Renting an illegal unit in California (Santa Clarita: rental, attorneys, houses)

[DontH8Me]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

So you didn't use all or always. Your premise seems to be building on the fact that because someone builds an illegal unit, meaning non permitted that it is uninhabitable. My premise is that is not the case. Please correct me if I am wrong.

You are wrong.

Things aren't always what they "seem" to be - that would be your interpretation. I did not once state what you claim my posts "seemed" to be implying. If you stick with what was written, it shouldn't be to hard to figure that out.

I don't have an illegal unit, not do I live in one - I guess my standing is impartial. Feels good.

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

Originally Posted by DontH8Me

You are wrong.

Things aren't always what they "seem" to be - that would be your interpretation. I did not once state what you claim my posts "seemed" to be implying. If you stick with what was written, it shouldn't be to hard to figure that out.

I don't have an illegal unit, not do I live in one - I guess my standing is impartial. Feels good.

what exactly is the premise or idea that you are proposing then? When you are pushing an idea, stick with it. My idea is that not all units that are illegal are bad. What is yours so the readers will not misinterpret what you are writing.

[CupofCoffee]

You seem to feel that all first time renters (I'm 21) know what is and what is not right. I didn't. Yeah, I accepted the place until my health and safety were severely compromised and that's when I thought, something's not right here. I got the lawsuit for back rent because I refused to pay rent after the burglaries because of the unfixed broken window which was the point of entry. My mom got involved, started doing some research and immediately helped me get out of there. But, I'm still being sued eventhough it was an illegal apartment and unhabitable.

Someone called the BI in July, but it wasn't me. I had moved out in Sept by the time the BI got around to visiting the unit. The owner told them he wasn't renting it out. He lied. I've got the lease agreement, he got my monthly rent for over a year, and my security deposit. I'm pissed. I was taken advantage of and I'm looking at having my credit messed up. He did me NO favors.

All I wanted to know was whether or not the judge would give me my deposit back and moving expenses.

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

My thoughts are that a 21 year old would know the difference between a place that is not fit to inhabit and one that is. If your renting a converted garage, chances are you would know that, not to say that was your case. Just trying to show that shabby built properties have red flags all over them.

Also you stated in the above post that the owner told the BI (Not sure what that is.) that the place was not being rented. How can he tell one agency that it is not being rented and still pursue action against you from another agency? Could you go to the BI and use the information that the owner gave them to help your case in court?

[CupofCoffee]

The place looks like a studio apartment with a kitchen sink, cabinets, a stove, a shower, a toilet, a window and a door. It seemed ok--until the owner decided not to fix things after a year of my living there. I found out it's a converted laundry unit that was once used by the other tenants in the building. It was illegal and then became substantially uninhabitable.

I've learned alot.

BI is Building Inspector. The BI came after I moved out. So the owner lied. And I think the BI was believing him over a 21 year old. The owner rented out 5 units including mine but is only assessed for 3. The BI tells me he called Edison and there are only 3 meters. Yeah, that's because the other tenant like myself paid one monthly fee that included utilities so no utility bills in our names.

I told the BI about the lawsuit, my lease agreement, my payments and security deposit and oh yeah that the owner hired a property management company to collect rent from the unit. Perhaps when his lawyer sees my answer to the UD he'll drop the lawsuit because I questioned whether the owner had the proper permits needed to rent the unit. But, I would still like to get my security deposit back and moving expenses. That's over $1,000.

I don't know how he could expect to keep my deposit when he told the BI he didn't rent out the unit but it's two different agencies and I'm trying to get a letter from the BI to support my case in court.

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

I am with you on this one now. Mainly because it looks like the building owner is trying to play both sides of the fence. On the one side you are being sued for an unlawfull detainer on this rental unit. On the other side the owner is claiming that the unit is not being rented. Would be fun to get all the parties together in a court of law. There was a case in Oxnard, CA where an owner of soem farm worker housing was playing games like this. The judge in Ventura County made him pay for the tenets moving expenses. Included was some monetary compensation. Since the courts are all for precident, you may want to look up that case and use it for your benefit. You may need to archive either Ventura County Superior Court cases, or you could also look into the Ventura County Star Newspaper archives for information on the case. Sorry that I can't be of more help. Other than what the paper wrote I have no other information on the case.

[CupofCoffee]

Thanks for the heads up about looking up other cases for precedent, I hadn't thought of that. You know what really hurts, the BI says that if he were able to inspect the unit while I was still living there, the owner would have been fined for the numerous violations. Maybe that's why he filed the UD, to motivate me to move ahead of the inspections. Things that make me go hmmmmm.

[ferretkona]

I still do not understand why you feel you have moving expences coming? Were you going to never move out?, will your next landlord be liable for your future moving costs?
Just because you may have unexpected costs does not mean they are refundable.

[CupofCoffee]

Perhaps you haven't read the complete thread? Let me summarize, unhabitable dwelling, substantial safety and health risks, a unit not permitted for habitation. No cause of mine.

[CupofCoffee]

The end result, went to small claims, after landlord did not show up for two times, added the property management company to the suit--landlord showed up this time. Got security deposit back plus the cost of stolen items due to landlord negligence. Nothing for the unit being uninhabitable except that I did not owe landlord additional rent once I confirmed it was an illegal unit. Judge thought my mom was an attorney (she was in court with me), she's not. Landlord paid me within 3 months so no collection hassles. I'm in a better place and learned a valuable lesson.