The difficulty obtaining counsel in cases of this nature is widely recognized. Congress has recently introduced legislation, including the Eviction Right to Counsel Act of 2025 and the Landlord Accountability Act of 2025, reflecting acknowledged barriers to tenant representation when facing corporate landlords. Stuart’s experience reflects these recognized constraints.
Stuart’s 10-Minute Attorney Pitch
Minute 0–1: What this case is really about
“This case is not about a $2,475 rent dispute.
-
It’s about a corporate landlord manufacturing a tenant debt after a lease renewal, after a TRO, and after the tenant relied on the landlord’s own ledger — then presenting that fabricated debt to government agencies and the court.”
“At its core, this is a case about ledger manipulation, retaliation, and HUD-HAP violations, not missed rent.”
Minute 1–2: Why I’m a credible plaintiff
“I’m a six-year HUD-VASH tenant with a perfect payment record.
- I used the landlord’s required payment system — Bilt autopay — exactly as instructed.
- I was never late, never withheld rent, and repeatedly asked for explanations instead of filing suit.”
“Local management confirmed my account was in good standing. A new lease was signed with a zero balance.”
Minute 2–3: The recurring pattern (six years)
“Every year, Brookfield generated massive, automated overcharges — often close to ten times my lawful tenant portion — followed by automated notices to vacate.”
“Every year:
- the overcharge appeared, I reported it,
- the issue eventually vanished without explanation, and the cycle repeated.”
“This year was different only because I finally demanded a full accounting and sought court protection.”
Minute 3–4: The critical 2025 timeline
“January 2025: Brookfield’s own ledger showed a $1,312 credit balance in my favor.”
“January through April: Bilt autopay properly paused withdrawals because the account showed a credit.”
“May–June 2025: The lease renewed with a zero balance. No delinquency. No notice of debt.”
“June 2025: I reported the recurring overcharges to the housing authority and sought a TRO.”
Minute 4–5: The retaliation
“July 24, 2025 — after the TRO and reporting — Brookfield produced a brand-new ledger.”
“That ledger:
- erased the $1,312 credit retroactively,
- backdated late fees for months where the account showed a credit, and created a $2,475 ‘debt’ from a lease that had already closed.”
“That debt did not exist before my complaint.”
Minute 5–6: Why their defense collapses
“Brookfield admits:
- the credit existed,
- their systems were not synchronized, and errors occurred.”
“But they:
- cannot identify who created the July ledger,
- cannot produce contemporaneous records supporting the debt, and have no accountant or broker willing to certify it.”
“Their entire defense rests on an unauthenticated, retroactively altered ledger.”
Minute 6–7: Independent professional validation
“I obtained a signed opinion from a licensed Texas real estate broker with property-management experience.”
“Her conclusion:
- the tenant was fully compliant,
- the July ledger is invalid under standard accounting practices,
- retroactive credits and backdated fees are improper, and attempting to shift a housing-authority payment issue onto the tenant violates the HUD Tenancy Addendum.”
“She states the debt is not enforceable.”
Minute 7–8: Procedural posture (important)
“Summary judgment was denied — which confirms material fact disputes exist.”
“The TRO was issued and later violated by the creation and dissemination of the July ledger.”
“Discovery responses are incomplete; key accounting logs and Bilt transaction data have not been produced.”
“Trial is currently set for April.”
Minute 8–9: Why this case matters (legally)
“This case implicates:
- retaliation as a matter of law,
- breach of HUD-HAP and tenancy addendum,
- knowing misrepresentation through accounting records, and potential spoliation or adverse inference issues.”
“The evidence trajectory points away from clerical error and toward intentional reconstruction of a delinquency.”
Minute 9–10: What I’m looking for from counsel
“I’m looking for trial counsel to take this through discovery completion and trial.”
“The immediate leverage points are:
- forensic accounting,
- compelled production of raw ledger and Bilt logs, and exclusion of the July ledger absent proper foundation.”
“This case is fully documented. I’ve done the groundwork. I’m not looking for someone to invent a theory — only to prosecute the one the evidence already supports.”