Your article “The Painmaker” (1/13) was one-sided. I think Richard Luchs should be commended for his knowledge of D.C. real-estate acumen. His 95/5 transaction, a solution to enable his building landlord clients to avoid triggering the TOPA Act, is a reflection of his obvious experience and knowledge in the D.C. real-estate market. Mr. Luchs is paid to ensure the sale and/or culmination of real-estate building sales, not to prevent them.
Your article would have been better if you’d spent more time examining why the DCRA is enforcing the TOPA Act so poorly rather than picking on a savvy attorney who is just doing his job. Instead of being angry and shocked over Mr. Luchs and his firm’s ingenious real-estate maneuvers, perhaps you could suggest that they consider starting an internship program for budding attorneys. By the way, I am neither an attorney nor related to Mr. Luchs or his firm.
Silver Spring, Md.