(415)552-9060
My Landlord’s Jacking My Rent Way Up After I Complained About Maintenance

My Landlord’s Jacking My Rent Way Up After I Complained About Maintenance

My Landlord’s Jacking My Rent Way Up After I Complained About Maintenance

I Complained About Maintenance.

Building was built 8 years ago. Two roommates and I rent a three-bedroom condo from its owner. Rented it to us as a three-bedroom, but we have good information that the third bedroom is illegal–built without a permit.

Construction on the building has kept us from using around a third of our unit. After writing many complaint letters he ignored, last month he sent us a notice that he was increasing our rent by around a third. We feel this is in retaliation for complaining about being partially constructively evicted from our unit. Rent is 3500, increase is for 1200.

Do we fall under the ordinance?

Unfortunately, because the building is a newer one, built after 1979, you are not covered by the San Francisco Rent Ordinance. You can only avail yourselves of the protections of California law. You may as well be living in Bakersfield.

That doesn’t mean that you don’t have any tenant rights. Your rights are just more antiquated and harder to enforce. It’s like you’ve traveled back in time about 40 or 50 years. The Billboard Magazine Number One pop song in 1961 was, appropriately, “Tossin’ and Turnin’” by Bobby Lewis. You’re probably doing a little of that, dealing with your Cheese Ball landlord.

The first thing to do is check to see if the landlord has the requisite building permits for the construction. It’s amazing how often arrogant wads, like your landlord, don’t bother to get permits. And on top of that, don’t consider that their tenants might get angry and turn them in.

Go to the Department of Building Inspection Online Permit and Complaint Tracking site, type in the address and check if the landlord has the permits. Also see if there are other complaints on the unit or the entire building. Remember the unit is considered a single family dwelling because it’s a condo. The building may have separate complaints.

Next, call a Housing Inspector to write up violations in your unit. It doesn’t matter if the work is legal or not if you have substantial violations of the implied warranty of habitability.

Finally, the rent increase may very well be a violation of California Civil Code § 1942.5which defines and provides remedies for retaliatory evictions. Civil Code § 1942.5 essentially provides that the landlord is presumed to have served the rent increase notice in retaliation if it was served less than 180 days after a complaint from the tenant regarding the habitability of a unit. The code also provides for statutory damages and attorney’s fees to a prevailing party.

Go to the San Francisco Tenants Union to discuss your issues with a counselor. You can flesh out your possible causes of action and develop a strategy to deal with your landlord. You should at least write him a letter warning him that you will sue him if he continues his behavior.

Hopefully, you have some DBI notices of violation to support a demand that the construction is completed in a timely manner.

Do not withhold your rent. You do not want to be a defendant in an unlawful detainer (eviction) lawsuit. Alway complain about maintenance in writing.

After all is said and done, you get to sue your landlord. Isn’t that wonderful? You get to hire an attorney. You get to spend a couple of years thinking about and dealing with your landlord, whether you still live in the unit or not.

If you talk to me, it’s likely that I’m going to tell you the same thing that I tell tenants every day, “Make a business decision.” In your case, your landlord will have the absolute right to evict you without cause somewhere down the line. He will also be able to increase the rent to more or less whatever he wants, if not now, later.

Usually, apartments without rent control are not worth fighting for. Depending on the provable damages, many affirmative lawsuits are not worth the aggravation. That’s why landlords get away with so much shit. They make the laws. They know that tenants often don’t have the means or the time or the stomachs to fight them.

I hope you can solve your problems with your landlord. If you can’t and you’re pissed off, the chances are that your anger would be better served working to change the laws than to sue the landlord. Join the San Francisco Tenants Union and/or call Tenants Togetherand ask them how you can help.

In the meantime, consider the 1961 Number Five Billboard hit, “Runaway” by Dell Shannon. Maybe it’s a song your landlord should be singing.

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

How Can I Buy Property In SF And Not Burn In Hell?

How Can I Buy Property In SF And Not Burn In Hell?

How Can I Buy Property In SF And Not Burn In Hell?

Having read your “Tenant Troubles” blog and examined your website, I am curious as to your personal view of bona fide OMI evictions / good faith owner-move-in buyouts.  I should be clear, I’m not looking for your advice in the interest of the landlord, but rather advice in the interest of tenants, AS a (potential) landlord.

We are currently looking to buy somewhere to live in in SF and many places we have looked at are two units, both tenant occupied.  My husband and I have no interest in raising rents or emptying the building for the purposes of raising rent in the future however we do need somewhere to live.  We don’t own any other property in SF.  I am aware it is possibly within our legal rights to do an OMI eviction on one unit (and leave the other occupied as is, rent controlled and all).  However the thought of being an evicting landlord (colorful adjectives you use such as sleazy, lying, greedy etc, I don’t THINK apply but still, we would be displacing someone from their home, there’s no way around it…) does not sit easily.

I fully support rent and eviction controls on principle.  I value the notion of ‘home’ over ‘home ownership’ (UnAmerican I know).  Should I just walk away from occupied properties?  Don’t buy SF property at all?  Someone else will buy and evict no doubt.  Is there a way to do this and have everyone come out on top?  What’s the way forward?

A few years ago a very dear of mine came to me seeking my thoughts on this very issue. She and her husband, long time San Francisco residents and City employees wanted to buy a building with two units, one for them and one for retiring parent.

The market was off its rocker, fueled by what we now know was a Ponzi scheme designed by corrupt banks, mortgage brokers and realtors. Two unit buildings were being snapped up by speculators to be converted into TICs and condos. Tenants were being evicted right and left, because the cheapest buildings were those occupied by tenants, especially long-term disabled and elderly tenants.

My friend has long been a social justice advocate, but she found herself in a position similar to yours. My friend had just seen a building that would be perfect for her and her family, a building in a good location that was priced right and could accommodate her family’s growth. She was planning to have a baby. But the building had tenants and in one unit, elderly tenants.

As we spoke, I described the cases I was defending and others I’d witnessed at theTenants Union. I told her horror story after horror story. During our conversation, I witnessed something that I will never forget. I saw my friend become resolute in her ideals.

We both came to the conclusion that community begins at home and that nobody should have the right to disrupt community simply because they can afford to do so.

With the courage of their convictions, my friend and her family bought a two unit building that was vacant. They paid top dollar so that they could sleep at night. My friend could raise her daughter and speak of social justice without underlying hypocrisy. My friend’s decision was brave and principled but it came at a cost–brave, principled decisions usually do.

If you think about it, much of what is wrong in our country today comes from bottom line thinking that has utterly no regard for its effects on people.

I can tell that you’re conflicted and I think you may trying to do the right thing, but if your decisions are colored by our culture as it is evolving, you’ll be wrong every time. For example, if you believe in “home over home ownership,” why do you need to buy at all?

And why would you even think that your values are “unAmerican”? Do you actually believe that one-third of Americans (renters) are unAmerican?

My advice to you is the same I gave to my friend, buy a place that doesn’t have tenants. Buy a condo or a house or an unoccupied building with a friend. But before you do, find out if the building was previously emptied by an Ellis eviction.

Ellis eviction notices are registered with the Rent Board and they will also show up in a title search. Ask your realtor if tenants were evicted at all to market a unit. He or she will lie, but watch them squirm when you ask. That alone should drive you crazy if you truly care about a stable community.

Also ask yourself if you really want to own property in a city where everybody is rich; a city that drives out its young people because they can’t afford to come back from college and live here. Think about your role in that, if you pay an exorbitant, insane price for a unit in a building.

Community begins at home. Sit down with your husband tonight and discuss what kind of a community you want to live in. Understand that your decision, however small it may be in the larger scope, may have a ripple effect.

Finally, understand that if you make the wrong decision and buy a building in which you evict tenants, you will burn in hell forever.

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

How Do I Get Reimbursed For Utility Overages That Aren’t My Fault?

How Do I Get Reimbursed For Utility Overages That Aren’t My Fault?

How Do I Get Reimbursed For Utility Overages That Aren’t My Fault?

Utility overcharges.

I rent a one bedroom apartment in a Victorian house that was constructed about 120 years ago.  The house has 4 units, one of which is owner occupied.  I pay $1750 a month plus $150 for garage parking and I’ve been in the unit since June 2010.

My lease requires that I have the water bill in my own name and pay it, which I do.  For over a year, the bill was about $50.  Late last year, it’s started increasing dramatically, and my most recent bill was over $200.  I called SFPUC and they told me they could tell I have a leak because the water is always being consumed, even at night.  I set up a time for an inspection which my landlord attended.  I could not attend as I was working.  She informed me that the inspector said the leak was not in the unit but elsewhere in the building.  She informed me she would have her son look into it, and that he has some expertise in this area.  That was two weeks ago.

I believe that my landlord is responsible for the overage due to the leak.  SFPUC says they will reimburse for half of the overage when we prove that it has been repaired.  How do I (1) get this repair done ASAP, (2) get my landlord to pay the overage, either all of it or what’s not reimbursed by PUC.

My landlord is generally a nice person but the house could be in better repair.  I don’t know if it’s an illegal unit or not, and if I got the building inspector out, I’m pretty sure they would find a good number of problems.  I don’t intend to stay in this apartment long term but do plan to stay for at least six months.  I don’t want to cause more trouble than necessary, but I want my money back for the over paid water.  Should I start deducting it from my rent?  What about the last 4 bills that were high?  What is a legal, polite but assertive way to handle this?

This is an issue that is more common than you might think. I’m not clear on whether you are paying the water bill for the whole building or just for your unit. Unit water meters, while becoming more common, are not often found in old Victorian buildings. That’s why it is more common that landlords pay for water.

A side issue here could be that the house had been chopped into units illegally. If you are also sharing your PG&E bill or your utilities are included in your rent, you should look into the possibility that your unit is illegal. SF Assessor-Recorder’s website. Of course, if your unit is illegal, that would open up a can of worms that I’m not going to discuss here.

Unfortunately, in my experience, when landlords ask their sons to look into anything, nothing gets done. Certainly, her son could be a licensed plumber and I may be wrong. But that’s the point, she is going to need the help of a professional to find and fix the leak.

You need to compile all of the documents you received from SFPUC. You need something in writing from them that states you did not cause the leak and/or that the leak is coming from a part of the building not associated with your apartment. Compile all of your water bills to get an average charge to demonstrate the amount of the utility overcharges.

Then simply ask the landlord to reimburse you. I think that should be done in writing and the letter should include a brief synopsis with the proof that you are in no way responsible for the leak. (BTW, I believe that letters should always be one page long, two if you must.)

This is also the time to mention that she needs to repair any conditions in your unit that may represent a substantial decrease in services–roof leaks, heating issues, broken windows, etc. You should go to the San Francisco Tenants Union to discuss this with a tenant counselor.

If the landlord doesn’t make the other repairs in a timely manner, call a Housing Inspector for the Department of Building Inspection to get any violations on the record.

If your landlord refuses to reimburse you, or, more likely, just stalls, you should notdeduct the overpayment from your rent because you could risk an allegation that you breached your lease by failing to pay your full rent for the month.

As I’ve said many times, it’s always better to be a plaintiff in a legal action rather than a defendant. File a petition alleging a substantial decrease in housing services at the San Francisco Rent Board instead.

You have already compiled your evidence, now all you have to do is fill out the form and file it. You should include any other decreases in service regarding habitability of the premises with supporting evidence. The Tenants Union can also help you with this.

One of the reasons I like working with tenants is that they’re usually nice people who are not vindictive. Most just want to get what they pay for and live their lives. Most don’t want to sue anybody and they usually look for the humane, civilized approach to resolve problems. Sometimes problems can be resolved in that manner.

Unfortunately, the landlord-tenant paradigm is based upon engrained beliefs that the landlord is always in control. When tenants attempt to assert their rights in any manner, however politely, the old passive aggressive lord of the manner mentality can rear its ugly, antiquated head.

Landlords, especially those who live with their tenants, may forget that their relationship with their tenants is simply a business relationship, no more no less.

The legal, polite way to handle this is to be polite but direct. The leak needs to be fixed and you want your money back. If this doesn’t happen, you dispassionately use the legal system to resolve the issue, no more, no less.

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

If I’m Rich, Am I Still Protected By Rent Control?

If I’m Rich, Am I Still Protected By Rent Control?

If I’m Rich, Am I Still Protected By Rent Control?

I live in a two-unit building where the owner lives in one unit. The building was built in 1900. They are both legal units and I pay $3,900.00 per month.

Is it true the rent can only go up .5%? I make over 400K per year but don’t want to pay any more than I have to.

When I read the laws of rent control my interpretation is that for a building like mine that only portions of the rent control apply to my situation covering evictions and such but don’t cover the actual rental fee. I know my landlord doesn’t cover his costs monthly on the rental and he will want to raise the rent if he can.

I love this question! It’s a great set-up (intended or not.) Rich tenant exploiting struggling landlord. Shouldn’t we all have their problems? I feel like I’m sitting behind a desk at ACORN; a prostitute and her pimp asking me for advice about buying a house and hiding their source of income… Okay, I’ll bite.

Unless the units were converted to condominiums, your tenancy is protected by both major provisions of the Rent Ordinance. Your rent can only be increased by the allowable annual increases established by the Rent Board and you can only be evicted for for one of the 15 just causes. If your unit is not a condominium you are correct. Beginning March 1, 2011, the annual allowable increase is .5%, half a percent. Last year’s increase was .1%.

If your unit is a condominium (a legal single-family dwelling) then your tenancy is only covered by the just cause provisions of the Ordinance. The landlord can raise the rent to “market rate.”

Really, the landlord could raise the rent as much as he wanted, but if he tried to raise your rent to, say $10,000.00 a month, that indicates that his “dominant motive” is to evict you–a violation of the Rent Ordinance.

Of course there are other allowable increases a landlord can levy: capital improvement passtroughs; operation and maintenance costs; utility cost passthroughs, etc. Generally, however, you won’t have to pay a penny more than $3,919.50 if your rent is increased after March 1, 2011.

A rent increase of 20 bucks for a tenant who makes $400,000.00 per year, is this fair?

The Rent Ordinance was enacted in 1979 because:

“Tenants displaced as a result of their inability to pay increased rents must relocate but as a result of such housing shortage are unable to find decent, safe and sanitary housing at affordable rent levels. Aware of the difficulty in finding decent housing, some tenants attempt to pay requested rent increases, but as a consequence must expend less on other necessities of life. This situation has had a detrimental effect on substantial numbers of renters in the City, especially creating hardships on senior citizens, persons on fixed incomes and low and moderate income households.” (San Francisco Rent Ordinance §37.1(b)(2).)

Every once and a while landlords squeeze into their green tights and with Robin Hood-like indignation point at tenants like our reader and demand “means testing” for rent control.

They claim that our reader and his ilk are always going to be able to afford increased rents and that he doesn’t deserve the protections of rent control. His unit, they cry, should be removed from the statutory protections. At first blush, this may seem fair…until you take a closer look.

Means testing, the application of an income threshold to remove a unit from control,would not create a single new affordable rental unit. Instead it would serve to remove vast numbers of units from rent control protections forever.

Think about it, a landlord with a wealthy tenant can raise the rent to whatever he wants, whenever he wants to. By virtue of those increases alone, only wealthy people will be able to afford his unit, insuring that the unit will stay at “market rate” forever. A landlord in that position has no incentive to rent to a tenant whose income may fall below the threshold.

If means testing is enacted, all tenants will have to prove eligibility for rent control. If you don’t like sending your tax returns to the IRS, how are you going to feel sending a second set to your landlord?

Finally, imagine the bureaucracy necessary to enact a means control scheme. The Rent Board would be flooded with petitions seeking to review renters’ tax returns.

Tenants, don’t get fooled about “fairness.” Means testing won’t create more affordable units nor will it provide revenue to do so. Means testing is simply a scheme to rob from the rich and give to the richer–another ploy to eviscerate the Rent Ordinance.

If we’re truly concerned about the rich paying their fair share, it’s time to revive the graduated income tax with upper level tax rates of 80-90%, just like in the days of that old socialist, Richard Nixon.

Let the IRS sort it out, not the Rent Board.

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

Can I Get Evicted For Adding A Lock To My Closet?

Can I Get Evicted For Adding A Lock To My Closet?

Can I Get Evicted For Adding A Lock To My Closet?

I have been having a hard time with my landlord/management (the building was sold in July-no one was notified) and someone entered my apartment (which is in an SRO hotel) and put some nasty stuff in my closet.

I am 67 years old and I’ve lived here for over 20 years. Because of this incident, I want to put a lock on my closet. Is that permitted in a hotel?

Before I answer your question, I want to point out that it is a violation of Rent Ordinance 37.9(k) to fail to inform tenants that a building is on the market. The ordinance also provides that tenants must be informed of their rights in a notification that the building is for sale.

If real estate agents know about this they’re not letting on. I see many cases in which landlords have failed to inform the tenants of a pending sale.

As you may be aware, Single Room Occupancy Hotels (SROs) are covered by the San Francisco Rent Ordinance and state law. You have the same rights as a tenant in an apartment.

You need to check your lease to see if it allows you to “alter” the apartment without the consent of the landlord. If you don’t have a lease, you may install a lock on the closet without further ado.

If your lease states that you can only alter the apartment with consent of the landlord, you have two choices. You can write the landlord and request written consent or you can install the lock and see what happens.

If the landlord notices the lock and wants you to remove it, he must serve you a three-day notice to cure or quit, meaning that you have three days to remove the lock before the landlord can serve you with an unlawful detainer lawsuit to evict you. You can choose to remove the lock to avoid an unawful detainer or you can choose to fight the eviction.

Luckily, seniors (60+ years old) can receive free unlawful detainer representation at Legal Assistance for the Elderly. The program has a staff crackerjack housing attorneys who know how to defend evictions.

Frankly, I don’t think a jury would toss you out of your home simply because you put a lock on a closet, but as I have said in several columns, fighting an eviction in court is tricky. Before you decide to defend an eviction, talk to LAE or the San Francisco Tenants Union to develop a strategy.

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

Time To Hire A Private Eye To Go After Your Landlord

Time To Hire A Private Eye To Go After Your Landlord

Time To Hire A Private Eye To Go After Your Landlord

I have lived in my rent controlled North Beach flat since 1994. In April 2010, a new landlord purchased the building and began eviction proceedings. The tenants in the basement accepted a buyout to move out of the illegal unit they were living in. My roommate and I were also offered a buyout which we refused. Nothing happened until November 30, 2010, when we received a 60 day end of tenancy notice.

The lawyer my landlord hired is an experienced eviction lawyer.

The landlord is claiming he lives in the building in the top empty unit, and is trying to evict my roommate and I so that his brother can move in. I went to the rent board and filed a wrongful eviction because the landlord does not live in the building. I was trying to settle with the landlord, but now they are claiming that my roommate and I never paid last month’s rent and a deposit–a claim my old landlord also made.

I have no records of paying for the last month’s rent and the deposit and when I called Bank of America for copies of my processed checks, they told me they don’t keep copies beyond 7 years. I was young and naive and did not keep copies and I did not make sure that these amounts were included in my lease.

My questions to you are:

1) How can I prove my landlord does not live in the unit? Is it pretty much his word against mine? He owns a condo is SF, which I believe is his primary residence, but he claims he lives in the building and is in the process of selling his condo.

2) Is there anything I can do about the last month’s rent and deposit? Is my old landlord required to keep copies of these records? Is there anything I can do about this?

Whenever I get a case like this, I carefully check the Owner Move In (OMI) Notice. There are specific requirements for an OMI notice that must be followed to the letter.Sometimes even experienced landlord lawyers can omit the details.

For example, sometimes the landlord “forgets” to tell his lawyer about other residential properties he owns. Not listing those properties could invalidate an OMI notice. If you haven’t had an experienced tenant counselor or lawyer read your notice, you should do so immediately. Go to the San Francisco Tenants Union. The counselors there know what to look for in an OMI notice.

The next thing to do is find out if the landlord owns residential properties other than those listed on the notice. You can search online for properties under the landlord’s name at the SF Assessor-Recorder’s website. But I think you can do a more comprehensive address search at the Assessor-Recorder’s office in City Hall. I would also check to see if the brother owns any properties.

If the landlord hasn’t listed all of this residential properties, the notice is invalid. You may also be able to use the information to help you understand where the landlord really lives.

The law is clear that the landlord has to live in the building to be able to serve a relative move-in notice, so there may be a timing issue. That the landlord is hemming and hawing about selling the condo is worth investigating.

Unless the brother now lives in a mansion in Forest Hills that has not been sold or you can somehow obtain photos of the empty unit in your building, it can be difficult to prove where that the landlord is lying.

You need a shamus, a private eye, private dick, you know, a private investigator like Phillip MarloweJake Gittes or Jonathan Ames to fully investigate. You should hire a PI with particular experience investigating landlords. Many tenant lawyers use private investigators in cases like this. I like working with investigators who are sympathetic to tenants.

A PI can find records that are difficult for laymen to get. She can go through the landlord’s trash to try to find documents revealing his true motive. She can also investigate the brother.

Unless you have very good evidence that the landlord is lying, it’s probably not a good idea to stay in the unit past the notice period and risk getting evicted. As I have said before, eviction defense is expensive and complicated.

Sometimes the better move is to just vacate the unit and wait for the landlord to screw up, i.e., the brother doesn’t move in or the landlord never sells the condo, etc. We also use PIs for ongoing investigations like this. A good PI has many tricks to find out who is living in a given building.

One of the best resources to check the coming and going in a building is your neighbors. You’ve lived in the neighborhood for 16 years. You know people. The landlord doesn’t. You should ask your neighbors to keep an eye on the place. I have seen a couple of cases in which the landlord actually bragged to neighbors about how he evicted the tenant. It’s not surprising; stupidity and arrogance are in no short supply in the landlord business.

Regarding your security deposit, unless you can find a copy of your lease that shows how much you paid, you’re probably SOL. Landlords don’t have to account for shit in California.

Situations like these underscore the need for security deposit law reform. Many other states require landlords to create a separate, interest bearing trust account for security deposits. As you may know, I believe that hundreds of millions of dollars are simply stolen by landlords each year in California. It’s time for the trust account requirement, among other reforms, to be instituted in California.

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

My Landlord Wants Me To Move Out So He Can Sell My Apartment

My Landlord Wants Me To Move Out So He Can Sell My Apartment

My Landlord Wants Me To Move Out So He Can Sell My Apartment

I live at the top of a 4-story, single-family home (garage included) with 2 owners, 1 owns the downstairs unit and my landlord owns his floor as well as my unit above him. My landlord, in addition to his investment partner, owns his unit as well as mine. The investment partner owns a 50% share. I received a call today from the investment partner that they intended to sell both the units and would offer me first and last months rent to help me move out.

I already presume that my tenancy rights are at stake, especially since this sounds like a potential Ellis Act move. My landlord and I have had numerous problems with the downstairs neighbors, who are completely irrational owners that are involved with our overall “living” situation. The investment partner mentioned that the neighbors are going to build a barricade. The other unfortunate thing about the living arrangements is we all share a washer and dryer downstairs. We have tried compromising with these owners but they really are completely unreasonable. I could even take them to court for harassment I’m sure.

I mentioned to the landlord’s investor that I would be interested in buying the property. What is your view on this overall situation. I like the property so much I am willing to buy it and either put up with or sue the downstairs neighbors. I may become part of the conversation with the real estate agent this weekend.

I went ahead and filed a “Report of Alleged Wrongful Eviction” with the Rent Board today to protect myself as this situation continues to unfold.

Any other recommendations or perspective you have that could shed some light on what I am dealing with legally would be most helpful because I am truly trying everything in my power to hang on to this place.

I’m going to try to answer your question with the caveat that I am unclear about the status of your building. Is it a single-family house legally divided into three units? When you mentioned that the downstairs neighbors are going to “build a barricade” and an “overall living situation,” I began to have some doubts. You will need to know the status of your unit to determine the correct course of action to deal with the landlord.

I recommend that you take a look at the SF Assessor-Recorder’s website. Just type in your address and pray that the goddamned thing works. I think I’ve mentioned that I hate this website, but it is better than nothing.

If you have three addresses in the building (a sign that the units may be legally divided) try to use the lowest number to find it. Do you pay your own electricity bill? If so, that also is an indicator that your building has three legal units.

Your landlord states that he wants to sell his two units. If the landlord is selling the units as tenancies in common (TICs), he is really selling partnership interests in the whole building rather than the units themselves. The units must be condominiums to be sold individually.

If the units were converted to condominiums you should be able to see that on the parcel map. The map will show three lot numbers for the building lot. You can also check the Department of Public Works Subdivision Tracking System to determine if the units are condominiums. If the units are condos they are considered single family dwellings.

I’m assuming the building was built before 1979. Regardless of your unit’s status, the landlord has to evict you for just cause. That the unit is for sale is not a just cause.Filing the Report of Alleged Wrongful Eviction was justified.

If you find that your unit is illegal (converted without the proper permits), the landlord can evict you by permanently removing the unit from housing use pursuant to Rent Ordinance §37.9(a)(10). The landlord must obtain the necessary permits and, if you have lived in the unit for more than a year, provide you a 60-day notice to vacate and arelocation payment of $5,101.00.

You can also sue the landlords, including the neighbors downstairs, for void contract. The landlords were not entitled to rent the unit at all; your lease is null and void.

If you live in a legal apartment, the landlord could evict you by moving in a close relative or, if the partner owns more than 25% of the entire building, he could move in. You would be entitled to a 60-day notice and the same relocation payment of $5,101.00. If the landlord want to sell it is unlikely he will serve an OMI (owner-move-in) notice because he has to represent that he will live in the unit for three years.

It’s hard to say if an Ellis Act eviction would be viable. Remember, the downstairs owners would have to agree and it doesn’t sound like they are very agreeable. If that does occur you would be entitled to a 120-day notice and a $5,105.20 relocation payment.

If your unit is a condo, the landlord can raise the rent to market rate because the unit is exempt from the rent control provisions of the Rent Ordinance. The most likely scenario here is that a new owner will evict you, using an OMI eviction.

Frankly, I don’t understand why you want to enter into a partnership (assuming the units are TICs) with neighbors you want to sue and landlords you can’t trust. No, you can’ttrust the landlord because he and his partner are sleazily trying to get you out. That’s why you filed the Report of Alleged Wrongful Eviction, right? Would you marry someone as irrational as your neighbors? Or someone who lies to you? Life is too short. But that’s just my opinion based upon observation (and litigation) of several TICs gone bad.

Before you do anything else, you should rush to the San Francisco Tenants Union to sort this out. Join the Tenants Union. It will be the best forty bucks you ever spend.

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