Overview of California eviction laws
A crash course for new landlords and a refresher for the rest of us.
California has a series of detailed eviction laws that landlords and tenants should be familiarized with and adhere to. This regulatory regime spells out when, why, and how a tenant can be evicted from the rental unit and affords many protections to renters.
Never in our legal careers have we witnessed such a deluge of new regulations and government requirements than during the COVID era. Although draconian eviction moratoriums related to the pandemic have expired, rental housing providers are still dealing with the residue.
In many instances, policymakers have taken the opportunity to usher in new, permanent tenant protections to appeal to their voter base, which is overwhelmingly composed of renters. This regulatory regime can be maddening, especially for small, mom-and-pop owners and those who have inherited property and did not choose to play landlord. Let’s get a 360-degree view of California eviction laws.
Reasons for eviction:
Non-payment of rent: A 3-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit can be prepared and served when a tenant does not pay rent when due. Yet there can be any number of mistakes in drafting or serving this notice so it is prudent to consult with Bornstein Law to get it right the first time and avoid costly delays.
Violation of Lease Terms: We’ll have to gauge the seriousness of the offense, whether it’s violating a no-smoking policy, a no-pets policy, having parties at night that disturb the “quiet enjoyment” of neighboring tenants, unauthorized parking, subletting the rental unit, or a host of other transgressions.
Less serious offenses can also lead to eviction when they continue after repeated warnings. What we’ve found is that the biggest predictor of dysfunction in the rental relationship is past acts that have occurred. Certain behaviors have a high recidivism rate, for instance hoarding.
California eviction laws relating to no-fault evictions
As its name implies, a California "no-fault" eviction refers to situations where the landlord wishes to terminate a tenancy even though the tenant hasn't necessarily done anything wrong, i.e., the tenant hasn't breached the lease or violated any terms. No-fault evictions include:
Owner move-in and Relative move-in (OMI/RMI): Oftentimes, the owner intends to move into their own property. Perhaps first-time homeowners want to live in a property they just purchased but it is tenant-occupied. Other times, the owner wants to leave the landlording business and move into the rental unit. Not uncommonly, the owner has a close family member who wants to reside in the unit. A parent who is ailing or a grandmother who wants to move in to help take care of the owner’s daughter, for example.
Many unscrupulous owners and real estate speculators have given the rest of us a black eye when they effectuate an OMI or RMI with no genuine interest in recovering possession of the unit for their own use or that of a close relative; instead, their goal is to find a new tenant willing to pay a higher rent or make a windfall profit by selling the rental property.
Given the distrust for these types of evictions, lawmakers have enacted an abundance of safeguards to prevent this. Among these patchworks of rules is the requirement that the owner or their close relative use the unit as their principal place of residence for 36 continuous months in San Francisco, for instance. Another recurring theme is a requirement that the tenant has the right to move back in if the landlord or family member moves out short of the specified time.
Withdrawal of the property from the rental market: If the landlord decides to call it quits and not rent out their units, they may be entitled to go out of business according to the controversial Ellis Act, a 1985 law that codifies the rights of landlords to exit the rental market. Despite numerous assaults on this statute, it prevails.
Deciding to remove buildings from the rental market is a weighty decision and will come with a host of considerations and statutory obligations. Here are but a few:
Can’t be selective: All rental units in the property must be removed, meaning all tenants in the building must be evicted; the landlord cannot single out any individual units to be put on the chopping block.
Notice requirements: Uprooting tenants through the Ellis Act will demand lengthy notice requirements and even more so for vulnerable tenants like elderly tenants and persons with disabilities.
Relocation payments: Displaced tenants are entitled to money for the upheaval, and these amounts will vary.
Sale restrictions: There may be restrictions on selling individual units for a period after an Ellis Act eviction. This is particularly relevant in situations where rental units might be converted to condos.
Re-rental restrictions: The entire property is prohibited from being rented out for a time certain and then, the original tenants have the opportunity to return at the same rental rate as they were paying before.
Although the Ellis Act is a state law, local jurisdictions may have additional requirements, making it imperative to consult an attorney well-versed in California eviction laws to understand the rights and responsibilities under state and local rules.
Complying with government orders (“red tagged”), substantial renovations that cannot be feasibly done with the tenant living there, and temporary evictions for capital improvements: We’ll need to ascertain several things.
› What is the scope of work?
› Is the work necessary to remedy habitability issues or code violations?
› How long will the work take?
› What relocation payments are the occupants entitled to?
› What are the notice requirements to serve the tenants and government bodies?
With a maze of maze of regulations, which ones to follow?
The Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB-1482) sets a statewide standard but many local jurisdictions have more robust tenant protections. In cases where both the state law and a local ordinance apply, landlords must comply with more restrictive regulations.
These local, stricter ordinances have spread throughout the Bay Area. When we first began our practice, there were only a few ordinances to contend with, namely San Francisco, Berkeley, and Oakland. Now there are 17 and growing.
Given the complexity of California eviction laws, no shortage of attorneys offering free legal representation to tenants, and with landlords having to defend against a proliferation of lawsuits, it is imperative to be tethered to proper counsel.
