A tenant who lived at 2501 Porter St. NW for five years says he paid more than $2,000 in fees for things like keyless entry doors, a digital thermostat and trash removal — charges his new class-action lawsuit claims Vivmark Residential had no legal right to collect. The suit, filed in D.C. Superior Court, argues the fees covered basic services that should already be baked into the rent tenants pay every month.
According to NOTUS, the lawsuit was filed by tenant Sam Mather and alleges Vivmark Residential charged renters fees tied to keyless doors, digital thermostats, trash removal, access to centrally boiled hot water, and third-party billing services. Mather is seeking a jury trial along with damages and disgorgement of what the suit calls ill-gotten gains. Vivmark Residential owns and manages roughly 5,300 units across the District, the outlet reports.
Mather's lawsuit argues these are exactly the kinds of charges the D.C. Council and the D.C. Attorney General's Office have already deemed illegal, per the same NOTUS report. The company itself was formed in August through the merger of AvalonBay Communities and Equity Residential, and it now operates out of headquarters in Chicago and Arlington.
What D.C. Law Says About Fees for Basic Services
The D.C. Attorney General's Office defines junk fees broadly, as charges that are unclear, not used for their stated purpose, or that cover a service a landlord is required to provide for a unit to be livable, the NOTUS article notes. That framing echoes a provision in D.C. law cited by the D.C. Code, which states that a housing provider shall not charge a fee to a prospective tenant before move-in, during a tenancy, or after move-out for services required to maintain a rental unit in a livable condition. That same language appears in the Fair Housing Practices Amendment Act of 2026, according to the D.C. Law Library.
The article adds that the D.C. Council has clarified housing providers cannot charge tenants separately for habitability services that rent is already supposed to cover, specifically naming lockable doors and trash removal as examples. Those are two of the very charges named in Mather's complaint.
Attorney Calls It a Growing Pattern Across the City
Tara Mikkilineni, the lead attorney on the case, told the outlet the lawsuit addresses a problem she sees proliferating across a rental market that's already expensive for tenants to navigate. She said basic services landlords are supposed to provide, combined with a scarcity of affordable housing, leave renters with less disposable income to work with. Mikkilineni also said corporate landlords can turn add-on fees into a steady stream of extra revenue, the report states.
The lawsuit was filed by the firms Halperin Petersen & Mikkilineni LLP, Tycko & Zavareei LLP, and Migliaccio & Rathod LLP in D.C. Superior Court, where case records are generally searchable by the public without registration, according to the District of Columbia Courts. A Vivmark Residential spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit or the fees, the same NOTUS report notes.
Landlord Industry Pushes Back on Pressure to Add Fees
Not everyone in the industry frames the issue the same way. Dean Hunter, CEO of D.C.'s Small Multifamily Owners Association, said property managers paid as a percentage of collected rent may not be adequately compensated when collections dip amid broader operating and maintenance challenges — a dynamic the article ties to the slim profit margins and high rent delinquencies facing D.C. property management firms generally.
The case follows a separate, earlier enforcement action by the D.C. Attorney General's Office, which previously sued Mid-America Apartment Communities and its subsidiaries over allegations the company overcharged hundreds of tenants and hid the full cost of rent, according to the D.C. Attorney General's Office. The office separately issued a consumer alert earlier this year reiterating that D.C. law bars landlords from charging junk fees.
A review on the property's Rentable listing alleges the building charged move-out costs for cleaning and carpet cleaning. Another review on the same Rentable page alleges maintenance requests sometimes took two or three tries before getting fixed. Those accounts are individual tenant allegations and have not been independently verified.
