation’s novel interpretation of the word “rent,” which the company complained could exceed the actual rent paid by hundreds of dollars per month.

Gural appealed the OAH decision to the Rental Housing Commission, which in 2020 overturned the lower court decision, agreeing with Gural that the word “rent” has its plain English meaning. Specifically, “the Commission concluded that the phrase "rent charged" is intended to refer to the rent actually demanded or received from a tenant…”

The case moved slowly in 2020-22 with multiple delays due to the COVID pandemic. In 2023 and 2024, proceedings and filings came in a flurry as the date for another formal hearing in the Office of Administrative Hearing approached.

At a hearing in February 2024, Equity Residential property manager for 3003 Van Ness, Josh Luper, claimed that he did not know the meaning of the word “rent,” affirming Equity’s claim that the “rent” can exceed the amount paid by hundreds of dollars.

Even in its closing arguments for the case, Equity Residential claimed that it could not possibly have known the meaning of the word “rent.”

Finally, on August 28, 2024, the Administrative Law Judge in the Office of Administrative Hearings issued a final ruling in the case, finding that Equity Residential had overcharged Harry Gural — as he had claimed eight years ago. The judge ordered Equity Residential to pay Gural $46,798 for the overcharges, plus $13,090 in interest — a total of almost $60,000 ($59,888).

Given the thousands of hours and eight years that Gural has spent fighting Equity in court over the simple meaning of the word “rent,” a $60,000 award represents less than minimum wage.

Gural had argued that Equity’s overcharges were made in bad faith, which by DC law would mean that Equity would be compelled to pay him triple the amount of the overcharges. However, the judge ruled that Equity did not act in bad faith because she did not believe that it acted out of “sinister motives” or the “intent to deceive or defraud.” Gural had pointed out in his rebuttal to Equity Residential’s final arguments that it is extremely unlikely that a $27 billion Real Estate Investment Trust, a Fortune 500 company with upscale properties in major cities around the United States, did not know the meaning of the word “rent.”

Furthermore, he has pointed out that Equity Residential continued to overcharge him despite losing three court cases on the rent issue, including the DC Attorney General’s case, District of Columbia vs. Equity Residential Management, which forced Equity Residential to pay $1 million in restitution to residents of 3003 Van Ness.

Either party in Harry Gural v. Equity Residential may appeal the OAH decision within 10 business days of the date of the August 28th final ruling.

See a chronology of the entire case at this link.

Tenant association president calls for triple penalties in "rent concession" case

Harry Gural, president of the Van Ness South Tenants Association, filed his 41-page closing arguments along with 81 pages of exhibits in his eight-year legal battle against Equity Residential for overcharging him using its “rent concession” scam. Gural is requesting that the court force Equity Residential to pay him more than $150,000 penalties — three times the amount that Equity has overcharged him over this period — as required by law when the landlord overcharges a tenant in bad faith.

In response, Equity Residential filed its final arguments, restating its claim that before recent related court decisions it did not know the meaning of the word “rent.”

DC law states that in older buildings that are subject to rent stabilization, property owners may raise the rent annually by a maximum of 2% plus inflation. In order to circumvent the law, Equity Residential wrote leases with “rent” amounts that far exceeded the actual rent paid, claiming that the “rent charged” could be $1,000 or more per month higher than the rent that is actually charged.

Equity Residential had invented a new definition of the word “rent” — one that was neither in a standard English dictionary in in DC law.

Using its own definition of the word “rent” and the words “rent charged,” Equity Residential in 2016 demanded that Gural pay a rent increase of 20% ($297 per month) instead of the 3.5% ($65) allowed by law.

As president of the tenant association, Gural contacted the office of DC Attorney General Karl Racine in 2016, requesting help for other tenants who complained that Equity Residential had demanded that they pay rent increases of $1,000 or more per month. In 2022, a judge in DC Superior Court handed down a $2 million judgment against Equity Residential for deceiving and overcharging its customers at 3003 Van Ness.

However, the judgment affected only residents of 3003 Van Ness, despite the fact that Equity Residential appears to have used the same rent scam in its other six rent-stabilized properties.

Gural’s case against Equity Residential is distinct from the Attorney General’s case — he had filed the complaint before the Attorney General decided to sue Equity Residential on behalf of the residents of 3003 Van Ness.

In 2020, Gural won the main part of his case on appeal to the Rental Housing Commission (RHC), which issued a strong decision in his favor confirming that the word “rent” in DC law has its plain English meaning, i.e., the amount a person pays for the right to occupy a rental unit. The RHC sent the case back down to the Office of Administrative Hearings for a final decision on related issues, including Gural’s claim that Equity had retaliated against him for his work assisting other tenants.

Nevertheless, eight years after Gural filed his initial complaint, Equity Residential continues to claim that it could not possibly have known the meaning of the word “rent” before the 2020 RHC decision and a related case, Gabriel Fineman v. Smith Property Holdings, or before it lost the Attorney General’s case against it, District of Columbia v. Equity Residential.

While Gural’s tenant petition in the Office of Administrative Hearings against Equity Residential has been litigated over eight years, Equity Residential’s lawsuit against Gural in DC Superior Court over the same issues has been on hold. However, Equity convinced the court in 2016 to force Gural to pay $297 per month into escrow to protect the company’s interests — Gural has now paid $29,474 to date. Moreover, Equity claims that Gural owes the company more than $50,000.

The law calls for restitution to the tenant of three times the amount of the overcharge in the case of bad faith. Gural has asked the court for triple the overcharges — more than $150,000 — because Equity has continued to overcharge Gural despite several court decisions finding that it’s novel definition of the word “rent” is wrong.

In response to Equity Residential’s closing arguments, Gural submitted his final rebuttal — a short overview of the case that points out that Equity continues to object to the simple definition of the English word “rent” and the phrase “rent charged,” despite the fact that the Rental Housing Commission has ruled against Equity’s claim that a radically different definition could apply. In response to Gural’s final rebuttal, Equity filed its own rebuttal — again claiming a novel definition of the word “rent.”

Both parties await a final decision by the Chief Justice of the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Tenant association president threatens Equity Residential with legal action over poor security

Harry Gural, president of the Van Ness South Tenants Association, today sent a letter to Equity Residential, requesting that it repair broken exterior doors within two weeks — or face possible legal action in Housing Conditions Court.

For well more than a year, the tenant association has repeatedly asked Equity Residential to fix broken exterior doors and locks, presenting evidence of dozens of videos showing that it is easy to enter 3003 Van Ness without a fob. Equity has promised to repair the doors, but some doors have remained broken for months. Broken doors are a violation of DC Housing Code, 14 DCMR 705.5.

In the past, the DC Metropolitan Police Department has referred Equity Residential to the DC Attorney General for possible prosecution for poor security under the Drug-, Firearm-, or Prostitution-Related Nuisance Abatement Law.

The tenant association for a long time has argued that Equity Residential, a Real Estate Investment Trust with a market capitalization of approximately $23 billion, must provide adequate security at its property at 3003 Van Ness.

Read the entire letter at this link.

“I am contacting you to request repairs of DC housing code violations in common areas of 3003 Van Ness. If the three security doors are not repaired within the two weeks, I intend to file a complaint against Equity Residential Management in DC Housing Conditions Court.”

— Letter to Equity Residential

Mayor's Office of Legal Counsel denies VNSTA's appeal of DHCD denial of FOIA request

The Mayor’s Office of Legal counsel today denied an appeal by the Van Ness South Tenants Association regarding the denial of a FOIA request by the DC Department of Housing and Community Development.

The FOIA request by VNSTA stated:

We request the most up-to-date draft version of the Rent Control Housing Database mandated by DC law under §42–3502.03c. Public Accessible Rent Control Housing Database.

We request access to an operational version of the database so we can review its functioning before it is released to the public later this year.

VNSTA’s appeal of the DHCD denial of the initial request stated:

There is an urgent public need for a publicly accessible database of rents, which was mandated by the DC Council via a the “Rent Control Housing Clearinghouse Amendment Act of 2015 (B21-0119).” The District of Columbia has failed to deliver the database for eight years, depriving DC residents of important information that likely would slow the rising cost of rental housing.

The appeal also argued that:

If the database had been produced in a timely manner, renters, the DC Council, and the press could have used the historical information to easily detect the “rent concession” scam, by which some landlords falsely reported rents and systematically overcharged customers.