Castelblanco Law Group, APLC – Los Angeles

Carla was great and very helpful.

While Castelblanco could not take our case as it is a mold case and they handle pest cases, they still gave us time, and practical advice on next steps. Thank you for your generosity in a moment of crisis. If they provide this level of service to a “non-client” I can only imagine their client service is top notch.

I contacted Castelblanco Law Group because its website promotes the firm as protecting California tenants from unsafe and uninhabitable housing conditions, including mold, plumbing and sewage leaks, pests, defective heating systems, structural damage, health effects, property loss, emotional distress, and the need to break an unsafe lease. As a disabled veteran placed in this residence through a VA-funded housing program, I hoped this firm would carefully evaluate my evidence and help my family pursue justice. I submitted an extensive evidence packet documenting numerous housing concerns, including a plumbing and sewage incident, moisture-related conditions, suspected mold-like discoloration, multiple forms of pest activity, HVAC and heating problems, damaged areas of the residence, health symptoms affecting members of my household, medical documentation, displacement, and related expenses. I later provided four additional videos. Attorney Eric Castelblanco responded that he had personally reviewed the materials and had been the person who initially rejected my case. However, his explanation addressed only whether the four videos demonstrated a “significant” active cockroach infestation. I never presented this as merely a cockroach case. His response did not meaningfully acknowledge or address the broader habitability conditions, health concerns, extensive photographic documentation, or other evidence I submitted. The fact that he so abruptly denied me twice with the same explanation although his website describes my sort of situation the type he protects renters like me hope, and he’s Latino like I am is disappointing, maybe it’s because I am part of the LGBT community that he personally denied me twice either way. I suggest you find a different law firm do not fall for his videos or his website promotions everyone. He is selective and doesn’t care about disabled Latinos. Every attorney has the right to decline representation, and I understand that no firm can accept every case. What disappointed me was the narrow and dismissive explanation, especially when the firm’s own website represents that it evaluates many of the precise unsafe-housing conditions documented in my submission. Its website states that mold, leaks, pests, broken heating systems, structural damage, health problems, emotional distress, and financial losses may support a slum-housing matter. It also promotes assistance with compensation and breaking unsafe leases. The denial therefore appeared inconsistent with the broad advocacy the firm publicly promotes. I have never received such a narrowly framed response from a professional after providing this volume of relevant documentation. Given the high ethical standards and commitment to vulnerable tenants that the firm claims to uphold, I expected a more complete, respectful, and professionally reasoned evaluation—even if the ultimate answer remained no. I am deeply disappointed that a firm advertising itself as a defender of families living in unsafe conditions reduced a disabled veteran’s extensive habitability complaint to whether four videos showed enough cockroaches. This review reflects my personal experience with the firm’s intake and denial process.