(415)552-9060
Can Move I Out and Sublet to New Roommates?

Can Move I Out and Sublet to New Roommates?

Can Move I Out and Sublet to New Roommates?

I was researching on how to add new roommates to my lease in SF, and found your super article, “Tenant Troubles: Can I add a new roommate to my lease?”

I would love some help. I have a 1-bedroom rent controlled apartment, and I would like to keep it, as I love the location. The lease is originally for 1 adult occupant (myself) and my son (a teen now, a toddler when we started renting). I’ve lived there for 10 years. I entered into a new lease in a different bay area city a month ago. I need more space for a home business, and it was getting very cramped with a teen son. I work in SF and it’s convenient for me to switch up and stay in this SF apartment at times, plus it’s nice to be in my old neighborhood/stomping grounds.

I have a couple who are interested in becoming new roommates. I read your article, it was a really nice confirmation of my understanding of Rent Board Rules & Regulations § 6.15E.

I’ve notified the landlord, and let him know that I am requesting to add 2 roommates, and remove my son as an occupant, so it ends up becoming 3 occupants total, for a 1 bedroom. I’ll be responsible for full payment. The landlord is unwilling to approve of it and he did not give a reason.

I have a few questions:

1. I would like to ask what are my options in challenging this? I see that your article suggests to petition for a rent decrease for a reduction in housing services. If I go this route, can I ask for 2/3 reduction since they are refusing for me to add 2 occupants?

2. Alternatively, can I ask the Rent Board to allow the new roommates, since the landlord has no reason to reject, and it is a roomy 1 bedroom, 550 square feet? What are my chances in pursuing this option? The roommates need a place, and they were expecting to move in soon, and it would be my preferred outcome.

3. Would you recommend I use a lawyer such as yourself? I have never approached the Rent Board before.

If you have read my other articles about absentee master tenants, you know that I advise potential new roommates to never, ever move into an apartment with an absentee master tenant. See, e.g. My Absentee Master Tenant Was Scamming Me And My LandlordWhy An Absentee Master Tenant Is A Bad Idea; and I Think My Master Tenant Is Scamming Me.

Arguably, the landlord’s refusal to sublet is per se unreasonable because he did not give you a reason for his refusal. Arguably, you can simply allow the new “roommates” to move in. But I still think it’s a bad idea and here’s why.

First, you should understand how a lawyer or a judge, including an administrative law judge at the Rent Board, might read your facts if they were offered as some sort of statement under oath:

“I have a 1-bedroom rent controlled apartment, and I would like to keep it, as I love the location.” You want to keep your apartment, but you don’t need to keep it.

“The lease is originally for 1 adult occupant (myself) and my son (a teen now, a toddler when we started renting). I’ve lived there for 10 years. I entered into a new lease in a different bay area city a month ago. I need more space for a home business, and it was getting very cramped with a teen son.” Your son is a minor and he still lives with you. He moved out because you did. You have a home business. You moved out of your San Francisco apartment to get more living and working space.

“I work in SF and it’s convenient for me to switch up and stay in this SF apartment at times, plus it’s nice to be in my old neighborhood/stomping grounds.” Earlier you said you have a home business, now you say you work in SF. Which is it? I’m not saying you can’t have both, but it’s not apparent that you must come to San Francisco on a regular basis for work. You confirm that, by saying you want to come to San Francisco, occasionally, to hang out.

Based upon the facts you’ve presented here (and I’m not saying that there aren’t more), I could conclude that you want to maintain a San Francisco pied-à-terre to which you could return once and awhile to get drunk in the old neighborhood and sleep on the couch to avoid driving home.

Second, think about the new “roommates.” I’m sure they’re delighted at being able to pay below-market rent, that is unless you’re charging them airbnb rates. They may even be willing to reserve a place on the couch for you when you come to the City, but for how long?

Moreover, if the landlord gets wind of your arrangement, he will likely serve a 60-day notice to increase the rent based upon the fact that the unit is not your permanent place of residence per the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which, hopefully will be repealed in November. The landlord can allege that he has the right to increase the rent because the new “roommates” are subsequent occupants and the unit is not your permanent place of residence.

The landlord also could attempt to evict them outright under Rent Ordinance § 37.9(a)(7):

“A landlord shall not endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit unless The tenant holding at the end of the term of the oral or written agreement is a subtenant not approved by the landlord.”

I don’t think an attempt to evict, based on this section would hold much sway over a court because the landlord has unreasonably refused such approval. But that doesn’t mean that the landlord won’t try to evict, subjecting you and your new “roommates” to the massive cost of defending an eviction in court. I also believe that this section of the Rent Ordinance should be eliminated, given the Kim Amendments.

Finally, your decision to sublet rather than to simply move out weakens rent control for the rest of us. As the campaign against Costa Hawkins repeal heats up, we’re going to see ads on TV depicting crying little old ladies, the “mom and pop landlords” crying and whining about how nasty tenants, like you, usurped landlords’ god-given right to increase the rent by moving out and subletting apartments to new roommates.

To briefly answer your questions: 1) For the reasons above, I wouldn’t advise you to try to seek a decrease in rent at the Rent Board, other lawyers might, but I wouldn’t; 2) The Rent Board does not have the jurisdiction to require that the landlord accept the new “roommates”; and 3) We would not take your case, others might, but we wouldn’t.

Bad idea! Don’t do it!

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060

How Can I Get My Roommate to Leave?

How Can I Get My Roommate to Leave?

How Can I Get My Roommate to Leave?

Dave, How can I get my roommate to leave?He continues to possess the same type of behavior is most common when relations aren’t working out. – Paying rent late, having friends over during hours when everyone is sleeping at 3 am, being loud, skipping out on doing dishes, etc.  My roommate and I didn’t sign any agreements or conditions of him living here, nor did he provide any security deposit initially during the time of move-in.  I feel I am not able to find a rational reason to evict him even after talking to him that it’s best that he finds other living arrangements.  He says he’s not budging, but integrates all of these passive-aggressive tactics so that I no longer want to be living with him.  Any options you may have aside from hiring a lawyer?

DETAILS:

For 22 years, I rent a one bedroom apartment in the City of West Hollywood, CA.  The apartment  is regulated by the Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO).  There must be a Just Cause from the Property Management to reasonably evict a tenant.  The 16-unit apartment  was built in 1950, I am 49 years old male that is not disabled and currently live with my roommate who was at some point my domestic partner.  We recently have drifted apart and only use the domestic document to  for him to live with me as a family member.  I am the solely responsible for the terms of my lease.

I just would like to take the time to applaud you for the information you provide to the readers of your site.  What stands out to me are your detailed responses that empower a renter and their tenancy.

Thank you for your kind remarks. I receive calls from all over the nation and, to the extent I can, I try to provide tenants with local resources to help them deal with their local laws. As you might imagine, some of my calls come from places where most people think slavery is still legal, let alone that renters may have any rights at all. I enjoy writing this column and responding to readers because it keeps me on my toes. So it’s good to hear from you in West Hollywood, where you have an extensive rent ordinance that’s easily accessible online.

As you know, The West Hollywood Rent Ordinance requires that a tenant be evicted for a just cause:

  • Nonpayment of rent;
  • Creating a nuisance or using a rental unit for illegal purposes;
  • Subleasing without the landlord’s permission;
  • Failure to provide the landlord with reasonable access;
  • Violating written terms of tenancy with certain exceptions under the Ordinance (see below);
  • Failure to renew a lease if given proper notice to renew before the lease-term expires and the lease has gone month-to-month.
  • Termination of employment for an on-site manager or other employee who was given the unit as part of his or her employment and was not a tenant on the same property prior to employment.

The site also contains an information page called Having a Roommate, which states in part:

“When a tenant accepts rent from a roommate in West Hollywood, the roommate is the tenant’s subtenant and has a right to the protections under the Ordinance that a tenant has. Thus, a tenant may not:

  1. ask a subtenant to leave the unit without having cause under the Ordinance and without following the procedures for evicting a tenant;
  2. ask a subtenant to pay more than the Maximum Allowable Rent on a unit;
  3. increase a subtenant’s rent by more than the annual general adjustment each year and not above the tenant’s MAR in any case;
  4. increase the security deposit after a subtenant’s move-in or charge fees not allowed under the Ordinance.”

We have a similar requirement in San Francisco, except that a Master Tenant may evict a roommate without just cause only if, prior to commencement of the tenancy, the Master Tenant informs the roommate in writing that the tenancy is not subject to the just cause provisions of the Rent Ordinance. Rent Board Rules and Regulations § 6.15C.

As a long-time tenant, I understand your conundrum and I empathize with you, but as you may know, I’ve taken the blood oath to never represent master tenants seeking to evict their roommates. And that includes giving advice on the subject.

It sounds to me like you have tried to be rational with him, to no avail. If you find a lawyer, it’s likely you’ll end up with a landlord lawyer who will encourage you to cook up a just cause eviction like, maybe, nuisance because your roommate parities with his friends until 3:00 a.m. Let me tell you, that can get real sleazy, real fast, not to mention, costly. I would not advise you to try to go to the owner or property manager because they will see your complaint as as opportunity to get rid of you both.

I’m fairly certain you don’t want to move, given the length of you rent-controlled tenancy. However, it may be time to consider the psychological cost of living in your current situation. Place a dollar amount on that cost, if you can, and ask yourself, “Can I find another, similar place for the rent I’m paying plus that cost?”

Of course, you can also use that same methodology to figure out how much to offer your roommate to move out, adding what it would cost you to hire a lawyer. As Tom Gray of the Brains said before Cyndi Lauper, “Money changes everything.”

She said I’m sorry baby I’m leaving you tonight
I found someone new he’s waitin’ in the car outside
Ah honey how could you do it
We swore each other everlasting love
She said well yeah I know but when
We did; there was one thing we weren’t
Really thinking of and that’s money

If your roommate accepts your offer, get a general release of all claims from him in writing.

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060

Adding Roommates to Your Lease is Much Easier These Days

Adding Roommates to Your Lease is Much Easier These Days

Adding Roommates to Your Lease is Much Easier These Days

Since I began practicing as a tenant lawyer, I have always been appalled that a landlord could evict a tenant for “illegal” subletting (adding a roommate without permission). I maintain that it’s not a landlord’s business to approve of a subtenant as long as the original tenant keeps paying the rent and doesn’t burn down the building.

“It doesn’t make sense to give the landlord a say in picking your roommate. The original tenant or tenants are still responsible for paying the rent. The landlord retains all of his remedies to collect and to repossess the unit if the rent isn’t paid. Yet, in San Francisco the landlord is allowed to evaluate a potential roommate’s credit score; old bankruptcies; past unlawful detainers and anything else that could be argued to be relevant. The law isn’t clear on what is relevant.”

Over the years I’ve answered many questions from tenants asking about adding a roommate, like this one from 2014:

“I recently came across this post from 2011. I’m facing a similar situation (though haven’t gotten to the stage of asking my landlord yet, just want to know my rights before I start the process). I live in a 2-bedroom, rent-controlled apartment, and I’m the only one on the lease. My lease forbids subletting and says I need the landlord’s permission to add occupants.

 

My boyfriend would like to move in with me so we can both save on rent. I’ve seen references to a law passed in 2009 that you can add roommates even if the lease forbids it. How does that law factor into the response you gave in the article above?

 

The 2009 law, referenced in the Los Angeles Times article linked to your question, would have barred landlords from increasing rent above 33% of a tenant’s income and allowed tenants to add roommates other than family members to help pay rent. It was passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on June 23, 2009. The law was later vetoed by Mayor Gavin Newsom, the rapacious, oily narcissist and shill for the real estate industry, who could occasionally squeeze out a crocodile tear for tenants. Now Lt. Governor, this “liberal” Democrat personifies Democrats everywhere. If you feel smoke blowing up your ass, it’s because your house is burning down.”

I explained the current law, hoping that the tenant had sublet the unit in the past with the landlord’s knowledge and consent. But essentially I had to conclude, given the state of the law at the time, “If your boyfriend isn’t replacing a former roommate, you might be better off marrying him.” Embarrassing, especially in San Francisco in 2014!

In 2015, the most important legislation for tenants adding a roommate in San Francisco came in the form of the “Kim Amendments.”

Supervisor Jane Kim, currently running for mayor, authored and championed the Kim Amendments or Rent Ordinance 2.0, (I would enthusiastically support Ms. Kim’s candidacy, if she renounced her membership in the Democrat Party, but that’s the topic for a separate discussion.)

Essentially the Kim Amendments amended Rent Ordinance § 37.9(a)(2) to include that a landlord cannot evict a tenant, despite provisions in a lease stating otherwise, for  adding a roommate to a rental unit so long as the maximum number of occupants does not exceed the lessor of two persons in a studio unit, three persons in a one-bedroom unit, four persons in a two-bedroom unit, six persons in a three-bedroom unit, or eight persons in a four-bedroom unit; or the maximum number permitted in the unit under state law and/or other local codes such as the Building, Fire, Housing, and Planning Codes. Because the Building, Housing, Fire and Planning Codes use a person per square foot calculation, they are often more lenient. One can almost always safely assume that the occupant per bedroom standard will apply.

The landlord cannot unreasonably refuse a tenant’s written request for adding a roommate. If the landlord fails to respond to the tenant’s request  in writing within 14 days of receipt of the tenant’s written request shall be deemed approved by the landlord. Nor can the landlord refuse based on the proposed additional occupant’s lack of creditworthiness, if that person will not be legally obligated to pay some or all of the rent to the landlord—meaning that unless the landlord wants to put the subtenant on the lease (and they never do), he can’t ask for credit reports or references.

Moreover, Rent Ordinance § 37.9(a)(2)(D) provides that a landlord must serve a 10-day notice to cure to evict a tenant for illegal subletting. If served tenant can cure by simply requesting in writing with 10 days, to add the offending roommate and avoid an unlawful detainer (eviction lawsuit) altogether.

So how would I answer the question today?

I would remind the reader that Lt. Governor Gain Newsom still remains a rapacious, oily narcissist and shill for the real estate industry, who can occasionally squeeze out a crocodile tear for tenants—a typical “progressive” Democrat politician.

And I would refer her to either Rent Board Rules & Regulations § 6.15A (absolute subletting prohibition in the lease) or § 6.15B (lease requiring landlord’s written consent to subletting).

I would advise her to write the landlord to request the addition of her boyfriend and wait to see if he responds at all or tries to refuse permission. In most case, that will be the end of the process, as most blanket refusals will be deemed unreasonable.

I would point out that the landlord cannot unreasonably refuse permission unless the boyfriend has intentionally misrepresented significant facts on the landlord’s standard form application or provided significant misinformation to the landlord that interferes with the landlord’s ability to conduct a typical background check; or where the landlord can establish that her boyfriend presents a direct threat to the health, safety or security of other residents of the property; or her boyfriend presents a direct threat to the safety, security or physical structure of the property.

In other words, if the landlord could prove that her boyfriend was a liar, a sex offender or a firebug, the landlord could refuse permission. I would also suggest that my reader think twice about adding her boyfriend to the tenancy if he had any of those particular traits.

Finally, if the landlord insisted upon unreasonably refusing to add the boyfriend to the tenancy, I would advise my reader to file a decrease in services petition at the Rent Board to reduce her rent by half.

Whew! No more need for me to assert the Victorian implication that San Francisco requires partners to be married for legal cohabitation! Thanks, Jane.

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060

My Landlord Wants Me To Add My Boyfriend To My Lease. Do I Have To?

My Landlord Wants Me To Add My Boyfriend To My Lease. Do I Have To?

My Landlord Wants Me To Add My Boyfriend To My Lease. Do I Have To?

I moved into the apartment I’m renting about six months ago. The building was constructed in the 1950’s and there are two apartment units in my building. I’m paying $4000 for the two bed, two bath apartment and $150 for a garage/parking space. The other building tenant and I split the cost of the water bill and trash bill and we each pay our own gas & electricity directly.

The landlord made a big production of verifying my employment, salary, and credit history (all are in good shape) before agreeing to rent the apartment to me and I’m the sole tenant on the lease.

Since I moved in, I’ve always paid my rent and my 1/2 of the water bill on time. As God is my witness, I’ve been a quiet, low-maintenance tenant.

My landlord has a real bee in her bonnet with me and I’m not quite sure why. My boyfriend moved in with me after I signed the lease. It’s a wonderful development in our relationship. But the landlord has identified that he’s there full time (not sure how) and has twice asked that he becomes a tenant on the lease agreement. There is a clause in my lease about getting landlord approval for any guests who stay over 30 days, but the lease also later differentiates between guests and domestic partners, so I feel like it’s a little vague.

I explained to my landlord that I was happy to comply with any legal requirements that I had, but that I wanted to take sole responsibility for my obligations under the lease and that I saw no reason to add my boyfriend to it. I’ll add – he’s a nice, straight-laced kind of guy and my landlord met him and was very pleasant to him, so it’s not like I’ve got some drug fiend who I’m occasionally hooking up with holed up in the extra bedroom . So my question is, am I under any obligation to add my boyfriend to the lease?

Have you heard the old proverb, “Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth?” A useful reminder of the meaning of the saying can be found in The Phrase Finder:

As horses develop they grow more teeth and their existing teeth begin to change shape and project further forward. Determining a horse’s age from its teeth is a specialist [sic] task, but it can be done.

The advice given in the ‘don’t look…’ proverb is: when receiving a gift be grateful for what it is; don’t imply you wished for more by assessing its value.

Simply put, you are not required to accept your landlord’s offer to put your boyfriend on the lease, but it may be the only way to legally establish his residence in the building.

You don’t want to add your boyfriend to the lease. You prefer that he resides in the unit as a subtenant, that his lease is with you rather than the landlord. In other words you will be subletting the extra bedroom to him. I still speak to many tenants who don’t understand that adding a roommate is a form of subletting. Many tenants still believe that subletting only occurs when one temporarily rents an entire unit to person. Not true.

You have not provided the language in your lease that limits or prohibits your ability to sublet, so I’m going to assume that your lease is fairly standard and prohibits subletting without the written consent of the landlord.

In that case, because the building is subject to the Rent Control Ordinance, your ability to obtain the landlord’s reasonable consent is governed by Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15A. Your issues is the same as the one I recently discussed in “Did Gavin Newsom Make It Harder For My Boyfriend To Move In With Me?” You aren’t making a one-for-one replacement of a roommate. While there is an argument to be made that you should be able to rent the second bedroom, it doesn’t fall squarely within the statute. Perhaps you could construe the landlord’s offer to add the boyfriend to lease as an acceptance of his subtenancy, but that’s a stretch.

The difference is that you’re not ready to marry this guy yet. That’s an important distinction to make. If you add your boyfriend to the lease, he becomes a co-occupant. What if you break up and he doesn’t want to move out? You can’t evict him and he can’t evict you. Potential problem.

Read Rent Board Rules and Regulations §6.14. Whenever I decide to reread the regulation I rent a cabin in a very remote area for a weekend. I bring extra copies of the statute and my 357 Magnum. I read the rule for awhile, then I take a copy out back and use it for target practice. Then I read for awhile and repeat. By Sunday I think I understand it.

Then I suggest you revisit the issue with the landlord. Thank her for offering to add your boyfriend to the lease. Tell her that it’s more beneficial to her to allow you to add your boyfriend as a subtenant, a subsequent occupant. In the unlikely case that you move out, the landlord would be stuck with your boyfriend and she could not increase the rent. Tell the landlord you would gladly accept service of a 6.14 notice, informing your boyfriend in case you vacate, he will be subject to a rent increase to market rate.

The landlord should be delighted…unless she wants to evict you for illegal subletting because she can increase the rent to $10,000.00 a month. Isn’t that the going rate for a two-bedroom in North Beach?

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060

Did Gavin Newsom Make It Harder For My Boyfriend To Move In With Me?

Did Gavin Newsom Make It Harder For My Boyfriend To Move In With Me?

Did Gavin Newsom Make It Harder For My Boyfriend To Move In With Me?

I recently came across this post from 2011. I’m facing a similar situation (though haven’t gotten to the stage of asking my landlord yet, just want to know my rights before I start the process). I live in a 2-bedroom, rent-controlled apartment, and I’m the only one on the lease. My lease forbids subletting and says I need the landlord’s permission to add occupants.

My boyfriend would like to move in with me so we can both save on rent. I’ve seen references to a law passed in 2009 that you can add roommates even if the lease forbids it. How does that law factor into the response you gave in the article above?

The additional “catch” in my situation is that my boyfriend has 50% custody of his 2 kids, so they’d be living with us half the time. How do the kids impact the situation? If I go and ask permission to have my boyfriend move in, do I even need to mention the kids?

The 2009 law referenced in the Los Angeles Times article linked to your question would have barred landlords from increasing rent above 33% of a tenant’s income and allowed tenants to add roommates other than family members to help pay rent. It was passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on June 23, 2009.

The law was later vetoed by Mayor Gavin Newsom, the rapacious, oily narcissist and shill for the real estate industry who could occasionally squeeze out a crocodile tear for tenants. Now Lt. Governor, this “liberal” Democrat personifies Democrats everywhere. If you feel smoke blowing up your ass, it’s because your house is burning down.

You don’t mention if you had roommates in the past. If you did, the process to add your boyfriend would be fairly straightforward. San Francisco Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15B provides the procedure for adding a subtenant if the roommate is a one-for-one replacement  of an outgoing roommate. Rent Ordinance §37.9(a)(2)(A) states:

Provided that notwithstanding any lease provision to the contrary, a landlord shall not endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit as a result of subletting of the rental unit by the tenant if the landlord has unreasonably withheld the right to sublet following a written request by the tenant, so long as the tenant continues to reside in the rental unit and the sublet constitutes a one-for-one replacement of the departing tenant(s).  If the landlord fails to respond to the tenant in writing within fourteen (14) days of receipt of the tenant’s written request, the tenant’s request shall be deemed approved by the landlord.

If your boyfriend isn’t replacing a former roommate, you might be better off marrying him.

The Rent Ordinance allows a tenant to add family member, spouse or domestic partner to the tenancy. Rent Ordinance §37.9(a)(2)(B) also provides:

A landlord’s reasonable refusal of the tenant’s written request may not be based on the proposed additional occupant’s lack of creditworthiness, if that person will not be legally obligated to pay some or all of the rent to the landlord.

With respect to your children, you can also add them to the tenancy under Rent Ordinance §37.9(a)(2)(B) as long as the total number of occupants does not exceed the maximum number of occupants stated in the ordinance. If you case, the maximum allowable number of occupants is four (4) for a two-bedroom unit, so that shouldn’t be a problem.

Maybe it’s time to reintroduce the 2009 amendment to understand if the current Supes have any guts and to see how Mr. Lee treats the legislation if it passes.

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060

Screwed by Costa Hawkins

Screwed by Costa Hawkins

Screwed by Costa Hawkins

I think I have been screwed by Costa Hawkins. I live in Noe valley SF in a rent controlled apartment. I have been at this apartment for 4 years. The lease is in my roommate’s name. He is moving out and the landlord wants me to sign a new lease and increase the rent 50%.

I always paid my roommate directly without exchanging money with the landlord.  But the landlord knows that I have been living here, he has my phone number etc.

Do I count as a tenant? Can I argue that even without being on the lease rent control applies to me because that was my only residence for 4 years?

Note that I’m OK with increasing the rent but hopefully not that much (I’d be happy with 25%). Do I have anything to negotiate with or can he just make me move out if I don’t accept the new rent?

Of course you count as a tenant.

Rent Ordinance §37.2(t) defines tenant: “A person entitled by written or oral agreement, sub-tenancy approved by the landlord, or by sufferance, to occupy a residential dwelling unit to the exclusion of others.” Note that a tenant under the Rent Ordinance can even be a person at sufferance, the legal term for a holdover tenant, a tenant occupying a unit without permission from the landlord.

Judging by the behavior of the landlord, you are an approved subtenant because he is willing to negotiate a new lease with you and let you remain in the premises.

The problem is that the rent control provisions of the Ordinance don’t apply to you because you are a “subsequent occupant.”

California Civil Code §1954.53(d)(2) mandates:

If the original occupant or occupants who took possession of the dwelling or unit pursuant to the rental agreement with the owner no longer permanently reside there, an owner may increase the rent by any amount allowed by this section to a lawful sublessee or assignee who did not reside at the dwelling or unit prior to January 1, 1996.

If you are a regular reader of “Tenant Troubles” you should recognize that California Civil Code §1954.53 is called the Costa Hawkins Rent Housing Act, a bi-partisan law enacted in 1995 by the band of pandering griftocrats we call our state legislators.

Costa Hawkins eviscerated local rent control so bona fide tenants like you get screwed because you’re not an “original tenant.”

The only way you can argue that that you could be entitled to the rent control protections of the Rent Ordinance is to prove that you are a “co-occupant.”

Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.14 defines a co-occupant as “a subsequent occupant who has a rental agreement directly with the owner.” Rules & Regulations §6.14(c) applies to you and states:

When all original occupant(s) no longer permanently reside in a rental unit, and the last of the original occupants vacated on or after April 25, 2000, the landlord may establish a new base rent of any subsequent occupant(s) who is not a co-occupant and who commenced occupancy of the unit on or after January 1, 1996 without regard to the limitations set forth in Section 37.3(a) of the Rent Ordinance unless the subsequent occupant proves that the landlord waived his or her right to increase the rent by:

(1) Affirmatively representing to the subsequent occupant that he/she may remain in possession of the unit at the same rental rate charged to the original occupant(s); or

(2) Failing, within 90 days of receipt of written notice that the last original occupant is going to vacate the rental unit or actual knowledge that the last original occupant no longer permanently resides at the unit, whichever is later, to serve written notice of a rent increase or a reservation of the right to increase the rent at a later date; or

(3) Receiving written notice from an original occupant of the subsequent occupant’s occupancy and thereafter accepting rent unless, within 90 days of said acceptance of rent, the landlord reserved the right to increase the rent at a later date.

Where the landlord has waived the right to increase the rent under subsection (c)(1) or (c)(3) above, the subsequent occupant to whom the representation was made or from whom the landlord accepted rent shall thereafter have the protection of an original occupant as to any future rent increases under this Section 6.14. Where the landlord has waived the right to increase the rent under subsection (c)(2) above, any subsequent occupant who permanently resides in the rental unit with the actual knowledge and consent of the landlord (if the landlord’s consent is required and not unreasonably withheld) at the time of the waiver shall thereafter have the protection of an original occupant as to any future rent increases under this Section 6.14.

As you can see, it’s very difficult to prove that you are a co-occupant unless you moved in at the same time as the master tenant or established a direct relationship with the landlord, e.g. paid the rent directly to the landlord and the landlord treated you like a tenant and promised you (in writing) that someday you could “inherit” the tenancy at the same rental rate.

Try to make the best deal possible with the landlord.

If you fail to come to an agreement, remind him that he must serve a 60-day notice to increase the rent more than 10% (Civil Code §827.) Then take all of you documentation to the San Francisco Tenants Union and purchase a membership to assess your chances for success if you file a Rent Board Petition for a wrongful rent increase.

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060

We’re Basically Paying Our Master Tenant’s Rent. That’s Wrong, Right?

We’re Basically Paying Our Master Tenant’s Rent. That’s Wrong, Right?

We’re Basically Paying Our Master Tenant’s Rent. That’s Wrong, Right?

I am a 26-year-old female and have been living in an old Victorian apartment in a six unit building in Nob Hill for the past 11 months, paying rent only my roommate, who is on the lease. There are a total of four of us living in the apartment (another roommate and I pay $924 for our smaller rooms and another pays $1190 for her larger room, a converted dining room).

The problem is that we know that our fourth roommate (the lease holder) pays next to nothing. Rent is $3200 a month (he does not know we know this). He pays for all utilities with the checks that we write, as well, but who knows how much utilities add up to since he discloses nothing.

I know that he is charging us “market rate” for our rooms and that he will have a ton of folks willing to pay even more than what we are now, so I don’t want him to kick me out for questioning him, but it just feels wrong! I should also mention that I have no written agreement with him. He has been unemployed for 10 months now and often travels. When he leaves he charges $1300 a month to random subleasers for his room (usually finding them on Airbnb or Craigslist). 

I love my apartment and would really like to become the master tenant or at least get added to the lease so I have some rights. Is there anyway to get him off the lease? Is there anything I can do here or should I just let it go and realize that this is what I get for living in a city with such insane housing prices?

Tenants march and demonstrate in the Mission every week. They claim that soaring rents and “development” projects destroy community. Clearly, they’re wrong.

Yours is one of many micro-communities that have evolved in response to property owner greed. Your new community comes complete with a class system ruled by a lazy, greedy landlord.

You need to look at Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15C(3):

Partial Sublets. In the event a Master Tenant does not sublease the entire rental unit, as anticipated in Section 37.3 (c), then the Master Tenant may charge the subtenant(s) no more than the subtenant(s) proportional share of the total current rent paid to the landlord by the Master Tenant for the housing and housing services to which the subtenant is entitled under the sub-lease. A master tenant’s violation of this section shall not constitute a basis for eviction under Section 37.9.

If you can get a copy of the original lease or can obtain some other document proving the actual amount of rent, you can file a petition at the Rent Board alleging that you’re paying a disproportionate share of the rent.

So if you want to stop subsidizing “Mr. I-Haven’t-Worked-In-Ten-Months-But-You-Can-Catch-Me-In-Bali,” file a petition to even out the rent.

There are two problems with this approach. First, you could receive a ginormous award of back rent from the Rent Board, but you won’t be able to collect it. Mr. Leisure doesn’t work and besides, he spent all your dough smoking opium in Chiang Mai.

Second, when the real landlord gets word of the strife in your unit, the landlord will kick you all out.

Why? Because these “entrepreneur” master tenants never get consent from the landlord for subletting, which is usually a violation of the lease.

There is nothing you can do to get your master tenant off the lease, and yes, this is what you get for living in a city with such insane housing prices.

This is what you get when we allow a leisure class to drain our resources, to suck your life’s blood like the vampires they are. (Had to get Halloween in here.)

This is what you get when you naively allow greed to run rampant without standing against it. Perhaps you mistakenly think that someday you could be a landlord (but a good one). You think (like your master tenant) that it’s somehow justifiable to seize every opportunity to profit, despite the pain and suffering you may cause.

This is what you get when you don’t truly understand that rent is simply an outrageous tax you pay to a lord to live on his land–a tax, nothing more, that subsidizes a lazy, unproductive aristocracy.

Didn’t we already have a revolution about that?

See my post Bad Master Tenant.

Call the Tenant Lawyers now for a free consultation.
(415) 552-9060