Below are questions asked by rental property owners regarding California and Orange County rent control laws, followed by answers provided by eviction attorney Dennis Block.
Question One: I have a tenant who has additional people and pets occupying the premises. In addition, they have installed a ceiling fan. These are all in violation of the rental agreement. What type of notice should I serve, and which item would be the strongest to prevail in an eviction action? My property is located in Santa Ana.
Answer One: The correct notice would be a Notice to Perform or Quit. All the items that you mentioned would be sufficient to prevail in an eviction action. There is no reason to limit the notice to only one violation. All violations can be included in the notice. You should separate these violations by labeling them as “Item 1”, “Item 2”, and “Item 3”. In this way, if you prevail on only one violation, your eviction case will still be successful. Do not forget that when you serve the notice you must also include the city form entitled “City of Santa Ana Rent Stabilization and Just Cause Eviction Ordinance Owner Required Written Notice to Tenant.”
Question Two: My tenant moved from the premises after serving me proper notice. He refused to give me his forwarding address so I could not issue him a security deposit itemization. He is now suing me in small claims court and asking for three times the amount of the security deposit. How can he do that when he refused to supply a forwarding address?
Answer Two: Under California law a landlord must account for the security deposit in writing, within 21 days from the tenant vacating the unit. If you are deducting for items that are $125 or greater, you must include receipts or estimates. Even though the tenant did not supply his forwarding address, you should have prepared the itemization and mailed it to his last known address, which would have been the unit he vacated. If he had informed the post office of his change of address, then the mail would have been forwarded to him. If the letter came back to you, you would need to retain it in case of any legal action. In this case, the court could rule against you as you did not comply with the statute. I doubt however, that the court would assess additional penalties since your tenant contributed to the failure to provide the security deposit itemization.
Question Three: My tenant had a caretaker which occupied the apartment. For the last year the caretaker paid the rent by way of a money order. My tenant has recently died, and the caretaker refuses to vacate. She claims that since I accepted the rent directly from her, that she has now established tenant’s rights. Am I now required to accept her as my tenant? The rent is way under market value.
Answer Three: The only thing that the caretaker has established is that she will be the subject of an eviction. The payment of the rent did not establish a tenancy, as the caretaker was merely acting as an agent for the infirmed tenant. You have the choice of either serving this person a 3-Day Notice to Quit or you can raise the rent to market level.
Question Four: I own a trailer and it is parked at the back of my lot. Someone approached me and offered to rent it as a residence. After much thought, I agreed to lease the trailer. The tenant signed a rental agreement and paid the first month’s rent and a security deposit. My property is in Fullerton. After the first month, I received an “Order to Comply” from Building and Safety, stating that it was illegal to lease this trailer as a residence. They are ordering me to remove the resident. The tenant is refusing to move and has not paid any further rent. I think this was a setup and I believe the tenant was the one who called this department. How do I get him out?
Answer Four: In general, a tenant has no obligation to pay rent for an illegal unit. Your property would fall under the Tenant Protection Act. You would be required to issue a 30-day notice to quit and offer one month’s rent as relocation.
Question Five: I bought a house at a probate sale. Escrow has closed and I have just learned that a relative of the deceased is still occupying the premises. This person was never on title and never paid rent. He is refusing to move and states that he should have been included in the will, and therefore has no obligation to move. Clearly, he has no right to remain in possession. What steps should I be taking?
Answer Five: You are correct that this person has no legal standing to remain in possession. When property is sold, the seller or a person who claims possession on behalf of the seller, must vacate. In this case, a 3-day notice to quit should be served and thereafter an eviction action could be filed.
Question Six: I purchased a building several years ago and many of the same tenants still reside in the building. The previous owner had the tenants sign a very basic rental agreement. I use the rental agreements supplied by the Apartment Owners Association, which is an excellent agreement. I have asked my tenants to sign this updated agreement, but everyone has refused. How can I force them to sign?
Answer Six: There really is no basis to force a tenant to sign a rental agreement. This would not be grounds to evict under a local rent control statute or under the Statewide Tenant Protection Act. You could implore a strategy of telling the tenant that you will forego a rent increase, in exchange for the signing of a one-year lease.
Question Seven: I have a prospective “renter” who is interested in my unit. She says she will not be able to qualify based on her credit and income. She states that she has a “boyfriend” that is a homeowner and lives nearby. He will agree to sign the lease and she will only be listed as an occupant. Do you think this would be a good idea? It appears that the “boyfriend” has excellent credit.
Answer Seven: This is a terrible idea. Your income would be based on their relationship staying intact. In general, the person who is to occupy the premises should be named as a tenant and have sufficient credit and income to lease the unit.
Question Eight: I heard that there will be an initiative on the November 2024 ballot which is entitled “Justice for Renters Act”. I am sure that this is not good news for landlords. Can you describe what this initiative is about?
Answer Eight: The initiative should be entitled “How to Destroy the Income Property Industry”. This initiative seeks to repeal the Costa Hawkins Act. Under this statute, landlords are free to charge market rent for single family homes, townhouses and condominiums. In addition, the statute guarantees vacancy decontrol. Vacancy decontrol allows a property owner the right to charge market rent on any unit that is vacant. Municipalities are barred from passing rent control for these areas. If this bill is passed, it will drastically slow down construction and adversely impact homeowners and income property owners. Clearly, your income property will decrease in value. Please do what you can to defeat this initiative. This will be the third time it has been on the ballot.
Dennis Block, of Dennis P. Block & Associates can be reached for information on landlord/tenant law or evictions at any of the following offices: Los Angeles: 323.938.2868, Encino: 818.986.3147, Inglewood: 310.673.2996, Long Beach: 310.434.5000, Ventura: 805.653.7264, Pasadena: 626.798.1014, Orange: 714.634.8232, San Diego: 619.481.5423 or by visiting www.evict123.com. Now, you can also read Dennis Block on Twitter, www.twitter.com/dennisblock or text him at (818) 570-1557. “Landlord Tenant Radio Weekly Podcasts can be heard at any time at www.EVICT123.com or download the app “EVICT123”.