(415)552-9060
Surprise! You’re Not Getting Your Deposit Back!

Surprise! You’re Not Getting Your Deposit Back!

Surprise! You’re Not Getting Your Deposit Back!

I moved out of an apartment last June 30th. My former landlord’s representative did a walkthrough on June 16th and said everything was ok.

I had the carpet cleaned per my lease agreement and submitted proof.

On July 22nd I received a letter saying they were keeping my security deposit, the letter is dated one day after the deposit was due. They cited damages to the apartment for the deductions and even tried to tell me I owed them money. I was never given an opportunity to correct any problems and never provided with receipts for repairs.

I have been busy with other matters and am now ready to devote some time to this, if it’s not too late.

So, is it too late and do you think I have a case?

If the landlord’s representative did a walkthrough and did not note any repairs that needed to be made to recover the security deposit, you should have a slam dunk winner, right? Unfortunately the answer is, as usual, maybe.

Civil Code §1950.5(f)(1) requires the landlord to notify a tenant of her right to an inspection no more than two weeks before move out. It also provides the procedure for an inspection.

Civil Code §1950.5(f)(2) states “Based on the inspection, the landlord shall give the tenant an itemized statement specifying repairs or cleaning that are proposed to be the basis of any deductions from the security the landlord intends to make […]”

First, you must be prepared to prove that the inspection took place. Hopefully, you saved correspondence about the proposed inspection or copies of a notice to enter for the inspection.

If you get lucky, the landlord’s agent will sign a declaration that he told you everything about the apartment was in order at the inspection. Occasionally, tenants can procure this type of testimony because the (former) representative is fed up with the landlord. Remember landlords who don’t refund security deposits don’t pay their other bills either.

More often the landlord or his representative will show up at the small claims hearing and deny that the inspection ever took place. If you don’t have evidence of the inspection, that could be a problem.

As you probably know, I think it’s very important to have photographic evidence of the condition of the unit when you vacated. Certainly your testimony and that of your witnesses is admissible, but you know the old saw about a picture being worth a thousand words.

The statute of limitation to sue a violation of Civil Code §1950.5 is the same as the limitation for suing under a contract–two years for an oral lease and four years for a written lease. You still have time to sue. I suggest you do it sooner rather than later.

As with all small claims cases, you are required to first write the landlord a demand letter. In your letter, firmly point out how you can prove the landlord violated the law. Remind him that you will be suing for you deposit plus the statutory damages.

In your case it sounds like you will be asking for your entire deposit plus double your deposit in statutory damages (just treble you deposit.) If that amount is more that the small claims jurisdictional limit ($7,500), tell the landlord you will sue him for $7,500.00 if he doesn’t pay in, say five days.

Now it’s time for me to remind you to take all of your documentation to the San Francisco Tenants Union and discuss you case with a tenant counselor.

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

My Landlord Isn’t Depositing My Rent Checks, Should I Worry?

My Landlord Isn’t Depositing My Rent Checks, Should I Worry?

My Landlord Isn’t Depositing My Rent Checks, Should I Worry?

I have been following your articles on SFAppeal for a while. I just had two questions to ask: 1) My landlord has not been depositing the checks I send to them for rent. 2) My landlord also has not been sending a receipt as note of receiving my check.

I’m not sure what the rules and regulations are about the two concerns. I couldn’t find anything at the SFTU and SFRB sites. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks.

This is one of the oldest tricks in the landlord playbook. We used to see it employed all the time when I worked at the Homeless Advocacy Project. If an SRO hotel landlord (think Sixth Street) didn’t like a tenant but could not find any reason to evict her legally, he would simply stop cashing the tenant’s rent checks or accepting rent. The logic is simple: Tenants, especially at risk, low income tenants, will spend the rent money. At some time in the future, if the landlord deposits all of the checks tenant’s checks at once, oops, the checks bounce. The landlord could serve a 3-day notice to pay or quit and, boom, the tenant is out.

The tenant harassment section of the Rent Ordinance (Section 37.10B) provides a long list of prohibited conduct if the conduct is done with ulterior motive and designed to harass tenants. Section 37.10B(a)(11): Refuse to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant’s lawful rent payment; (12) Refuse to cash a rent check for over 30 days. California Civil Code §1499 also requires receipts for rent payments.

Unfortunately in Larson v. City and County of San Francisco (2011), a case testing Proposition M remedies, the court found that the Sections 37.10B(a)(4-15) could not be enforced by the San Francisco Rent Board. But my reading of the case is that you can sue the landlord for violation of the Sections 11 and 12 in small claims court.

Obviously, the first thing to consider before you start any inquiry of the landlord is if you have all of your rent saved. If you don’t have the money, get it now because your tenancy is doomed if you don’t.

The next thing to do is to write your landlord a letter. Tell him that you noticed he isn’t cashing your checks. Ask him why. Or if you want to be more aggressive, demand that he cash your rent checks and cite the law that requires him to do so. Tell him you’ll take him to small claims court and demand “injunctive relief.” In other words you’ll ask the court to order him to cash your checks.

As usual, I suggest that you go to the San Francisco Tenants Union to go over your strategy with a counselor.

I also believe tenants should start referring these matters to the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office.

After all, Rent Ordinance §37.10B(c)(2) states: “Any person who is convicted of violating this Section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not greater than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.”

Maybe it’s time for the cops to start busting scofflaw landlords rather than pot smokers.

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

My Landlord Wants To Jack Up My Rent Because I’m Getting A New Roommate

My Landlord Wants To Jack Up My Rent Because I’m Getting A New Roommate

My Landlord Wants To Jack Up My Rent Because I’m Getting A New Roommate

Jack up the rent.

I am a tenant in a two-bedroom apartment. There are two units in the building and it was certainly built before 1979. I do not have a Section 8 lease with the Housing Authority. The unit is not a condominium. I have been renting this apartment for 5 years with my housemate. We are both on the lease. My housemate is moving out and I want to have another friend move in. I told my landlords this and they said that they want to jack up the rent from $1700 to $2250. I don’t think this is allowed under San Francisco ordinance.

The landlord insisted that he could increase the rent. I resisted. Now he thinks I have to move out with my roommate, writing:

Per your Addendum to Residential Agreement dated 07/22/2005, provision 4: ‘All tenants shall move in and out together as one tenancy.’ Therefore, per the agreement signed by you and (name redacted), both of you have to move out and the lease is terminated. Please vacate the property within two weeks. Thank you.

P.S. For your knowledge: I contacted San Francisco Housing Authority and it stated that the Landlord can increase the rent if the new tenant/roommate moves in.

Does my landlord have any justification to evict me?

No, no, no!

Before I go off on your landlord I want to point out to my readers that your opening statements about the facts of your tenancy tell me everything I need to know to answer your question. I can tell that you live in a unit that is subject to both the rent control and just cause provisions of the Rent Ordinance. That means the landlord can only increase the rent as much as allowed under the ordinance and that he must have a “just cause” to evict you. I know that you are an original tenant on the lease. I also know that the landlord is not going to get any information from the Housing Authority other than, “Call the Rent Board.”

To be fair to your landlord, if he called the Rent Board and asked the question, “Can we raise the rent for a new tenant moving in?” without anything else, the Rent Board might tell him that he can raise the rent.

But you are not a new tenant. If the landlord forgot to mention that important fact, he is not the sharpest tool in the shed. Of course sending an email with an illegal notice to vacate isn’t very bright either.

The other possibility is that the landlord thinks he can lie about his call and expect you to rely on his information. All in all, I think it might be fair to characterize your landlord as a stupid liar.

What should you do?

First become familiar with Rent Ordinance Rules & Regulations §6.15A and §6.15B. As you may know the Rent Board provides “Information to Go” on subletting and many other topics.

Follow the applicable rule to the letter. Write the landlord(s) to request permission to sublet to your friend before he or she moves in. Your friend should be willing to provide all the necessary credit information to the landlord(s).

If they fail to respond or they unreasonably withhold their consent, you can petition the Rent Board to reduce your rent by half. In this case it might be wise to provide the landlords copies of the applicable laws and procedures.

It’s best not to allow your friend to move in until the dust settles. You don’t want to defend an unlawful detainer (eviction). Even when you are in the right, defending an eviction is often too costly to justify. Landlords rely on that and file meritless lawsuits all the time.

If your landlord insists upon requiring you to vacate, you should point out that the clause in the addendum (likely penned by the landlord and their imaginary lawyer) is void as against public policy. It’s an attempt by the landlord to arbitrarily remove themselves from Rent Ordinance Jurisdiction. It’s like putting a clause in the lease that allows the landlord to raise the rent whenever he wants, regardless of the law.

Join the San Francisco Tenants Union. Bring all of your documentation and discuss the issue with them. They will explain the applicable law in detail and help you draft a letter or letters to your landlord. They can also inform you about filing a petition at the Rent Board.

Readers: This was an easier question to answer because the reader is an “original tenant” named on the lease. The issues get murky when dealing with unnamed tenants, “co-occupants”and “subsequent occupants” as defined in Rent Board Rules & Regulations §6.14 and the Costa Hawkins Act (which should be repealed.) There are many scenarios when the landlord can, in fact, increase the rent to market rate. This is not such a scenario. The point is: don’t read this and assume that your landlord may not have a valid rationale to increase your rent.

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

How Do I Dump A Deadbeat Roommate?

How Do I Dump A Deadbeat Roommate?

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.

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