Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1381
Retaliatory conduct prohibited
Operative Text
A. Except as provided in this section, a landlord may not retaliate by increasing rent or decreasing services or by bringing or threatening to bring an action for possession after any of the following: 1. The tenant has complained to a governmental agency charged with responsibility for enforcement of a building or housing code of a violation applicable to the premises materially affecting health and safety. 2. The tenant has complained to the landlord of a violation under section 33-1324. 3. The tenant has organized or become a member of a tenants' union or similar organization. 4. The tenant has complained to a governmental agency charged with the responsibility for enforcement of the wage-price stabilization act. B. If the landlord acts in violation of subsection A of this section, the tenant is entitled to the remedies provided in section 33-1367 and has a defense in action against him for possession. In an action by or against the tenant, evidence of a complaint within six months prior to the alleged act of retaliation creates a presumption that the landlord's conduct was in retaliation. The presumption does not arise if the tenant made the complaint after notice of termination of the rental agreement. "Presumption", in this subsection, means that the trier of fact must find the existence of the fact presumed unless and until evidence is introduced which would support a finding of its nonexistence. C. Notwithstanding subsections A and B of this section, a landlord may bring an action for possession if either of the following occurs: 1. The violation of the applicable building or housing code was caused primarily by lack of reasonable care by the tenant or other person in his household or upon the premises with his consent. 2. The tenant is in default in rent. The maintenance of the action does not release the landlord from liability under section 33-1361, subsection B.
Arizona law under A.R.S. § 33-1381 prohibits landlords from retaliating against tenants who exercise certain protected rights, such as reporting housing code violations to a government agency, complaining to the landlord about habitability issues, or joining a tenants' union. Retaliation is defined to include raising rent, reducing services, or initiating or threatening eviction proceedings. When a tenant has made a qualifying complaint within the six months before an alleged retaliatory act, the law presumes the landlord's conduct was retaliatory — though that presumption can be rebutted by contrary evidence. Landlords retain the right to pursue eviction if the tenant caused the code violation through lack of reasonable care or is behind on rent.
Plain English — not legal advice.
Under A.R.S. § 33-1381, property owners and managers are expected to ensure that any rent increases, service reductions, or eviction actions are grounded in legitimate, documented business or legal reasons entirely unrelated to a tenant's protected activity. Compliant operators typically maintain clear records of the timing and basis for any adverse action — such as lease violations, nonpayment of rent, or pre-existing maintenance schedules — so that those actions cannot be characterized as retaliatory. Because a tenant complaint filed within six months of an adverse action triggers a legal presumption of retaliation, operators generally document the independent justification for their decisions contemporaneously and thoroughly.
General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.
A.R.S. § 33-1381 gives tenants in Arizona protection against landlord retaliation when they report housing or building code violations to a government agency, raise habitability concerns directly with their landlord, or participate in a tenants' union. If a landlord responds with a rent increase, service cutback, or eviction threat within six months of such a complaint, the law presumes the action was retaliatory, and tenants may raise this as a defense in an eviction proceeding or pursue remedies under section 33-1367. Tenants who believe they are experiencing retaliation may consider contacting a local tenant-rights organization, a legal aid office, or the relevant government housing or code-enforcement agency to understand the options available to them.
General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.
Generated October 14, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.
Effective Timeline
References Out
Rules and statutes cited by this regulation
References In
No inbound references recorded yet for this provision.