A Somerville man who last week avoided eviction by winning a lawsuit against his landlord was served a new notice to quit.
The notice means Gary Rogers, who previously faced eviction after refusing to pay a 90 percent rent hike for two years, may have to leave his apartment by the end of May. Rogers lives in a one-bedroom apartment on the third floor of 22 Sargent Ave. The notice to quit was left at his door on Wednesday. It includes a reservation of his landlord’s rights to accept payments Rogers makes as “use and occupancy,” not rent.
Rogers said he also received a receipt for rent he paid for the month of April. The receipt notes that the $1,150 check he sent will go toward use and occupancy. The payment is also deducted from a balance of $27,400 that Rogers said reflects the rent ledger, which has noted his rent as $2,200 per month since spring 2024, and what he’s actually paid, which is $1,150 per month.
“They cannot collect any money that I have not signed an agreement to,” Rogers said in a phone interview. “I think this ledger is for fear.”
The notice to quit and use and occupancy notice came less than a week after a jury ruled that Rogers could remain in his apartment. The jury found that Rogers’ landlord, Ryan Pinto, who is based in California, terminated Rogers’ previous self-extending lease in spring 2024, shortly after the increased rent of $2,200 went into effect and Rogers refused to pay it. The jury also found that Pinto created a new tenancy for Rogers by accepting $1,150 checks that Rogers labeled as “rent,” effectively throwing out the eviction case.
Credit: Chinanu Okoli
Rogers said he was surprised to see his check labeled as “use and occupancy” because it was cashed before last week’s verdict. He plans to keep paying the $1,150 rate.
“They should count that [check] as part of my new lease,” Rogers said.
One of Pinto’s attorneys, Jay Zaheer, declined requests for comment.
Zaheer previously told Cambridge Day that he and Pinto were unsure of appealing the jury’s verdict or pursuing further litigation. Pinto had said after the trial he was considering selling the building.
Legal proceedings for Pinto and Rogers continue. The judge in the case reserved claims under the Consumer Protections Act for his own determination — the law prohibits unfair or deceptive marketplace conduct and applies to Pinto due to his status as an investment landlord. Each party has until May to file its own memorandum outlining specific claims and damages regarding sanitary and safety conditions in Rogers’ apartment. A hearing will then be scheduled.
Rogers said his attorneys and he believe that Pinto is purposefully trying to correct pre-existing issues in the apartment ahead of the hearing and a possible second eviction trial. Rogers said he was told this week that an independent contractor would enter his unit and make note of any necessary repairs. He added that Pinto sent him an email informing him that his non-functional oven would be removed from the apartment this week.
Rogers said he would not deny Pinto and the contractor entry into his apartment, though he thinks they’re trying to fix issues so there is “noting to complain about.” Rogers said he is still considering appealing the claims Pinto was found not liable for: retaliation, breach of habitability and depriving his tenant of the right to enjoy his apartment.
“This feels like attack number two,” Rogers said. “This is what everybody’s going to have to deal with if they were in my situation.”
Rogers acknowledged that he cannot stay in his unit forever and he may eventually decide to leave. Still, he said, he refuses to be intimidated by Pinto. “I don’t like this guy. And I don’t like his lawyer. And I’m a fighter,” he said.
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.