(415)552-9060
Can Our Landlord Kick Us Out When Our Roommate Moves?

Can Our Landlord Kick Us Out When Our Roommate Moves?

by | Apr 19, 2012 | Roommates

Can Our Landlord Kick Us Out When Our Roommate Moves?

I’ve lived at my home for over 2 years, my girl friend and I replaced two roommates who were on the original lease. The house was built in the 1940s and monthly rent has been $2400 the entire duration of lease. The original roommate still left on the original lease is moving out on the first. We would love to stay at the home and replace his room with a good roommate.

The landlord has contacted us stating that he needs us to fill out an application for a new lease – as well as pay a security deposit for the home. To make a long story short, the house has been in terrible shape since we moved in due to the prior roommates who were kicked out- holes in walls, filthy pet damaged carpets, plumbing leaks, paint peeling inside and outside, possible roof leaks/mold, leaking/moldy basement, large gashes in a few walls, broken doors throughout home and the front door frame is extremely damaged and not secure from a safety standpoint.

We spoke to the landlord for the first time today and he wants to meet us to discuss the application and what will happen after he conducts a walk thru with the old roommate to figure out how much security they will get back. After being told about the security deposit and need to show the room to potential roommates.

We asked if/when he would do things like paint and replace carpets and make fixes to the home because of the extreme shape the home was in and he gave us the impression that he wasn’t planning to fix anything and it was up to him to decide if we can even stay here and if he will fix anything while requiring a security deposit.

I’ve done some research and saw that we might qualify for a novation from our roommate who is moving out, which would then make us responsible for paying him any security deposit that would be due back. I do not know if this would be a option for us?

We are just worried that the landlord will either kick us out after we fill out a application, require a huge security deposit without making any fixes to the home or raise rent to an extreme amount. We are in great standing with our old roommate so I’m sure he would be ok with a novation or another option I don’t know about.

What are our options at this point? We are PT students with FT jobs, so a rent raise, having to suddenly move or huge deposit requirement would be too much for us at this point. I would appreciate any advice you could send me- thank you for your time spent on my questions.

I worked at the Homeless Advocacy Project while I was attending law school. In the first year of law school one usually studies contracts. In my case the class was two semesters. I came across the concept of “novation” one day and I asked my boss, a former California Supreme Court clerk, to clarify the meaning.  She looked at me, wryly smiled and said, “You know, Dave, it’s been a long time since I was in law school, but I think novation occurs when the sun goes supernova.”

I still get a laugh when I think of that moment and I have come to understand the irony of her comment–discussing the legal concept of novation in an office full of people desperately trying to survive a bit like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

A novation is the substitution of all new parties in an existing contract. For example, if you stay in the house under the old lease, the landlord is essentially allowing the old roommate to assign the lease to you. By offering you a brand new lease, the landlord is offering a novation. Signing a new document with your roommate, depending on the terms of the existing lease, is usually a waste of time.

Back to my original point, you’ve got bigger fish to fry.

Remember, because you live in a house, a single-family dwelling, you are only protected by the “just cause” provisions of the Rent Ordinance, not the price controls. The landlord can increase the rent as much he wants unless:

1) The dwelling or unit has been cited in an inspection report by the appropriate governmental agency as containing serious health, safety, fire, or building code violations, as defined by Section 17920.3 of the Health and Safety Code, excluding any violation caused by a disaster.
(2) The citation was issued at least 60 days prior to the date of the vacancy.
(3) The cited violation had not been abated when the prior tenant vacated and had remained unabated for 60 days or for a longer period of time. However, the 60-day time period may be extended by the appropriate governmental agency that issued the citation. (California Civil Code §1954.53(f))

However, because you may be approved subtenants, despite the landlord’s request for new applications, it is unlikely he has just cause to evict you, unless he wants to hold you and your roommates responsible for the damage caused by the former roommates (waste).

I think you’re doing everything you can to try to convince the landlord you can be good tenants. I understand that the rental market is tough out there, but why would you want to continue to rent from a slumlord who won’t spend the money to fix a leaky rook? Believe me, from your description, the roof leaks. Why should you have to spend the time and money to repair deferred maintenance? I do believe that you should repair damage caused by you or the other tenants, but that’s it.

Finally, let’s say the landlord does make an agreement with you. You lease the house and sign a one-year lease. Let say you fix up the place and make it cozy. That will certainly give the landlord incentive to increase the rent to whatever the market will bear next year.

If you really want to try to make a deal with the landlord, take your photos and documents to the San Francisco Tenants Union to develop a strategy, which may include calling a housing inspector.

My personal opinion is that you shouldn’t waste your time and energy on this joint. You should be looking for another place to live. You know, bigger fish to fry.

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?

I Think My Master Tenant Is Scamming Me

I Think My Master Tenant Is Scamming Me

by | Mar 1, 2012 | Roommates

I Think My Master Tenant Is Scamming Me

I thought this might be a good question for people like me who sublet temporarily in SF for a couple of months to give themselves more time to look for more permanent housing.

I am subletting an apartment in a 5 unit old Victorian in the Mission District of San Francisco for about 3 months from the original tenant who I met off Craigslist.  The tenant was temporarily leaving to take care of an ill family member on the East Coast.  I offered to write up the sublet contract because she was leaving for the East Coast in 5 days and was clearly distraught and still had a lot of things to take care of.

The tenant asked for an initial payment of the rent for the first month and the last month and an additional security deposit of a month’s rent of $1700 (in cashier’s check), plus utilities of about $60 in addition to rental reference and credit check.  She also asked me to include an option in the contract letting her move back in a week earlier and she promised to pay me back the prorated one week’s worth of rent before I vacated the apartment.  She has 30 days to return my security deposit.  She told me some other things to put in the contract about her plants and keeping the place clean and we agreed on the final version over phone and by email before meeting in person.

Before I moved in I asked to meet her landlord but she assured me she already talked to him.  We met the day before she left, went over the contract together and signed it then she gave me her keys.  A month into the sublet I ran into the landlord who was surprised to meet me and asked if I was living in that apartment.  I explained to him that I was subletting for about 3 months and was equally surprised that he didn’t know about it.  He told me the tenant had previously sublet to another people without telling him and he was unhappy about it but that generally she was an okay tenant who had lived there four years.  After some small talk, we exchanged contact information and he told me to let him know if there were any problems or anything that needed to be fixed.

Since that time, the tenant has exhibited more worrisome irrational behavior. 

1.     She called me trying to change the move back date in the contract to a much earlier date (not what we agreed to) and then promised both over the phone and by email to mail me the payment for the week’s rent plus utilities before my move out date in March (it’s been two weeks and I have not received it).  There is a specific provision in the contract saying that she needs to pay me that amount before I vacate.

2.     When we discussed the security deposit she was cagey saying that she would mail it back to me but she needed to hang on to it for the 30 days. Honestly, there is nothing in her apartment repair or otherwise that would be $1700.  I’ve kept everything the way she left it, watered her plants for her, and I don’t use her dishes or cookware because I have my own

3.     When discussing move out the date, she asked me to vacate the apartment and leave the keys in an envelope in her mailbox because she was going to “emotional” coming back to her apartment and wanted to be alone.  I objected saying that I felt more comfortable handing her the keys in person to make sure she received them, also that we should inspect the apartment together before I left so she could point to things that were “broken” she would use the security deposit to fix.  She reluctantly agreed but I have the feeling she wanted to avoid me.

I am worried that she is going to try to keep both my security deposit and also my week’s rent.  What can I do?  Refuse to vacate the apartment until she pays me at least the week’s rent?  Should I ask for a cashier’s check?  Get her landlord involved in this?  If she doesn’t pay me my security deposit what would I be able to do?  Small claims court?

Do I have any rights as a subletter?  What can I do to protect myself at this point?

I feel bad thinking this way but she has given me the impression that she is hanging on to my money because she’s not doing so well financially.  I don’t think she’s working right now.  Of course, I am hoping for the best but in our interactions with each other she has given me a negative impression of her in a short amount of time.  At first, I felt bad for her and thought this arrangement was mutually beneficial but now I feel like she’s trying to take advantage of me. 

Cases like this drive me crazy. It’s not enough that we in the tenant defense business have to deal with unscrupulous and/or uninformed landlords, we have to deal with tenants who decide they own their units and rent them out like landlords.

Master tenants who sublet in this manner rarely obtain the landlord’s consent to sublet. I write thousands of words complaining about landlords who don’t give a rat’s ass about their tenants. It’s always money. money, money, me, me, me.

The master tenant here is no different. She didn’t bother to consider that she could be subjecting you to a costly lawsuit that could ultimately effect your credit rating to the extent that future landlords won’t rent to you, not to mention that this could be a scam. She’s a Bad Master Tenant.

Luckily you’re not presenting the worst case scenario. The landlord could have served a notice to cure or quit alleging illegal subletting. Then the master tenant and you could spend the next couple of months defending an unlawful detainer (eviction) action–a lawsuit that the landlord would likely win. I have to say , your landlord gracefully handled the news that you were the new subletter.

The master tenant is either oblivious to the Rent Ordinance or she is relying on your naiveté. Bad.

To understand the scope of your rights as a subtenant you should first read Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15C. The regulation is very specific. Unless the master tenant has informed you in writing, before you sublet, that you are not subject to the just cause eviction provisions of the Rent Ordinance, the only way the master tenant can evict you is by alleging one of the just causes like nonpayment of rent, nuisance, habitual late payment, etc.

Even if you have been informed that you are not subject to “just cause” eviction, the master tenant would have to serve you a 30-day notice to quit.

Essentially, you have obtained most of the rights of a subtenant and you could tell your new “landlord” that you plan to live in the unit forever.

You also have to ask yourself if she’s simply scamming you. Believe me, that’s more common than one might think. Is she charging you more rent than she pays? What’s with the $5,100.00 charge for a temporary sublet? Did she use the dough to finance her trip? Check the Superior Court website to see if she has been sued for this before.

And here’s a thought for you: It’s not usually a good idea to give a stranger you’ve met on Craiglist over $5,000.00 unless the services are performed immediately.

So what do you do?

The landlord won’t want to get involved and he doesn’t have any duty to you anyway. He might get fed up and evict the entire household, but that does you no good.

I think you should simply tell the master tenant that you will move out, if she returns all of the unused rent  including the security deposit. (BTW, Civil Code §1950.5 provides that the landlord must return the deposit in 21 days, not 30.) She needed to hang onto to it for thirty days? Bad.

When you move out, the transaction should be a “cash for keys” exchange. That’s cash or a cashier’s check, not a rubbery gotcha note.

If the master tenant balks, you’ll know she spent your money. As distasteful as this may be, you may have to tell her that she just acquired a new roommate until she pays you.

You can also move out and sue her in small claims court, but the likelihood of ever collecting is small. The master tenant is unemployed and, think about it, her only source of income may be the next sucker she finds on Craiglist.

Why am I so freaking nasty when it comes to master tenants like this? They screw it up for the rest of us. Ironically, whatever the internal justifications master tenants sublet in this manner–ineptitude, desperation or greed–those justifications provide the fodder for landlords to demand the repeal of rent control. Of course, the repeal of rent control would further subject tenants to landlords’ greed, desperation and ineptitude.  Bad, bad, bad.

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?

When I Break The Lease, Is My Roommate Screwed?

When I Break The Lease, Is My Roommate Screwed?

by | Jan 26, 2012 | Costa Hawkins

When I Break The Lease, Is My Roommate Screwed?

Break the lease.

I’ve read your columns on the SF Appeal and tried to find a direct answer to my question in a few of them, but haven’t really hit the nail on the head. Here’s my situation:

I live in a building (not a house) in the USF/Pandhandle area in San Francisco that was built in 1917. It is 6 units. I am 25 years old, and have lived in the unit since May 1, 2011. The rent is $2050 per month.

In May when I moved, I found a roommate off Craigslist, Alison. She and I both planned on being there for at least a year, and so we both signed the lease. There were zero issues, and the move went smoothly.

My landlord seems like a good guy. When Alison told me in September that she would be leaving the city for work, my landlord agreed to let her sublet her room to a new tenant. I found a replacement roommate,  Bijou. Bijou signed a 6.14 notice. I didn’t realize the implications of this notice at signing – he sent it to her and she sent it back to him — I didn’t even look it over. My mistake.

Fast forward to today. My boyfriend and I decided to move-in together, and due to high rent and low availability, we ended up snapping up an apartment now instead of waiting until my lease ended in May. My new lease starts Feb 1, and I plan on moving at the end of this month.

I wrote an exhaustingly long email to my landlord about this, asking if I can sublet my room for the remainder of my lease. Bijou said she would even sign a new year lease if need be with her friend who is interested in moving in. My landlord said that it was “okay” for me to move out (aka I didn’t have to pay a fee for breaking my lease?) but that since I was the “original occupant” on the lease, that the lease would be null and void. That didn’t make sense to me, since he let Alison (old roommate) do it easily – I figured I’d be in the same boat.

My landlord then went on to say that he “might” raise the rent (no word yet on how much – my emails and calls have gone unanswered) and that he wasn’t sure if he wanted Bijou and new tenant to sign a lease but that he wouldn’t evict them, either. Huh? What are his rights in this sense, and what are Bijou’s rights? I feel responsible since I’m the one leaving early and complicating matters, but the landlord hasn’t told me I’m doing anything illegal or wrong — yet.

I made it very clear that I wanted to do a walk-through to get my security deposit back, and have been pressing him for information regarding the lease ending early, Bijou signing a new lease, and the rental cost. What else do I need to do to cover myself? What are his rights and what are Bijou’s rights in this situation?

What does being an “original tenant” mean, and why was Alison (old roommate) allowed to leave and sublet easily, but he won’t let me do the same?

Welcome to the world of Rent Board Topic No. 153:  “Rent Increases Under Section 6.14 And Costa-Hawkins.” San Francisco Rent Board Rules & Regulations § 6.14 and California’s Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act (Civil Code § 1954.50 to 1954.535) were designed to deal with “revolving door” tenancies–tenancies that pass from roommate to roommate over the years until everyone on the original lease is gone.

San Francisco’s ordinance has always provided that a landlord can increase the rent as he sees fit after all of the tenants vacate a unit. Rule 6.14 was designed to determine when a tenancy ended for purposes of increasing the rent.

On the other hand, California rent control ordinances were stripped of “vacancy control” by Costa Hawkins in 1996. For example, in Berkeley a landlord had to register his units price and all. Rents were only allowed to increase by allowable limits even after all the tenants vacated a given unit. Before Costa Hawkins it wasn’t as important to determine when a tenancy ended because the rental rate was controlled unit by unit.

Flash forward to now. In order to determine if a tenant is an “original occupant” a “subsequent occupant” or a “co-occupant” one must understand the interplay between 6.14 and Costa Hawkins. As you might guess, it can get very complicated. This is an issue that is often adjudicated at the Rent Board because it is misunderstood by landlords and tenants alike.

You have correctly kept the landlord and your new roommate in the loop and your tenancy is new compared to those who operated for years, adding roommates with or without the landlord’s consent.

In a nutshell, you are the last “original tenant” on the lease–the last named tenant, the last signatory. Your landlord consented to adding your roommate, Bijou, because likely he could not have unreasonably withheld that consent. Check your lease and Rules and Regulations §6.15A or §6.15B. He had no reason to deny consent anyway because you still had a one-year lease and he had ample remedies if you breached the lease, i.e. left without paying the rent.

In your case, however, one cannot readily apply the rules of either of the relevant statutes. Why? Because both Costa Hawkins and Rules & Regulations § 6.14 assume that a tenancy is a month-to-month tenancy. You have a term lease that does not expire until April 30, 2012.

You and your landlord can agree to terminate the lease now. Any agreement to do so, should be in writing. At that point Bijou would assume the status of a holdover subtenant–a subsequent occupant for purposes of Rules & Regulations § 6.14.

After you leave, the landlord cannot evict Bijou because he consented to her subtenancy. He can, however, increase the rent because you, the last original occupant, vacated. That she signed a 6.14 notice is irrelevant.

This alternative is advantageous to you because terminating the entire lease would entitle you to a refund of your security deposit upon move-out. It is advantageous to the landlord because he can increase the rent, using the rationale of Costa Hawkins that allows a rent increase:

“Where 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.” (Civil Code § 1954.53(d)(2).)

Yet as you scramble to get out of the lease and your greedy landlord tries to increase the rent you forgot about the person who will be hurt under this scenario–Bijou. One of the factors upon which she based her decision to move in was the amount of rent. At the very least she relied upon the fact that the rent could not be increased at all until April 30, 2012. She may also have relied upon the fact that the rent-controlled tenancy would only be subject to annual allowable increases. What is she supposed to do?

If the landlord increased the rent, I might advise her to sue you for the difference between the original rent and the increased rent because she relied on your representation that you had a valid lease and that she was a lawful subtenant.

The best way to deal with this is to execute a “novation,” a new agreement in which all parties consent to replace Bijou as the original tenant on the lease. That way Bijou can get a new roommate. Bijou can collect half of the security deposit which she can refund to you. The landlord will continue to collect rent based upon his original deal (and financial expectation) with you.

If the landlord balks, you should point out that he will not be damaged at all. He signed the lease with you and agreed upon a rent amount that he knew was controlled. You may have lived in the unit for years. He agreed to the deal and understood its ramifications. There is absolutely no difference between his deal with you and his new deal with Bijou.

If you just leave, I would argue that the lease is still valid until at least April 30 regardless of Bijou’s presence. It’s an argument I might lose. You would still be responsible if Bijou breached the lease and you would not be entitled to refund of the security deposit until everyone moved out.

Bottom line: this is going to be a mess, no matter how you play it. And it’s your fault.

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?

When I Break The Lease, Is My Roommate Screwed?

Can My Landlord Raise My Rent By $300/Month?

by | Dec 30, 2011 | Tenant Law

Can My Landlord Raise My Rent By $300/Month?

I am in a situation with my landlord and I need help understanding my rights in this poorly written lease that I should never have signed. This is in the city of San Francisco. I am not sure how to classify the unit, it was advertised as an in-law, the common type you find in the Richmond and Sunset. The landlord lives in the top level, there is a second level that her family lives in, and I live in bottom basement level. I do not know if this is a legal unit as it has no smoke detectors or carbon monoxide detectors, there is no separate address or PG&E meter and I’m almost certain it was built before 1979. Anyway, that isn’t really the issue.

I signed the month-to-month lease in May 2011. Later my boyfriend moved in. The lease does not limit occupancy to myself, or state a maximum occupancy requirement. The lease does not have any terms prohibiting subletting.

Anyway, my boyfriend has been living there for months, he even paid rent one month and she accepted and cashed the check.

Today, she emailed me saying she wants to raise rent from $1,300.00 to $1600.00. She didn’t ask for anything in writing, didn’t ask to have him sign onto the lease, its all about money.
My question is can my landlord raise the rent higher than 6%? Am I breaching my lease as there is no clause against another occupant? I just noticed the part that says landlord will return security deposit no later than 60 days. I know CA law requires 21 days, what do I do about that?

Last week I mentioned that there are several major recurring themes in landlord tenant relationships. You have encountered a few of them.

First, most landlords cannot see past their noses when it comes to money. It’s always all about the money. Second, some landlords seem to want to cut off their noses just to increase the rent. Third, don’t live in the same building as a landlord. You’re likely to encounter a troll in the basement, or as in your case, upstairs.

If I was Mitt Romney, I’d bet $10,000.00 that you live in an illegal unit. In “Tenant Troubles: Can I Be Evicted Just Because My Apartment’s An Illegal Unit?,” I outline some of the things to look for to determine if your unit is an illegal in-law.

Illegal in-law units have been a source of landlord tenant tension for years. They are some of the best deals in town and can be pleasant places to live, until the landlord starts screwing around with the tenant or a new owner wants to remove the unit from the market.

All of the lawsuits we have filed are based on facts similar to yours. The landlord gets greedy. The tenant realizes the unit is illegal and reports it. The tenants loses a cheap place to live and the landlord loses the income from the unit forever–a lose, lose proposition initiated by landlords just like yours.

The unit, regardless of its status, is rent controlled because the building was built before 1979 and it has two, if not three, units. Therefore, the landlord can only increase the rent based on the allowable annual increases determined by the Rent Board. The landlord cannot increase the rent at all until you’ve lived in the unit one year. In your case, the rent can be increased next May by the allowable 1.9% or $24.70.

I looked over your lease and, indeed, it does not prohibit subletting. The landlord would be foolish to attempt to evict you for allowing your boyfriend to move in. (Foolish in any case because you should report the unit to the DBI if the landlord attempts to evict you at all.)

I’d make another one percenter style bet that when you move, the landlord won’t return the security deposit. It’s just par for the course for Cheese Balls like this. California law will trump the terms of your lease. The landlord should return your security deposit in full (Remember, she shouldn’t be renting the place at all.) within the 21-day period.

What do you do if the landlord refuses to return the deposit? You sue her.

Share On Facebook
Share On X
Share On Reddit
Share Via Email
Share On Telegram
[yarpp]

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

Contact Us
Sitemap
Privacy Policy
Is This Legal Advice?

My Landlord Won’t Let My Boyfriend Move In

My Landlord Won’t Let My Boyfriend Move In

by | Sep 1, 2011 | Roommates

My Landlord Won’t Let My Boyfriend Move In

BIG fan of the column! Was feeling pretty good about having my boyfriend move into my apartment after your columns the last few weeks, until I hit a snag: my landlord said NO when I asked for permission.

Taking special care to follow every one of your instructions from the past two weeks, I asked my landlord for permission for my boyfriend to move in. I live in a one-bedroom, rent controlled apartment. I pay less than a tenant on a lower floor who has lived there longer. The landlord recently (less than 6 months ago) rented the unit across from me for almost $400 more a month than I’m paying… So when I asked for permission (in writing) his answer was:

“I have reviewed the lease and made a determination. Unfortunately, I must deny your request because the lease is clear on this type of situation. It is my option and wish not to amend our current agreement as set forth by the lease terms. “

There is a use/occupancy clause that says: “Tenant must have the prior written approval of owner if an invitee of Tenant will be present at the premises more than seven consecutive nights or fifteen days in a calendar year.” and

“Assignment and Subletting: Tenant may not assign this agreement nor sublet the whole or any portion of the Premises. This is a blanket prohibition which means that Tenant may not have any other person reside at the premises… no additional tenant or occupant will be allowed in the unit regardless of the relationship between tenant and said proposed occupant.”

The landlord and I talked on the phone and he wouldn’t point to any reason why he is saying no, and he gave me his lawyer’s number to call if I had questions. I asked if he would be willing to do a NEW lease for the two of us (saying “I understand I probably pay the least amount of rent in the building”) and he was not open to that either.

Landlord and I have had a decent relationship thus far. His daughter just moved in below me, so I’m worried that she will find a way to give him just cause (noise) if I make a fuss, or that she will rat me out if he moves in anyway, especially now that the landlord knows we were planning it.
The boyfriend is going to Asia for several months after his lease ends next month, so we don’t have to worry about this until December, when he was going to move in. We were going to look for another place when he got back (one with parking) so it’s not like we were planning on staying forever, but my landlord is being so shady about it that now I want to.

I was planning on getting a recommendation from him in writing before I challenge this nonsense later in the year, so when I am looking to move out, I can worry less about him not recommending me to future landlords. Anything else we can do?

Should I just let the boyfriend move in and try to say he can’t evict me on those grounds? I know I don’t want to be a defendant but I also don’t want to give him the pleasure of having me move out early so he can jack up the rent.

What to do?

I’m happy that reading my columns inspired you to ask the landlord for permission to sublet. You now understand his position on the issue. What if he is correct?

In this case, the landlord may be correct.

The last two TT columns have discussed the effect of replacing a roommate when the lease provides for a landlord’s written consent to do so. In your case the lease absolutely prohibits subletting. If you never had a roommate, you will not be replacing one.

San Francisco Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15A is applicable to these facts. The first few paragraphs state:
“This Section 6.15A applies only when a lease or rental agreement includes an absolute prohibition against subletting and assignment.

(a) For agreements entered into on or after May 25, 1998, breach of an absolute prohibition against subletting or assignment may constitute a ground for termination of tenancy pursuant to, and subject to the requirements of, Section 37.9(a)(2) and subsection (b) below, only if such prohibition was adequately disclosed to and agreed to by the tenant at the commencement of the tenancy. For purposes of this subsection, adequate disclosure shall include satisfaction of one of the following requirements:

(1) the prohibition against sublet or assignment is set forth in enlarged or boldface type in the lease or rental agreement and is separately initialed by the tenant; or

(2) the landlord has provided the tenant with a written explanation of the meaning of the absolute prohibition, either as part of the written lease or rental agreement, or in a separate writing.”

Look at the clause in your lease that relates to assignment and subletting. Does it conform to the Rent Board requirements? It looks like the clause has provided an explanation of a blanket prohibition on subletting. That’s a problem.

Does the lease allow for only 1 person? Are you the only named person on the lease? Have you always lived alone?
If the answers to these questions are “yes”, the no-subletting clause is probably valid. If any of the answers are “no”, you may be able to make a case to add a roommate.

Do not let your boyfriend move in without the landlord’s permission. You will be discovered because the landlord’s daughter lives in the building, but that’s not the point. I never recommend that a tenant blatantly breach a lease unless the clause is illegal or unconscionable.

You can explore two other options. You can ask the landlord to allow your boyfriend to stay as a guest until you find another place. The landlord may want you to give notice to move on a date certain. That could be a problem if you can’t find a new place in time.

Or you can get married or you and your boyfriend can register with the City as domestic partners. Check out “Tenant Troubles: Is My New Husband Going To Get Me Evicted?” to understand how the Rules and Regulations apply.
Before you take any other action, I strongly urge to bring your lease and any other relevant documents to the San Francisco Tenants Union for a counselor to review. You may even want to discuss this with an attorney. The TU has a list of approved tenant attorneys.

Sometimes following the rules won’t get you the answer you wanted. But following the rules won’t get you evicted either.

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?

Is My New Husband Going To Get Me Evicted?

Is My New Husband Going To Get Me Evicted?

by | Aug 25, 2011 | Roommates

Is My New Husband Going To Get Me Evicted?

I live in a four unit rent controlled building in San Francisco. I moved into the one-bedroom apartment in 2005.

My ex-husband moved out in 2009, and I finally got around to telling my landlord in 2010, so I am now the only “original occupant”.

However, my new fiancé has been living with me, and paying all the rent since August 2010.The lease requires that, “a substitution, addition, replacement, or sublet of tenants or roommates is not allowed unless the landlord has given specific, written consent.” and “In the event subsequent occupants, co-occupants or substitute roommates are accepted into this rental unit by prior written consent of the owners, the provision the of sf rent control ordinance, part 6, 6.14 & 6.15 will apply. “

We are going to get married in less than a month, I’m going to change my name, which I don’t think is going to be a problem since I pay my rent through money order. But, apparently him living with me but not on the agreement is a violation.

We wanted to act like he hasn’t been living at this address, and do all the stuff to get him on the agreement, but his credit report will state this address as an address. So, that’s sort of a give-away, right? Is there anything that I could do to help alleviate this situation, or will we have to move when we get back from our honeymoon so I won’t get evicted? I love this apartment so freaking much…

As you noted in your email, in your email your situation is almost exactly like our reader’s last week who wanted to swap girlfriends (on his lease.) If your fiancé had not already moved in, you could very easily use the method prescribed in Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15B to request permission form the landlord for him to move in. If your ex-husband was originally on the lease you would simply be making a one-for-one roommate replacement.

Of course it would be difficult to make the replacement now because your fiancé already lives with you. It is always tough to fake the approval process. He could move out and move back in. Or you might argue that he is an original tenant if he has been paying directly to the landlord for the past year. But guess what?

Rent Ordinance § 37.9(a)(2)(B) states: “[…] a landlord shall not endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit[…]as a result of the addition of the spouse or domestic partner of a tenant, so long as the maximum number of occupants stated in Section 37.9(a)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) is not exceeded.” The maximum number of people allowed in a one-bedroom apartment per the regulations is certainly more than two, depending upon which code you read.

Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.15D also addresses this. Creditworthiness cannot be a bar to the addition of a family member unless the family member is going to be legally liable for paying the rent. In your case, no matter where the money comes from, you’re the person who is legally liable because yours is the only name on the lease.

You do not have to engage in any subterfuge.

Readers: It’s never a good idea to try to backpedal to get a landlord’s consent to the addition of a roommate after the roommate has moved in. Follow the rules before you add a roommate. If you’re married to your roommate (or joined in civil union) you should still understand that the rules apply, but they are much more forgiving.

Go get married, have a great honeymoon and don’t worry about eviction.

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?

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?