(415)552-9060
I Need To Swap Girlfriends (On My Lease)

I Need To Swap Girlfriends (On My Lease)

by | Aug 18, 2011 | Roommates

I Need To Swap Girlfriends (On My Lease)

Swap girlfriends?

I live in a pre-1979 rent controlled building. I moved in with my GF (we are both on the lease) in 2003. She moved out a while ago and I just left everything lease-wise as is and paid the whole rent. I now want my current GF to move in and get on the lease. Is there anything besides notifying them and filling out the usual rental forms (she has great credit and would get glowing reviews from her current landlord) that I should know? Things always seem so simple until I read emails sent to you, and you point out a whole bushel of stuff that could go wrong.

Your issue actually seems fairly simple.

I’m assuming that you have a clause in your lease that allows subletting with a landlord’s written consent. San Francisco Rent Board Rules and Regulations §6.15B applies if that is the case.

Essentially, if you do not receive a landlord’s consent or the landlord withholds his consent to replacing your roommate, the lack of consent cannot constitute a breach of your lease for purpose of eviction under Rent Ordinance §37.9(a)(2) if you have followed all of the following steps before the new roommate moves in:

“(i) The tenant has requested in writing the permission of the landlord to the sublease or assignment prior to the commencement of the proposed new tenant’s or new subtenant’s occupancy of the unit;

(ii) The proposed new tenant or new subtenant, if requested by the landlord, has completed the landlord’s standard form application, or, in the event the landlord fails to provide an application or has no standard form application, the proposed new tenant or new subtenant has, upon request, provided sufficient information to allow the landlord to conduct a typical background check, including credit information, income information, references, and background information;

(iii) The tenant has provided the landlord five (5) business days to process the proposed new tenant’s or new subtenant’s application;

(iv) The proposed new tenant or new subtenant meets the regular reasonable application standards of the landlord;

(v) The proposed new tenant or new subtenant has agreed to sign and be bound by the current rental agreement between the landlord and the tenant;

(vi) The tenant has not, without good cause, requested landlord consent to a new tenant or new subtenant more than one time per existing tenant residing in the unit during the previous 12 months;

(vii) The tenant is requesting replacement of a departing tenant or tenants with an equal number of new tenants.” (Rules & Regulations §6,15B(b)(1)(i-vii))

If you follow these steps to the letter, you should be okay.

The days of simply replacing your roommate without the landlord’s involvement are long gone. Many tenants don’t realize this. They think they can simply add a roommate and as long as the rent gets paid, no harm no foul. Or they verbally inform the landlord about new roommates without obtaining a consent in writing.

Over the years, landlords in rent-controlled jurisdictions have increasing relied on “no subletting” clauses to evict tenants. Why? To increase the rent, of course.

Just this week, our office is dealing with a case in which the landlord is threatening the tenants with eviction because roommates were added without written consent. The landlord didn’t give a rat’s ass about that until he decided to sell the building and then raised the issue. Remember, buildings are worth more either without tenants or with tenants who are paying market rate.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to prove that a landlord waived his right to consent to subletting. And it is expensive to prove it because to do so means defending an unlawful detainer (eviction) lawsuit.

If you are living with roommates, you must begin to abide by the Rules & Regulations to avoid eviction.

Ask the landlord for his permission to add you new girlfriend to the lease.

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

Can My Landlord Evict Me For Smoking Marijuana?

Can My Landlord Evict Me For Smoking Marijuana?

by | Jun 1, 2011 | Tenant Law

Can My Landlord Evict Me For Smoking Marijuana?

Smoking marijuana.

My husband, two kids (17yrs and 4 1/2yrs old) and I recently moved in to the in-law unit of a single unit house in the Inner Richmond. It’s got a full kitchen, two bedrooms, a tiny bathroom and a living room.

My husband and I both smoke marijuana, both have cards, and both have the proper paperwork to prove it. (We do not cultivate in our home since we have children. All we do is smoke and occasionally have an edible.)

According to my landlord, she said that the odor came through the ventilation room and that her and her sister in law did not like the smell and that apparently one the next door neighbors had supposedly complained to her about it as well. She said that her sister and her sister’s children (who are over the age of 18) couldn’t stand it, and that she and her 10yr old daughter had some allergies from it as well.

This was after I explained the situation and I also proceeded to show her my husband’s paperwork proving the legality of it all.

It was like she was trying to come with an excuse to justify what she was saying. When I asked if we could smoke out in the backyard, she said no because the neighbors might get mad and complain. She said that we would have to smoke in the street or in our car which was also parked out on the street as well. Since my conversation with her, nothing has been said about it at all.

This month, she declined our rent and said that she doesn’t think that she can rent to us because her family said that they can’t stand the smell and that they have received numerous complaints about it and that hopefully we can find another place by the end of the month and be out by then and that she would give us our security deposit back.

I know that the first thing I should do is refer to my lease or rental agreement and see if there are any stipulations on smoking. But we don’t have a rental agreement: when my husband and I decided to rent the place, he went to see the landlord (who isn’t the actual landlord, she says that it’s her in-law’s house and they live in China) and my husband proceeded to give her 2800 dollars and basically according to him, he signed a regular piece of paper that had the house’s address preprinted on it that said that he was renting the downstairs unit with the current date on it and that he had given her 2800 dollars as first month and security deposit.

He said that when he asked for a copy of this, she said that she didn’t have a copy machine and she had promised him a copy the very next day. She never gave him one. He had called her a few times and had failed in his attempts to get a copy of that paper or a copy of a receipt or rental agreement.

Can she do this to us? Can she deny our rent like that? Can she give us a trial run like that and then if she doesn’t like us kick us out like this?

I would greatly appreciate any type of advice since this had become an incredibly stressful situation for my entire family now.

The landlord cannot refuse to accept your rent unless your tenancy has been terminated by a legal notice. It is a violation of the Tenant Harassment section of the Rent Ordinance to refuse to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant’s lawful rent payment.  (Rent Ordinance §37.10B(a)(11).)

What’s with the “no copy machine” excuse to refuse to provide a receipt for rent? I talk to a lot of tenants and this one’s been coming up lately. In March another reader complained about this practice. I have also had a couple of phone conversations with tenants who reported the same thing. Sometimes I think there’s a listserve or a secret monthly meeting in which landlords discuss new, nefarious ways to screw their tenants. Frankly, this is not that new. This excuse is a recycle, like bell bottoms.

If you are worried that your landlord will try to claim that you are not tenants and she is entitled to summarily kick you out, don’t. The landlord may try to argue this somewhere don the line, but her argument will fail.

In San Francisco a tenancy is presumed after a tenant has occupied the unit for 32 days. If you and your family have been there longer than that, you are tenants. It also looks like the landlord accepted a security deposit that was more or less equal to another month’s rent. How is she going to explain that?

It also would be a violation of the Rent Ordinance for the landlord to rent the in-law as a temporary/vacation rental.

“Trial runs” are not permissible under the Rent Ordinance.

There is a bigger issue here. That is: Are you creating a nuisance or interfering with the quiet enjoyment of the landlord by smoking pot in your unit?

It looks like you do not have any prohibitions against smoking in your lease because it is an oral lease with no covenants (promises, terms) about anything. The duty to pay rent is implied. The landlord cannot evict you for breach of the lease.

These days, pot is very stinky! If the smoke is truly bothering the landlord and her family, other than just vague apprehension about getting busted, the landlord can make a persuasive argument that your smoking substantially interferes with the her quiet enjoyment. You can be evicted for that pursuant to Rent Ordinance §37.9(a)(2). Of course, the key word is substantial.

Is marijuana possession and use legal in California? Well, yes, if you have a prescription, and no, because marijuana is illegal under federal law. I discussed this in “Tenant Troubles: Does My Landlord Get To Ask About My Pot Plants?”

If I was the landlord’s lawyer, I would advise her not to get into the marijuana legality issue and, instead, focus on the fact that the smoke is substantially interfering with her  and her family’s life.

You should also explore the possibility that you are living in an illegal unit. Remember, however, that you and your family are not entitled to any relocation benefits because you have not lived in the unit more than one year.

My initial take on this is that it’s a battle not worth fighting, but you need to take all your documents to the San Francisco Tenants Union to discuss specific strategy to deal with your case.

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

How Do I Dump A Deadbeat Roommate?

How Do I Dump A Deadbeat Roommate?

by | Nov 18, 2010 | Roommates

How Do I Dump A Deadbeat Roommate?

What are the laws governing kicking out one of your roommates? I read in one of your previous columns that its impossible for a landlord to evict individuals but can it be done by roommates? I’ve got a flat that I share with two people and one of them is a deadbeat. Our lease states that we can only pay rent with a single rent check. Not wanting to incur any late penalties and stay in the good graces of our landlord, on many instances we’ve had to cover the deadbeat’s rent while he finds some scheme to come up with the money. The problem has been getting progressively worse and I fear he might skip out on paying rent all together. Is there anything the other roommate and I can do to get rid of this guy?

Held Hostage by Housemate

Dear HHH,

As you may know from reading Tenant Troubles and from our website, my firm, Crow & Rose, does not represent master tenants seeking to evict their roommates. So I’m reluctant to give advice about how to evict a roommate. I do, however recognize that your predicament is one faced by many tenants and, as you pointed out, your entire tenancy has been placed in jeopardy because your roommate can’t pay his rent. So, I’m not going to talk about the procedure you could use to evict your roommate; you’ll have to get advice from a landlord’s lawyer for that. But I am going to answer your question because this happens all the time.

The first questions to ask: Did you and your roommates all move in at the same time? Are you all on the lease? If that is the case, you do not have the right to evict your roommate at all because you don’t have a “landlord-tenant relationship” with him. You are all co-occupants or co-tenants.

I am assuming that you are a San Francisco tenant living in a rent-controlled apartment. If one of you is a master tenant (a named tenant on the lease who rented a room to the roommate), he may have the right to evict the roommate without just cause. (See Rent Ordinance Rules and Regulations section 6.15C.) A master tenant may always evict a sub-tenant for just cause, in this case for non-payment or habitual late payment of rent. It may involve serving an unlawful detainer, an expensive process that most tenants just cannot afford. Talk to a landlord attorney.

I always think that the best course of action is to try to work it out. You have to talk to this guy with the understanding that he is probably scared as shit. Any scheming and bravado masks his fear of homelessness–unless he’s a total sociopath. You are not his mommy and he can’t expect you to pay his share of the rent.

You could try to mediate the problem to come up with an agreement for him to do what’s necessary to pay rent. I believe the Rent Board has expanded its mediation service to include this type of mediation. Give them a call. You might also try contacting Community Boards.

If your rent is more or less market rate, you may want to consider moving. Sometimes that’s the only way to extricate yourself form a problem like this. I’ve talked to roommates who moved and left the deadbeat to fend for himself. If you are considering that option, you should speak to a counselor at the San Francisco Tenants Union to go over your lease and develop a strategy that minimizes the chance of being sued by the old landlord when deadbeat doesn’t pay the rent.

I understand that times are tough. I believe that, as a society we must work for a more egalitarian system–one that can provide low-cost or even free housing for those who need it. I firmly believe that landlords can be parasites.

But this is the real world. In the real world you have to figure out a way to pay your rent. As a roommate, you have to understand that you jeopardize the entire tenancy when you can’t, for whatever reason, pay the rent.

In many cases, tenants will cover for each other. Tenants are great that way.

Hey deadbeat, when your roommates can’t cover you any more, it may be time to move. If you don’t and you drag your roommates down with you, you’re the parasite. You’re the person that confirms all the shitty attitudes out there about tenants. You’re living proof to those who would rule us that an egalitarian society is impossible.

Your roommate is going to have to quit scheming and, ouch, get a job. Maybe it’s a shitty job that’s beneath him, but he can still employ his con-artistry to unionize his fellow employees.

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

Foreclosure: Banks Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Obey the Law

Foreclosure: Banks Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Obey the Law

by | Oct 18, 2010 | Tenant Law

Foreclosure: Banks Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Obey the Law

A well-organized gang blatantly violates the law for the sole purpose of lining their pockets. What? Are the Sopranos back in business? They may not use terms like “vig” or “nut”, but the banks are foreclosing as zealously as loan sharks. And they’re throwing innocent tenants out of their houses in the process.

During the last few weeks came revelations that banks have been foreclosing on properties that they may not even own!

None of this comes as any surprise to tenants and tenants’ rights organizations who have been complaining, since the meltdown, about banks’ illegal practices, including tenant evictions.

In May 2009, Congress passed the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act which required, at minimum, a ninety-day notice to vacate for tenants without a term lease. Banks have been routinely violating the Federal law since it passed.

Even in San Francisco, with just cause eviction protection (foreclosure is not a just cause), we defended tenants who had already provided the bank (Wells Fargo) with copies of their leases! The bank’s attorneys filed an eviction anyway only naming the owner who didn’t live there (they had been informed of that too), but still seeking to remove the tenants from all of the units.

In May 2010, Tenants Together released its 2010 Report: California Renters in the Foreclosure Crisis. In late June, California Attorney General, Jerry Brown, announced that he would investigate whether tenants rights are violated in foreclosures. This month, the Governator signed Senate Bill 1149 which will help tenants who defend improper bank evictions maintain their credit ratings and require banks to inform tenants of their rights with an eviction notice.

Will these new requirements help? Maybe, but if San Francisco’s law requiring landlords to notify tenants of their rights upon placing a building for sale is any indication, the answer is: Not much. Most of the banks’ soldiers in the field, real estate agents and brokers, can’t read at all, let alone read and understand the law. And they don’t give a shit. If their bosses can act with impunity, why can’t they? Think back to why we got here in the first place.

The only real legal solution to this mess is to pass a statewide just cause eviction law. Even Tony Soprano’s home state, New Jersey, allows eviction for 16 just causes and foreclosure is not one of them.

What can you do if your building is sold in foreclosure?

Occasionally tenants will receive a notice of default meant for the owner. If you do, you have an advantage because you can begin to check public records to see if the there will be a foreclosure auction.

When you know the sale is final, stop paying rent to the owner. Remember the owner has been collecting your rent all the while he hasn’t been paying his mortgage. He needs the money and he will lie about the foreclosure to keep collecting your rent as long as he can. I’ve seen several cases in which the owner still wanted to collect rent in exchange for writing up new leases. This may sound attractive, but if a bank can prove you negotiated a sweetheart lease in anticipation of foreclosure, you could lose rights you may have to stay. Besides, it’s fraud.

Don’t spend the rent you withheld. After foreclosure, banks don’t often inform tenants how and where to pay rent, even if tenants ask. After a few months, they simply serve a three-day notice to pay or quit. If you don’t have the money to pay them you can be legally evicted.

Don’t communicate with the “representative of the bank” without proper notice. Often the first inkling you’ll have that the property is bank-owned is when you see a “representative” skulking around the building. He wants to ask you questions about your tenancy. He’s a real estate thug. He will want to talk about a “cash for keys” program and use veiled threats that you could be evicted if you don’t go along. Get his identification and as much information as you can about him and his employer. You can give him a copy of your lease if he will sign a receipt. You can also mention you know your rights as a tenant. Then politely inform him that you will call the cops if he ever shows his face again without proper notice pursuant to the law. In California it’s Civil Code section 1954.

Gather information. Try to find out who you can contact at the bank. It’s usually impossible because, like all experienced con artists, banks don’t answer the phone. Try to find out which attorneys represent the bank. If you happen to be dealing with a representative and ask him where to pay the rent, he might reply vaguely, “Oh don’t worry about that, the lawyers will send you something.” That’s the time to ask, “Who are the lawyers?” You need to be ready if you receive a notice to quit.

If you receive an unlawful notice to quit, don’t panic. If you live a a jurisdiction like San Francisco or Santa Monica that has a rent ordinance and eviction only for just cause, write a letter to the attorneys on the notice and point that out. Also tell them that if they proceed with an eviction you will file a complaint against them at the State Bar.

If you have a lease and you don’t live in an unenlightened city, send the lawyers a copy and tell them you have the right to stay until the lease expires under Federal law or 90 days whichever is longer. Once again, if they try to evict you illegally you will file a complaint with the State Bar.

Always communicate in writing. When I say “tell” I really mean write a letter.

Report abusive real estate agents to the local board or the California Department of Real Estate. When their licenses may be on the line, sometimes realtors will back off.

You get your security deposit back. Just because the bank did not collect the security deposit from the owner does not absolve it of its legal obligation to refund your security deposit in California. Civil Code section 1950.5(j) is clear that the landlord’s successor in interest is liable for your security if a transfer of the deposit has not be made to the new owner according to  Section 1950.5 (h). In a foreclosure scenario that transfer isn’t made because the old owner defaulted.

The foreclosure mess is far from over. It is time for Just Cause Eviction to be enacted statewide. The best thing you can do is to support Tenants Together with your money or your time.

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

My Building’s For Sale, Should I Worry?

My Building’s For Sale, Should I Worry?

by | May 12, 2010 | Tenant Law

My Building’s For Sale, Should I Worry?

Over the weekend I received a letter from a real estate broker informing me that my landlord intends to put the building I’m living in up for sale. I’m currently living in a three unit Victorian in the Lower Haight, and the rent is truly more than reasonable. Because of the great location and the rent I was hoping to hunker down in this place for a few years. I moved in back in November and signed a year lease, which I believe was supposed to go month to month after November 2010. Everyone else in the building has been there for several years so I’m fairly sure they’re already on month to month terms.

Now I’ve read up a bit on some of my rights, but I wasn’t really clear on a couple of things. First off I’ve noticed that once the building is sold if the new landlord decides to continue renting the building then my current lease terms will have to be honored. However if they decide to convert the building into condos/tic then I may have the right to relocation benefits. Now what’s not clear to me is how this will all factor in when my year lease would turn into a month to month lease.

At that point do these same rights continue to cover me for as long as I wish to stay in the apartment? Would it be possible for the new landlord to just wait out my current lease terms and then refuse to allow me to stay on month to month or renew my lease terms?

Really I guess I would just like some clarification as to what my rights are when my lease is scheduled to go month to month.

Let’s pick this one apart. Three-unit Victorian in the Lower Haight, obviously built before 1979 and not a single family house. You already know this; your tenancy is completely within the price control and “just cause eviction” parameters of the San Francisco Rent Ordinance. Even if you were living in a brand new SOMA cracker box you would have the same protections until November 2010 because your lease doesn’t expire until then.

Many tenants don’t understand the relationship between their lease and San Francisco rent control. Because your building was built before 1979, your tenancy can only be terminated for one of the fifteen “just causes” in the rent ordinance. Even if your lease expires, the landlord can only evict you for cause. Lease expiration is not a just cause under the rent ordinance. Because you live in a building with two or more units, the landlord cannot increase your rent to market rate after the expiration of the lease. Instead, he can only increase the rent using the applicable allowable increase. This year it is .1% (one tenth of one percent).

The landlord can require that you sign another one-year lease that includes the applicable increase but the lease must contain the same material terms as the lease you originally signed.

Before you hunker down, however, you should understand that three-unit buildings are prime speculator targets. Usually the inflated sales prices do not justify the rental income, so people who purchase small building are often looking to sell units as tenancies in common (TICs). After the building is sold you might be facing several different scenarios.

Often a new speculator owner will approach tenants in a small building with an offer to buyout their tenancy. That way he can avoid evicting the tenant for an applicable just cause. For example if the new owner is just a developer who wants to rehab the building and sell it as TICs, it’s going to be tough for him to claim that he wants to evict a tenant to move in, because among other things, he has to promise to live in the unit for three years.

For the speculator it may be advantageous to pay you money to waive your tenancy rights and move. For more information about buyouts check out the series of articles I wrote in my blog, Evict This!

A new owner may simply want to evict you to move in. If you are served with an OMI (owner move-in) notice you will be entitled to the stautory relocation payment. This year it is $5,101.00 per tenant.

Finally, a speculator may want to evict all of the tenants in the building using an Ellis Act eviction. If you are served with an Ellis eviction you’ll be entitled to 120 days to move (unless you’re disabled or over 62 years old) and a relocation payment of slightly more than the $5,101 for other evictions.

As you can see there are a lot of “what ifs” involving the sale of a smaller building in San Francisco. These days, given the real estate market and fewer speculator evictions you might just get your wish. Happy hunkering!

​

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

Smoky The Guest

Smoky The Guest

by | Apr 14, 2010 | Tenant Law

Smoky The Guest

Smoky the guest.

I live in a rent controlled, 4 unit building owned by a regular person (not, like, CitiApartments or anything). I’m the newest tenant there, I’ve been here for 6 years, and everyone else has been here 20 or so more. Everyone is really nice, but I’m still the newbie. I like them all a lot!

But! My upstairs neighbor has started dating a guy, in fact, he’s moved in. And I’m both just pettily annoyed by him, and sometimes kind of scared of him.

Here’s the petty stuff: he smokes, constantly. And he’s unemployed, and here all the time (I work from home, so I promise I’m not judging the being at home all day thing, I’m just providing context), smoking. I keep all my windows on their side of the building closed, and the hall is smoky (their front door has a decent sized gap beneath it). And my apartment still smells smoky, as does my clothes, towels, etc.

Ideally, my first step would be to talk to Smoky the guest, I know. But, here’s the other thing, he’s a big, all day long drinker, and he scares me a little. He’s kind of a bully, and gets aggro really easily.

So maybe the solution is to talk to my landlord? But I worry about involving her because I’m concerned that by letting him move in, my neighbor is in violation of her lease, and I don’t want my landlord to use this situation to evict her.

So, here’s my first question: how would you advise me to approach the smoking thing, is there any good way (Maybe you’re just going to tell me to “suck it up, princess,” and I can accept that)? And, second, if I were to pass the buck to my landlord, are there laws that will protect my neighbor and that allow her to have him as a permanent guest? If my choices are to live with the smoke and or to lose my neighbor, I’ll live with the smoke.

Wow, you’ve just covered two of my least favorite issues to discuss!

The first is smoking. Caveat: I still practice that nasty habit, much to my chagrin. It is still legal to smoke in your unit, but not in the common areas of a residential building. I, like many tenants advocates, am wary of any law prohibiting smoking in ones apartment because it will provide a pretext for landlords to evict rent controlled tenants.

The second is tenant versus tenant issues. Conflicts between tenants are common, however, unless a given tenant’s behavior is really bad or violent or illegal (i.e. nuisance), again, I don’t think it’s wise to give a landlord a reason to evict rent controlled tenants.

Alright, with that in mind, let’s see if we can figure this out.

You didn’t mention if your neighbor (the lessee) smokes. Maybe this is exactly what she needs to kick this guy in the ass to quit. Maybe this is her ticket to encourage him to look for a job. Believe me, if he’s sitting around the house all day slugging down a twelve pack and smoking a couple of packs of Raleighs, he ain’t lookin’ for work! In fact, she may just be ready to give this guy the boot. Talk to your neighbor. Tell her your concerns. See if you can come to some sort of compromise.

You may even want to introduce her to some guys with jobs who don’t smoke.

I have found that landlords are usually loath to deal with tenant versus tenant disputes. Often there isn’t much they can do; and in some cases siding with a given tenant could make the landlord legally liable to the other. In your case, it doesn’t look like the landlord could articulate a just cause to evict anyway.

You’ve already said you don’t want to present the landlord with the opportunity to evict a long-term tenant. There is no legal construct for “permanent guest.” Many form leases even restrict the number of days that a guest can stay. The boyfriend is likely a subtenant unless he has another place to live. Besides, they could get married or become registered domestic partners to avoid the taint of illegal subletting. Any rumbling from the landlord might accelerate that decision…and you need to show your neighbor why that would be a bad idea.

If you don’t succeed, you may just have to suck it up, Princess.

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

Buyouts

Buyouts

by | Jan 18, 2010 | Tenant Buyouts

Buyouts

“It’s a game of chicken”—Ted Gullicksen

If you negotiate a buyout with your landlord, you don’t want to be the person plummeting off the cliff. That is why we will help you if you decide to take a buyout.

What are buyouts?

A buyout is simply a negotiated settlement before litigation in which the tenants are paid money to vacate and all of the parties release all of their rights. In rent controlled jurisdictions like San Francisco, landlords often offer tenants money to vacate their unit and waive any future tenants’ rights they have. A landlord who offers a buyout is literally purchasing a tenant’s future rights to the unit.

Landlords offer buyouts to tenants for several reasons.

A couple of years ago when property was hot, developers bought buildings to turn them into TICs with the eventual plan to convert the units to condominiums. A TIC (tenancy-in-common) is a shared ownership of a building. In these cases developers sell shares in a building. Each of the shares includes a right to exclusively occupy a given unit in the building. Often developers used the infamous Ellis Act to clear buildings of tenants. I’ll save the sordid history and diastorous consequences  of the Ellis Act for another post.

Another scenario occurs when an owner wants to move into a given unit in a building. A landlord could be entitled to evict a tenant using the just cause of owner-move-in eviction (OMI).  In San Francisco an owner must jump through several procedural hoops and have the intent to live in the unit as his principal place of residence for three years.

Sometimes landlords are out and out lying about their intentions. They serve Ellis notices and OMI notices as a pretext to evict rent-controlled tenants to simply raise the rents. As you can imagine, there have been many documented abuses of these landlord rights resulting in many wrongful evictions. But unfortunately there are many other tenants who shrug their shoulders and move.

If you are offered a “cash for keys” buyout by a foreclosing bank or a sleazy real estate agent who claims to represent the bank, never take it unless you consult with an attorney or a tenants’ rights group.

Finally there are landlords who offer tenants buyouts just to get them to move to raise rents. Think the notorious CitiApartments and their tactic of tenant harassment with buy-out offers ten times a day. You should almost never consider a buy-out when you are offered one by a big landlord you know can’t even come up with a pretext to evict you.

When can you expect a buyout?

Usually buyout offers come with changes in ownership. A new landlord purchases the building or the greedy children inherit the building from your nice old landlord who immediately made repairs when you requested them and who brought you cookies at Christmas. If there are no changed circumstances in ownership a buy-out offer can indicate a landlord’s future intent to sell the building.

Most legitimate buy-outs are offered to tenants in buildings with six units or less in San Francisco because condominium conversion is prohibited in buildings with more than six units.

Get as much information as you can about the landlord.

Like almost all other decisions you will make regarding your tenancy, this is a business decision. Gather as much information as you can. Talk to other tenants in the building to see if they have been approached by the landlord. Has the landlord evicted tenants like this before?

In one case we represented a long-term tenant with an OMI threat from the landlord. He did excellent research and found that the landlord had served an OMI notice to another tenant in another building a year previously. Clearly the threat to our client was bogus because the landlord couldn’t live in two places at the same time.

So take some time to find out what other properties the landlord owns. Property ownership is a public record available through the Assessor-Recorder’s office. Does the landlord claim he wants to move into your one-bedroom, when in fact, he lives in a mansion in Forest Hills? You want to know this before you negotiate.

Eviction notices are also filed with the San Francisco Rent Board. Sometimes you can determine a landlord’s true motives by understanding his past eviction pattern.

Think it through and do the math.

Remember, if a landlord tells you he’s thinking of moving in or removing all the tenants in the building using the Ellis Act, in San Francisco, you will be entitled to relocation payments pursuant to Rent Ordinance §37.9C—as of this writing, approximately $5,000 per tenant up to three tenants, $3,300 for each disabled or elderly tenant and $3,300 for families with minor children. Check the linked chart. Notice that Ellis payments and qualifications are slightly different. That’s your bottom line. If the landlord offers less, he’s a Cheese Ball, too cheap to hire a lawyer and too stupid to read the law.

Next, think about the additional rent you will be paying if you move. You should factor that in, especially if you think the landlord might be offering you a buyout because the eviction threat is a pretext.

Finally think about how much time you will need to find another place to live and remember the more time you request the less money you will be offered.

Citistop, the tenants’ organization that played a huge role in the demise of CitiApartments, has some very good advice about buyouts from the perspective of tenants whose landlord never had a basis to evict them.

Tenant buyouts, especially those designed to empty units for TICs, deplete rent controlled housing stock. Yet, in some cases, notably Ellis Act eviction threats or quasi-credible OMI eviction threats, a tenant may not have any defenses to a future eviction if they stay and fight it out.

For some tenants, a buyout may be preferable to suing for wrongful eviction in the future, especially if the landlord’s rationale to evict may be sound. I believe it is extremely important to develop a strategy that considers all of your options and all of the pitfalls before you negotiate a buyout.

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

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram
Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?