Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have inherited a duplex with a tenant living in it who has been living there for a long time--like decades. Problem is that my aunt never had a lease with this tenant and never raised the tenant's rent ($160/month). Because the duplex is old it is covered by LA rent control. Tenant is over 62 so I can't occupy the house and I can't do an eviction for cause because she dutifully pays her rent and there isn't any thing else she could even be violating since there's no lease. I'm sorta okay with letting her live out the rest of her days on my dime though it does seem pretty crazy how the law works (she is not that old (65) and she's a freakin' marathoner so I'm not expecting her to age out anytime soon). But, I'm told that I should have a lease so that the tenant won't suddenly have some other random person move in to ride the rent control gravy train once she gets older or if she decides not to live there anymore or whatever. I tried and the tenant said she won't sign one. I'm not sure what to do. Anyone have any experience with this?
A good real estate attorney should be able to give you the best advice or point out any legal loop holes in your area. Soory. I don't have any personal experience with this.
How am I protected from Evictions? If you are under rent control, even if you don't have the rent increase limits, the Los Angeles rent control law limits evictions to 12 legitimate reasons, in order to prevent eviction abuses. Unlike cities without rent control where tenants can be evicted for nearly any reason or no reason at all, in Los Angeles, the landlord must prove the reason for the eviction, and follow special procedures for some evictions. Reasons fall into two categories: (1) where the tenant did something wrong, and (2) where the tenant is not at fault. Eviction for nonpayment of a rent increase prohibited by Ordinance 174501 [see above] may look legitimate, but it is not.
In the first category, tenants may be evicted for nonpayment of (legal) rent, breaking a term of the lease, causing a nuisance [including drugs and gangs], using the unit for an illegal purpose [eg, a machine shop in an apartment], refusal to renew the lease on similar terms, refusal to permit the landlord reasonable entry to inspect or repair, or there is a different person in possession of the unit than who rented it. In the second category, the landlord has to get and serve special papers with the city Housing Department after proving the reason is valid: the owner's family member or a new manager is moving into that unit, the house is no longer going to be a rental, the property is condemned, or HUD is selling the property. In this second category, the landlord must pay the tenant $3,300 relocation assistance [or $8,200 if the tenant has minor children, a legal disability, or is over 62 years old; new amounts effective 7/1/05] Evictions for major rehabilitation are no longer allowed. See the special section on rehabilitation, below.
The eviction notice itself has to give details on the eviction, such as what was done, the dates, times, and witnesses, so that the landlord cannot make something up in Court and catch the tenant unprepared. [State law now also requires a Pay-or-Quit notice to specify how and to whom the money is to be paid.]
How am I protected from Evictions? If you are under rent control, even if you don't have the rent increase limits, the Los Angeles rent control law limits evictions to 12 legitimate reasons, in order to prevent eviction abuses. Unlike cities without rent control where tenants can be evicted for nearly any reason or no reason at all, in Los Angeles, the landlord must prove the reason for the eviction, and follow special procedures for some evictions. Reasons fall into two categories: (1) where the tenant did something wrong, and (2) where the tenant is not at fault. Eviction for nonpayment of a rent increase prohibited by Ordinance 174501 [see above] may look legitimate, but it is not.
In the first category, tenants may be evicted for nonpayment of (legal) rent, breaking a term of the lease, causing a nuisance [including drugs and gangs], using the unit for an illegal purpose [eg, a machine shop in an apartment], refusal to renew the lease on similar terms, refusal to permit the landlord reasonable entry to inspect or repair, or there is a different person in possession of the unit than who rented it. In the second category, the landlord has to get and serve special papers with the city Housing Department after proving the reason is valid: the owner's family member or a new manager is moving into that unit, the house is no longer going to be a rental, the property is condemned, or HUD is selling the property. In this second category, the landlord must pay the tenant $3,300 relocation assistance [or $8,200 if the tenant has minor children, a legal disability, or is over 62 years old; new amounts effective 7/1/05] Evictions for major rehabilitation are no longer allowed. See the special section on rehabilitation, below.
The eviction notice itself has to give details on the eviction, such as what was done, the dates, times, and witnesses, so that the landlord cannot make something up in Court and catch the tenant unprepared. [State law now also requires a Pay-or-Quit notice to specify how and to whom the money is to be paid.]
How nice of you to find this info. I am not sure if your bolded section would work, since she's been on a month-to-month verbal agreement for so long. This would be about a tenant whose always been on a year lease and is refusing to sign another year lease, I think. Could be wrong, of course.
But, this says the OP can kick her out, and move into the unit. However, the OP will have to pay her $8,200. That's the way I read it.
Plus, OP, as far as changing the terms of the agreement so nobody else can move in, etc., you should have the right to give her a notice of change of terms. She wouldn't even have to agree to it, you just give her a 30 day notice of change in terms of her month-to-month agreement. This would effectively create an agreement with rules she must abide by, whether she signs anything or not.
Here's an article that explains this - scroll down to Rental Agreement Changes Proposed By The Landlord:
After I just looked it up for you, I see it includes info on rent control. You can download it, and it includes all the forms you need, too. Great book.
Last edited by NoMoreSnowForMe; 12-09-2014 at 08:57 PM..
Thanks for the help Ms C and No Snow... Under LA rent control, anyone who is over 62 and has been in an apartment for over 10 years is protected and cannot be evicted even for owner occupancy. Ever. I will look into creating some kind of "change of terms" agreement though.
Thanks for the help Ms C and No Snow... Under LA rent control, anyone who is over 62 and has been in an apartment for over 10 years is protected and cannot be evicted even for owner occupancy. Ever. I will look into creating some kind of "change of terms" agreement though.
Yikes. That's severe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
