Rental Law, CA - Having a dispute with old landlord (deposit, credit) - Renting -Apartments, houses, lease, tenant, landlord, agreements, termination - Page 2 - City-Data Forum

molliesue · 09-04-2009, 08:38 AM

Thanks for the replies all

I DID NOT move in - I came to clean & pain 2 days before the move in date (with permission from the owner) and on move in date my Dad said not a chance in hell he's letting me live there.

Here is some interesting stuff I found in CA rental/tennant law if anyone was interested in reading.

"Normally, you have to give 30 days' notice to end a monthly tenancy. Where the place is uninhabitable in any respect, the law allows you to move without any notice, under Civil Code 1942. You don't have to tell the landlord about the conditions, or give him a chance to fix them. The landlord has a sudden vacancy, losing money, and has to fix everything; to the Legislature, it's poetic justice. The defects don't have to be serious, and you may not even care about them. You can use them as an excuse to legally end your lease if you got a job transfer, can't afford it, are getting a divorce, or other reasons."

California Tenant Law - Non-profit legal advice for California renters' rights

The one thing I will do to strenghten my case is go to my county/city inspectors office (whatever it may be) & get proof that he does not have a COP to rent the unit.

I do legal work for a living, executing on judgments & attaching assets etc. I told him very clearly that once I get my judgment I will get a writ & record a lien with the county assesors office (showing up against his property) He'll have a public record judgment & my first step to recover my money will be to send the sheriff to his Wife's POE & garnish wages. I also have his bank info from the cancelled check to do a bank levy, but I didn't tell him this

I did call the heath inspectors office & make a complaint about the cars/chemicas he has & that he's converting old cars etc etc & that it's a fire hazard. I don't know if they went out to inspect the property but I sure hope so!

I will let you all know what happens with the case, I go to court on the 30th !

virgode · 09-04-2009, 09:11 AM

You didn't even need the advise from the forum

CptnRn · 09-04-2009, 01:51 PM

Only in California to the landlord tenant laws so heavily favor the tenant.

Honestly it sounds to me like you knew what you were getting into when you agreed to rent this place and you are simply looking for someway to avoid your responsibilities for paying the rent. It is possible you will get away with it in California. Shame on you.

I think California will come to regret this. Landlords are going to simply get out of the business and the shortages will make rent skyrocket, or landlords will raise the rates high enough to compensate themselves for this bias. I can't imagine whey anyone would want to be a landlord in California, other then ignorance of what they are getting into.

molliesue · 09-04-2009, 06:10 PM

I was greatly misled Cptn. I had NO idea that the outlets didn't work. Nor that the heater was broken. Nor that the fire alarm/smoke detector was broken. NOR was I aware that having a GAS stove on CARPET was a fire hazard (that one was my foolish error being a young woman who doesn't use her stove often enough to know better). Oh - and he didn't tell me that his garage was full of chemicals & garbage - he left that open to discover after he cashed my check. I'm thankful that the laws are in place to protect people from slum like the person I have encountered.

I was happy to do the cleaning. I was not going to live in a shack without appliances, outlets and the peace of mind knowing that the house wouldn't blow up directly beneath me someday.

So, shame on you for thinking anyone should have to live like that and have no rights.

CptnRn · 09-05-2009, 10:29 AM

I'm looking forward to hearing how the courts rule on this. Because I still think there is a strong possibility you will loose. None of the things you complain are not working, make the unit uninhabitable. The land lord has an obligation to fix them and they can all be fixed. But you have an obligation to notify the landlord they are not working before you can have any reasonable expectation for him to fix them. Did you give him notice? If they are all fixed by the time you go to court, where is your case?

Do the building codes forbid a gas stove on a carpet? Possibly not, if they do not then where is the proof that it is a fire hazard? There are fire retardant carpets that could be perfectly safe. And why wasn't this a concern to you when you inspected the place before agreeing to rent it? Being young, foolish or ignorant doesn't grant you permission to dismiss your contractual responsibilities.

You knew the apartment was above a garage when you rented it. Guess what, garages usually contain automobiles and chemicals, that doesn't make them illegal or even hazardous. He would have to be keeping enormous amounts of explosives in their before it could be deemed hazardous. It will be up to the code officials to decide if they agree it is anything out of the ordinary. There is nothing hazardous about converting old diesel cars to biofuel. Diesel and biofuels are far less hazardous then gasoline, yet we store cars containing gasoline in garages all the time.

No one ever say you should have to live like that or that you have no rights. You entered into that contract with your eyes open and agreed to rent the apartment. Now you are looking for an excuse to evade your responsibilities. Shame on you for being so irresponsible.

molliesue · 09-26-2009, 08:08 AM

I posted previously about having to sue my LL when I chose not to rent the unit but he refused to refund my 1st months rent & deposit. When I came to move in (after doing the cleaning & painting for 2 days) there were many things I discovered that were not disclosed to me such as the heat & outlets not working. Many other things as well ...

Anywho, I think it went well! My case was very strong & his weak IMO. It was odd though - the Judge looked at all my pictures, heard both sides .. asked NO questions about dates, facts, details etc .... then said we would receive his decision in the mail in 2-3 weeks.

Any ideas or opinions on why the Judge would not rule immediately? I'd like to think that if he had any incling of ruling against me, he would have asked more questions to clarify why the landlord felt I was not entitled to get my money back. My pictures left no question as to they place being a health/fire/safety hazard so I'm curious why he wouldn't have ruled then & there kwim?

STT Resident · 09-26-2009, 09:19 AM

It's quite common these days for judges in Small Claims Court to advise their ruling by mail within a couple of weeks. The reason for this is that there have been many instances when either plaintiffs or defendants have gone berserk in the courtroom when the judgement has gone against them!

As far as the judge not asking you any questions, everything was in front of him and his decision was probably already made before your case was heard. If the case is clear-cut and all the documentation is in order there is often no need for additional information from either party. Hope your instincts are right and you prevailed!

molliesue · 09-26-2009, 03:35 PM

Thank you very much! I hope so too & I'll post when I find out.

usafracer · 09-29-2009, 04:14 PM

More than likely he is taking a few weeks to review case law.

molliesue · 10-05-2009, 10:40 AM

I WON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He didn't waste anytime ruling. I received a copy of my judgment 4 days after court. He awarded me my rent $1000, deposit $550, costs $40 & and an additional amount that I don't know how he came up with for a total of $2040

I sued for $2100 - doubling my deposit since he did not return it to me.

So now it's just a matter of waiting the 30 days so that I can do a bank/wage levy since he still has a right to appeal. I can't believe he still wont just pay me my money. He said he was going to counter sue .. I wish him luck with that lol.