The battles in Sacramento never cease to amaze me. Each time a bill that is harmful to Landlords pops up we have to go to battle and be ready for every change and turn. Years ago a bill was proposed that would require landlords to do a walkthrough prior to a tenant vacating. The first draft was very onerous. When it was inevitable that the bill would pass, and I suggested at a CAA legislative conference that the time to provide the back up and repay the security deposit be extended to 21 days. A large owner chided me because he could provide all the bills and receipts within 14 days. I said that we have to look out for the Mom and Pop owners who may not be as sophisticated a large owner. When it all was finished the bill was passed and we got 21 days to refund security deposits.
This is where we are today in Sacramento.
CAA Members Succeed in Challenging Two Bad Bills
Language to Extend 3 Day Notice to 14 Days Removed from Bill
Recently, Assembly Member Tom Ammiano removed from his bill – AB 265 – the language that would have extended the 3 Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit to 14 days. The changes to the bill are due in large part to the thousands of opposition letters sent to him and other legislators by members of the California Apartment Association (CAA).
The negative impacts of this proposal to the rental housing industry would have been many, including delays in rent payments, the inability for some owners to meet mortgage and other financial obligations and the added delay in evictions.
Unfortunately, the fight is not over. While Mr. Ammiano has removed the 14 day language, he has added amendments to the bill that will allow for additional delays in the eviction process. The new proposal will allow tenants to ask the court to stop the eviction action – at any time during the process – so long as the tenant pays the rent and pays the landlord’s attorney’s fees – not to exceed $350. Among other things, the bill language doesn’t take into account the many delays the tenant may have caused throughout the process and the costs the landlord may have expended.
Sue Your Landlord Bill Stalls on Assembly Floor
Assembly Bill 934 (D-Feuer, Los Angeles), legislation that would have allowed a tenant to sue a rental property owner based on the statements the owner made in an unlawful detainer action has stalled on the Assembly Floor. Based upon persistent lobbying against the bill by CAA staff and more than 1,200 opposition letters sent to legislators by CAA members, Assembly Member Feuer was unable to garner enough votes to move the bill forward this week.
This bill would have stripped rental property owners of current court protections known as litigation privilege. CAA successfully argued that AB 934 unfairly targeted the rental housing industry, removing it from important legal protections. No other industry or group has been so unjustly targeted.
CAA also argued AB 934 would discourage property owners and managers (out of fear of being sued) from protecting their other residents and property by promptly serving notices to tenants who violate their leases, disturb or threaten other tenants, damage the property or violate the law.
The fight to keep the bill from moving forward is certainly not over. Watch for updates and additional calls to action.
