patrick.net

Looks like you have 3 weeks at your disposal:

"Unlawful Detainer Lawsuits

Before seeking eviction, a landlord should first speak with the tenant refusing to move to find out why. Courts customarily give evicted tenants time to move out as well; anywhere from five days to four weeks. Also, many municipalities prohibit eviction when temperatures fall below a certain level. To avoid potential legal issues, always ensure you follow state and local landlord-tenant lease termination rules and regulations."

http://homeguides.sfgate.com/tenant-not-leave-30-days-notice-41499.html

PS. What's your deposit situation?

tatupu70 says

NuttBoxer says

Shoe on the other foot, what would you do if you were the tenant? Throw away money or thumb your nose knowing they can't really do much?

I would have found a place that I can move into before my lease runs out. That's what I did every time I moved.

Or, I would have negotiated the extra 2 weeks BEFORE I signed with the new place.

Bingo. It would have delayed signing the new lease by a few hours, or perhaps one day, to call the old landlord and have that discussion beforehand. To just assume "hell I'll just stay longer, and if the old landlord doesn't agree, fuck him, it will take longer to evict" is what an UTTER ASSHOLE thinks.

If you go through with this, I hope they do ruin your credit, you deserve it!

that landlord is an idiot.

Try to negotiate a "fair standard", that negotiation works wonders. And they probably won't go to court (its more of a headache to them than it is for you). Just don't negotiate based on who can do what to whom (you'll lose that one), those are fun on forums but not in real life.

You can't really insist on having the right to overstay the end of the rental agreement. Landlord is technically under no obligation to honor the extension. Just like in a hotel, you can't insist on staying a few extra days without payment just cause something comes up, at best they may allow a late checkout free of charge.

In the future, I would advise that if you continue to rent go with a national reputable company like avalon or whoever bought out archstone. Things are much better spelled out and you will avoid the ambiguities that come with renting from a private individual. Besides, you can invest in a REIT and get some money back in a form of a dividend lol

If you rented in the PRoB you wouldn't be having these types of problems. It's positively feudal out there.

@nuttboxer--

In all honesty, you must have a plan--how you do foresee this playing out?

You should demand a free blow job and an ipad. Otherwise, you will be laying on bed masturbating on closing day. That should spice up the walk through.

Oh they are closing, then to best of my knowledge they can't just toss you out on the street because someone is closing. Either the buyer or seller has to buy you out.
I would fillibuster if I were you.

Tenpoundbass says

I would fillibuster if I were you.

WTF?

@NuttBoxer : just continue to negotiate. Take the high road. Don't let this tip toward litigation ... you have been legally served your 30 days. That's it. There isn't a judge in the world that goes against that. Basic contractual law. Don't think that if you force them toward a legal path they won't reach out and try and exact comeuppance for whatever you pull. They are on really solid ground. YOU are not. No amount of web searches into legal mumbo-jumbo will save you.

NuttBoxer says

... only recourse is an unlawful detainer that may not even get filed in court before we vacate, and can be dismissed if we leave before the trial day.

How good do you feel about making a choice like that? You think that's the right thing to do?

What do they owe you? Why?

I am sorry for the situation you find yourself in.

tatupu70 says

I would have found a place that I can move into before my lease runs out. That's what I did every time I moved.

Or, I would have negotiated the extra 2 weeks BEFORE I signed with the new place.

I asked about pushing up the date, and I will again once it gets closer. But the current tenants of our new place are military being deployed. The military is moving their stuff for them the week before, not much flex there.

This place is $350/month lower than our next best option. For that I'm willing to take some risk...

tatupu70 says

From your postings, it doesn't sound like you're negotiating-it just sounds like you asked for concessions and then moved right to threats.

Did you offer something for the right to extend your stay? After they said no, did you sweeten your offer?

I shouldn't have to explain this, but negotiation starts with one party asking for something they want, and the other party counters with something closer to what they want. A flat no is not negotiating, and that's what they said to both requests I made.

To the last, I haven't threatened. Simply stated we don't have the means to pay for storage and hotel, and don't have another place to go. I offered to pay for the 21 days up front, as I should. Not much I can do when they shut me out right away...

Change the locks!

And only communicate with him through the mail slot.

We got Rew on the ropes don't wuss out on us now.

dang007 says

Because some people are entitled in this country, let some1 else pay for their mistakes.

I haven't made any mistakes. The PM should've remembered who I am, and negotiated. They tried to stick me with the fee for a mouse infestation at this place when they had a huge hole in the garage that let all the mice up to into the attic. I researched and found out that owner is always responsible for pest abatement, stuck to my guns, and they backed off. Some people don't learn though...

This whole thread is why I didn't care if 2010 wasn't the bottom or not, turns out it was, for now any way.
I just got tired of Landlord crap, the house I was in sold three times in 7 years. I didn't care if my house went down another $40K and still woudn't, so my taxes will be cheap when I pay it off soon.

Because now I'm sick of mortagage company, insurance companies having me by the short and curlies when it comes to insurance.

blowmeironvagina says

Legal. enforceable. That way, if I was dealing with an entitled prick who thinks the world should just give him crap, like you, I wouldn't even have to bother going to court. Rather, I'd report your debt to all three credit bureaus, same as any other renter who doesn't pay according to their rental contract.

Unless

What if I didn't agree to the terms and never signed? OHH, YOU'D START THE UNLAWFUL DETAINER SUIT. AHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Straw Man says

PS. What's your deposit situation?

I've confirmed through law and a friend, deposit cannot be touched except for damage to the residence. We will be having a pre-inspection, and we will be taking lots of pictures...

tatupu70 says

@nuttboxer--

In all honesty, you must have a plan--how you do foresee this playing out?

When they said no to financial assistance I replied back that I don't have the means to pay for storage/hotel, and don't have a place to go. I offered to pay the full rent during my time around the first as usual. Their response has been silence. If I feel like it's gotten too far, I will bring in my friend's lawyer. Both my friend who's in real estate, and my friend who own's properties say I have nothing to worry about. The laws I read are on ca.gov sites. I think my footing is pretty solid here...

Rew says

@NuttBoxer : just continue to negotiate. Take the high road. Don't let this tip toward litigation

That's not my interest at all, but they are refusing to offer up any sort of compromise. And I'm open to additional compensation their way if they wanted it. Something to get talks going...

Direct the landlord to this site and then tell them that you are APOCALYPSEFUCK.

NuttBoxer says

What if I didn't agree to the terms and never signed? OHH, YOU'D START THE UNLAWFUL DETAINER SUIT. AHAHAHAHAHA!!!

on a month to month lease, the landlord can change the rent to anything they want, and/or terminate the lease with one month's notice. No signature needed. (some few california rent control cities have different rules but that is the general rule)

you are one of those trash dumbfucks who think they know what they are doing, but actually doesn't.

it may work out your way this time, but the risk/reward ratio on your course of action is just stupidly tilted against your decision. I have literally destroyed assholes like you in court. Your landlord could sign a lease with someone else, promising them the place literally for the day after your lease expires, that person shows up from NY with a truck full of stuff and no where to go. Then, they sue the landlord, and you for: motel for the 2 weeks, truck rental fees for 2 weeks, restaurant meals for the family for 2 weeks since they can't cook at home. ALL legitimate. Why? because you were given legal notice to leave, and choose not to.

the last jackass tenant like you I had, I left his credit in flames. I actually paid the extra $20 to record the small claims judgement against him and his wife on county public records too, just to make sure it kills his ability to rent or buy for years to come.

grow up. you created this situation by not taking your lease turns as serious. quit being a spoiled entitled little child.

blowmeironvagina says

with one month's notice.

Code of Civil procedure Section 1161.3.

Two months if you've inhabited the dwelling for over a year. For a landowner, you don't know much about California rent laws...

NuttBoxer says

I've confirmed through law and a friend, deposit cannot be touched except for damage to the residence. We will be having a pre-inspection, and we will be taking lots of pictures...

http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtml

Unpaid rent. The LL can give notice now that the rent will increase to a very large amount per day after the 30 day notice period. Then they will file an unlawful detainer the day after the 30 day period. If you stay any days - that amount will be unpaid rent and they will keep your deposit. You'll have to file a claim to try and get it back. You won't win.

Then assuming you move out prior to the trial, their lawyers (this is a corporation; a corporation must be represented by a state bar certified attorney in a legal proceeding) will happily file the civil action additional damages which will minimally be the balance of unpaid rent, the attorney's preparation and filing fees, and the court filing fees for the unlawful detainer and the civil action. Most attorneys bill $500-1000 per hour on the low end, and phone calls, emails, visits to the residence, (for discovery) etc. are all lawfully billable. And they will be done, at least, they will provide billable records to the court. Not to mention other possible damages related to the delay (or loss of) the property sale itself.

Then you will be PRAYING to settle.

If not, you will be deposed. They will bill for that. There will be pre-trial discoveries. They will bill for that. If you are stupid enough to go through all of that AND go to the trial (and represent yourself because every attorney you talk to will tell you to settle.) you will lose. And they'll bill you for that. You get the point.

If you don't attend the deposition or answer the discoveries, you risk being held in contempt, fined, jailed, and the plaintiff may receive summary judgement.

I'd estimate a judgement of at least $20k if you do this. Honestly. They won't settle for anything less than $5k, probably because they know they have 100% likelihood of winning. This will not be filed in small claims court most likely.

Not to mention your solid payment history (and job, presumably) will only encourage them to see this through because they will view you as collectable.

I cannot fathom how bad of an idea this is.

I've seen this before a lot in Los Angeles, especially now that a lot of rentals are being flipped and tenants turned over. This game of chasing "appreciation", also brings a lot of idiot land lords (plenty of those around) who don't know the rules and end up screwing themselves over out of greed. Reminds me of one of those morons out here who tried to kick an old lady out, she is still there rent free 2 years later because of how he did it.

So here is how you win:

1) You said you were there over a year. He owes you 60 days. He can't just do 30 day notice. Do send him a certified letter that he owes you 60. You can remind him that that is the law. They might argue and try to turn it into a position or use some other manipulative thing, as long as you keep it professional it won't escalate. Law is on your side no matter what.

2) Find it if it's under rent control ordinance, if it is (in LA most are) he can't just kick you out just because he wants to. Rent control = cash for keys, you are under no obligation to leave EVER.

FortWayne says

He owes you 60 days. He can't just do 30 day notice.

There is an exception to this. A 30 day can be served the day the unit enters escrow(is sold). I got a soft confirmation they did that part right. I'm pretty sure they can provide harder proof if needed though, so the 30 day is legit.

I think that also means the rent control does not apply.

FortWayne says

So here is how you win:

This is horrible advice.

OP, the moral of the story here is to sign & renew a lease, and make sure to redline any clause allowing the LL to terminate the lease upon sale. Then at least you will know when you have to start looking for a new place to live.

If the LL doesn't allow the redline, move on to another property.

NuttBoxer says

There is an exception to this. A 30 day can be served the day the unit enters escrow(is sold). I got a soft confirmation they did that part right. I'm pretty sure they can provide harder proof if needed though, so the 30 day is legit.

I think that also means the rent control does not apply.

I'm 100% sure that rent control (if it was present before) always applies. There is reason they pay renters here about $25,000 - $35,000 to move out of their old rental units. It is because of rent control. Now if the building is not rent controlled, that doesn't apply of course. They simply can't kick them out legally here so investors pay people to leave, but again that's only if the building is in rent control ordinance. Most of Los Angeles is.

I don't know about 60 days being turned into 30 because of purchase. Based on what is on the government website they have to have 5 things to turn it from a 60 day to 30 day. All 5 must be present or it doesn't make it a valid 30 day:

1) The landlord has contracted to sell the rental unit to another person who intends to occupy it for at least a year after the tenancy ends. In addition, all of the following must be true in order for the selling landlord to give you a 30-day notice
2) The landlord must have opened escrow with a licensed escrow agent or real estate broker, and
3) The landlord must have given you the 30-day notice no later than 120 days after opening the escrow, and
4) The landlord must not previously have given you a 30-day or 60-day notice, and
5) The rental unit must be one that can be sold separately from any other dwelling unit. (For example, a house or a condominium can be sold separately from another dwelling unit.) 203

Based on what I've seen with purchases, they for sure don't have #1 covered. No investor ever walks in with a tenant contract signed for a year. Because no one in their right mind would sign a contract before they see anything. And #5 also depends on property type (apartments generally dont qualify for 30 day, and are often under rent control).

Hope this helps man.

with all the money you saved from renting an "under market" rental over the last 4 years, why the fuck are you squabbling over 2 weeks of temp housing/storage?

FortWayne says

Based on what I've seen with purchases, they for sure don't have #1 covered. No investor ever walks in with a tenant contract signed for a year.

I think this is covered. Buyer is a family looking to occupy. Other circumstances are covered as well.

Just ran across this:
http://www.fresno.courts.ca.gov/_pdfs/Self-Help%20Packets/English%20versions/SHP-25%20R11-11%20unlawful%20detainer%20%28website%29.pdf

Seems to indicate 30 day has to be served by a process server(start of page 3). They used the third method, and did it day of, or day after escrow was entered. Definitely didn't make three attempts to hand deliver. I think could mean they have to re-serve...

NuttBoxer says

Buyer is a family looking to occupy.

sounds like you're being an obstructionist.

it was already stated in the thread, but the bottom line is:

escrow is a time-sensitive process with a lot of contractual contingencies and good faith money on the line. take your shit and get out.

NuttBoxer says

30 day was not served at the beginning of the month, it was served the day escrow was entered, which is now looking illegal. Anyway It was 6th of April I believe.

why is this "i believe"

where you served in writing? taped to your door? process server? email?

the link you presented earlier, trying to bolster your claims about your service being illegal applied to FORCIBLE DETAINER only. Nothing to do with giving you 30 day notice.

If the landlord can show you knew of his intention, all of your stupid legalize won't matter. I've had tenants try this.
Dipshit: your honor, I wasn't legally served...so according to AZ law.
judge to me: did you serve them?
Me: I emailed them and they replied, I have copies of their replies.
Judge to dipshit: are these your emails?
dipshit: yes, but according to az law... blah blah blah.
judge: but, you clearly knew of ________.
dipshit: yes, but that isn't the way its supposed to be served.
judge: you were given notice, you got the notice, you replied about the notice, so you can't claim you weren't served.

and done.

In THE REAL WORLD, it is the intent, and equity of the situation that wins out.

Now, back to your case: In most month to month leases, service has to be made at the time of each period, i.e. on or before the 1st if that is when you pay your rent.

CA law may be different. Perhaps they have a different law regarding sale of the home.

AND, you don't even seem to be sure what day you were served, the 6th is awfully close the 1st, and your track record for veracity is pretty low. Don't think just claiming you didn't see it, or didn't get it in the mail will clear you.

BUT, this is honestly the first point that you might have.

Tenants on a month to month lease have to give their notice on or before the 1st, and for whole periods of the lease, the same applies to landlord where I am. ymmv.

NuttBoxer says

Let me separate the crap in this thread from the substance. I have been an excellent tenant for over 4 years. Thought that would cause the owner to be a little flexible if I needed more than 30 days to find a good place. Tried to negotiate an extension or financial assistance, with the point being I meet their deadline. No negotiation was entertained. Stated I don't have the money, or a place to live, and for those reasons would be staying past the 30 day. Asked for a pro-rate so I could pay for the entire time I stayed.

I'm not expert on tenant law anywhere, but what gets me is the OP's attempts to rationalize what he's doing and pretend it's OK. He didn't try to negotiate at all. He offered to pay rent for the extra time he would be overstaying his lease. Whoop de doo. Of course he's going to pay that. That's not offering ANYTHING for the disruption and extra costs that his overstaying his lease causes the landlord or new owner. Then he has the balls to ask for compensation for his moving and storage costs?? wtf? He's been paying under market rent for several years and now he's going to ask the landlord to pay his moving expenses too?? This guy lives in la-la land.

And don't pretend what you're doing is legal or moral. You are trying to game the system and use a loophole. You may win or you may get hammered. But you are the bad guy--not the landlord. He followed the law. He followed the terms of the contract. You are the one who doesn't want to.

There's a lesson to be learned here

Always get at least 60 days notice ON YOUR LEASE for termination of contract. Its hard to pick up your home and find a new one to move to in only 30 days

errc says

There's a lesson to be learned here

That's a good point, but the lesson I would learn in his shoes is to be thankful he had a hugely undermarket rental agreement for 3 or 4 years. In such a situation, don't worry about how many days notice or quibble on the exact exit date. Just use a pod or similar moving service where you can keep your stuff in storage for a month for free. Then stay in a hotel or go on a short vacation during the move time. You caused the 2 week homeless situation. Fortunately, there is an easy solution. Hopefully, he saved some money during his years of subsidized rent to pay for this expense.

If you fight it, I'm guessing the landlord will take you to court. They want the place vacated and don't want to risk you in there mucking things up. So, you'd have to prepare for that, which is probably a bigger hassle and cost than just getting a pod.

ThereStrategist says

and iI have already learnt more from this thread alone, than 4 years of being the world's best landlord.

There's some useful, but mostly a lot of biased, false information. Regarding service of 30 day in California:

http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/terminations.shtml#writtennotices

Under Proper Service of Notice is clearly states than "nail and mail", cannot be done until PM has attempted in person or certified service 3 times. The other article I linked to was a handbook for landlords who don't use a lawyer on the step-by-step process of a UD. Obviously you can't file a UD without serving a notice to vacate first.

Now I know people can hypothesize about what might happen all day long, but I'm interested in facts, not opinions. If this went to a UD, I could file a motion to quash based on improper service, and I'll make sure PM is aware. Just one more complication to persuade them it's in our best interest not to make this a legal matter.

Sorry some of you have your panties all wadded up about tenants questioning your supremacy, but please stick to cited law and facts, as some have done.

These punk LL are fortunate that they live in such a hyper conservative hell hole like California, and not a progressive utopia like Pennsylvania, because here we recognize the power imbalance, and protect our renters much better.

The last place we moved out of, both the LL and their realtor lied to us verbally about what was going on, so we told them that they could apply the security deposit as the last months rent. They got all pissy, and I'm certain they were wanting to try and screw us over, but we held up our end otherwise (kept the property looking nice) and moved out and cleaned house quickly in the 13th hour. Moving sucks

Also, there was some wildly inaccurate information about raising the rent on a tenant to get them to leave. In California you are required to give 30 days notice for an increase under 10%, and 60 days for an increase over 10%.

http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/legal_guides/lt-2.shtml

errc says

Moving sucks

Agreed, and moving over 2 weeks is even worse. That's why I'm not taking this lightly. The one constant I've seen during my years renting, and again in this thread is the arrogance of landlords. I say arrogance because when I look up the law, they are often in violation of it. Usually I've been able to work something out though. Court has only been an option for me once, and I was extremely aggravated by the circumstances, otherwise I wouldn't have taken the time.

I know I'm alone on this, but I couldn't possibly give any less a shit what the law says. The majority of the laws in the United States are unjust and cause harm, so as a freedom loving American, it's my duty to disregard them

NuttBoxer says

Agreed, and moving over 2 weeks is even worse. That's why I'm not taking this lightly. The one constant I've seen during my years renting, and again in this thread is the arrogance of landlords. I say arrogance because when I look up the law, they are often in violation of it. Usually I've been able to work something out though. Court has only been an option for me once, and I was extremely aggravated by the circumstances, otherwise I wouldn't have taken the time.

Wow--your are truly delusional. I have no love for landlords--they are true rent-seekers and add very little value. But you are blatantly disregarding your contract. Just because you screwed up. It's not the LL fault. It's YOUR fault. It's offensive that you try to pretend that it's someone else's fault.