Landlord-Tenant

Bay Area’s Spike in Rents Presents Incentive for Landlords to Turn Over Units

October 17, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

With the San Francisco Bay Area long one of the most desirable areas in the country to live in and apartments in short supply for a variety of reasons, there is little surprise that rents in the region would be among the highest in the nation. But a report released Wednesday showed that rents have reached record highs in the Bay Area, a fact that prompts San Francisco landlord-tenant law attorney Gregory J. Brod to remind us that some landlords, especially of rent-controlled units, may be tempted to employ illegal means to get their tenants to move out so they can raise rents.

According to the San Jose Mercury News, a third-quarter report from RealFacts of Novato found that rents in the Bay Area have risen 11.4 percent from the third quarter of last year to an average of $2,234 per month, which is the highest level recorded since two decades ago. More category-specific, the rent increases are reflected in the following year-over-year gains in the nine-county region: for a studio apartment, $1,931, up 12.5 percent; one bedroom, one bath, $2,017, up 11.8 percent; two bedroom, one bath, $2,006, up 11 percent; two bedroom, two bath, $2,562, up 9.8 percent; three bed, two bath, $3,022, up 13.5 percent.
Among the five inner Bay Area counties, here are some additional figures concerning third-quarter 2014 over third-quarter 2013 average rents:

San Francisco: $3,400 a month, up 9.8 percent, with a 95.1 percent occupancy rate.
San Mateo County: $2,580 a month, up 10.7 percent, with a 94.3 percent occupancy rate.
Alameda County: $1,994 a month, up 11.6 percent, with a 97.3 percent occupancy rate.
Contra Costa County: $1,659 a month, up 8.8 percent, with a 96.8 percent occupancy rate.
Santa Clara County: $2,369 a month, up 10.7 percent, with a 95.8 percent occupancy rate.

With rent increases such as the foregoing, it’s not hard to imagine that there is an economic incentive for some landlords to turn over apartments, especially rent-controlled units, so that they can reap bigger rents or even take units off the market and repurpose them as condominiums for sale. The latter move is often accomplished in California through a controversial Ellis Act eviction, but landlords can also resort to various methods of harassment to get tenants to abandon their units. Harassment can appear in various guises, which include but are not limited to interrupting, terminating or failing to provide housing services required by contract or by state, county or local housing, health or safety laws; failure to perform repairs and legally required maintenance; abuse of the landlord’s right of access to the unit as provided by laws; and attempts to coerce the tenant to leave the premises with offers of payments that are accompanied by threats or intimidation. Indeed, the list of various forms of harassment is a long one, and harassment is spelled out in municipal ordinances, including San Francisco’s special provision on harassment, Section 37.10B.
Continue Reading ›

The Law on Late Fees in California Rental Agreements

September 25, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

Rents continue to climb throughout the San Francisco area. As affordable housing becomes a scarce commodity, many renters feel like they are at their landlord’s mercy. However, there are laws that protect renters from unfair business practices and our San Francisco tenant’s law firm works to help renters enforce their legal rights. One little-known right that many rental agreements actually violate – California’s law protecting renters from unreasonably high late fees.

Tenants Sue Landlord Corporation Over Excessive Late Fees

Earlier this month, as detailed by San Jose Mercury News, a group of tenants in East Palo Alto filed a class action lawsuit against Equity Residential. Equity is one of the country’s largest landlords and the owner of most apartments in East Palo Alto. The suit, brought by three long-term residents of Woodland Park Apartments, alleges that the company is charging unreasonable and excessive late fees to renters. The plaintiffs claim Equity’s late fees bear no relation to the amount of damages incurred by the landlord as a result of a late payment.

SFFD Fine Against Property Owner Points to Example of When Seemingly Minor Infraction Can Lead to Major Disaster

September 12, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

In the scheme of things, a fine or a single building code violation leveled against a landlord may not seem to be mean much to the layman, and there are plenty of responsible property owners who will properly attend to remediating the cause of the fine or violation. However, as San Francisco landlord-tenant law attorney Gregory J. Brod would point out, sometimes even a seemingly minor infraction can be the basis for a major incident.

That was the case, it turns out, with respect to at least one property in San Francisco recently. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Francisco Fire Department issued two citations to a company that owns a Civic Center property in which the sprinkler system was improperly removed. The Build Group, Inc., of San Francisco was fined $1,000 for removing or disabling sprinklers at the former Renoir Hotel, which was consumed in a big fire August 4 that injured seven construction workers.

Build Group has been managing a $30 million renovation of the closed Renoir Hotel, which is slated to become a “high-end boutique hotel with 135 rooms,” two restaurants, a conference center and a rooftop bar, according to the company’s website. Construction work at the seven-story, 83,300-square-foot building has included seismic upgrades as well as remodeling.

The fire occurred when a spark, ember or flame from a welding torch spread from the second-floor crawl space and throughout the building at 45 McAllister St, according to SFFD spokeswoman Mindy Talmadge.

The SFFD issued Build Group a second $1,000 citation for removing the sprinkler system at another one of its construction sites, this one at 218 Buchanan St. Talmadge said that the company was instructed to leave the sprinkler systems at both of it sites intact.

Build Group, however, is appealing the citations because it believes it was following SFFD instructions and that it “never received a directive instructing the company to not remove fire sprinklers.”

One thing that is quite clear it that the SFFD believes that bringing the fire under control at the former Renoir Hotel would have been a much easier task had the sprinklers been in place, according to Talmadge. And since that is what sprinkler systems are designed for, the Fire Department’s assessment is not an unreasonable one.

Municipalities have building codes, fire regulations and other safety-related ordinances for a very valid reason: to help safeguard the lives and protect from harm the people who live or work in and visit their city. A seemingly minor infraction can, if not adequately addressed by a landlord, lead to unnecessary injuries or even deaths. In addition, a violation of the so-called implied warranty of habitability, a fundamental concept of landlord-tenant law that, under California law, mandates that every tenant has the right to a habitable unit, can be the basis for a tenant pursuing legal action against the landlord.
Continue Reading ›

Theater’s Alleged Bedbug Problem Reminder That Parasites Can Strike Anywhere

August 26, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

Theatergoers typically flock to their favorite venues on weekends, and last weekend would be no exception with summer blockbusters available for viewing. However, last weekend was also the first one on which a theater in Lodi that had allegedly been infested with bedbugs was open for business again. And San Francisco personal injury attorney Gregory J. Brod would cite the high-profile incident at the multiplex facility as an example of how bedbugs can potentially make their nasty presence known in all types of structures.

According to CBS News, the theater in question, the Lodi Stadium 12 Cinemas, re-opened Thursday for matinee showings on 10 of its screens after being treated for an alleged bedbug infestation that led the management to close the theater on Sunday, August 17. Lodi police code enforcement said that the theater owners took care of the infestation by employing three methods of extermination: using high heat in the theater, steaming the seats, and applying chemicals to the furniture.

The Lodi police code enforcement also said that Clark Pest Control was monitoring the theaters, and code enforcement would inspect the theater next week and follow up with monthly inspections of the facility. The repeated inspections and monitoring of the theater point to an issue that is often present whenever there is a bedbug infestation – the parasites are very hard to fully eradicate.

Indeed, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, bedbugs (Cimex lectularius) are remarkably hardy insects that feed on human blood, typically during the evening hours when humans sleep or, say, go to the movies. Aside from their nocturnal habits and small size, bedbugs are difficult to notice, much less eradicate, because they can enter a dormant condition and can even live for 18 months without a source of food. Bedbugs do not spread disease but they do inflict nasty bites upon their victims, who may suffer, as a result, from the bite marks as well as allergic reactions, other skin problems, painful swelling, itching, insomnia and anxiety. And it is difficult to tell if one has been bitten by bedbugs because the critters inject an anesthetic and an anticoagulant into their victims, who, as a result, are prevented from realizing that they have been bitten.

Bedbugs are also adept at finding new victims, as their slim, flat bodies permit them to fit easily into the smallest of spaces, including the luggage they love to crawl into, a habit that affords them an easy and far-flying means of transportation as people travel. Therefore, travelers are often unwitting carriers of bedbugs who stow away in their luggage, permitting bedbugs to take their infestation on the road, so to speak. And the fact that bedbugs can go for long periods of time without a meal make them very efficient parasitic insects, indeed.
Continue Reading ›

Hazards from Lead-Based Paint Must Not Be Overlooked in Landlord-Tenant Law

August 5, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

The implied warranty of habitability is a core principle of landlord-tenant law in California, and it gives every tenant the right to a habitable rental unit, which includes protection from weather, working plumbing and electricity, appropriate garbage receptacles, a unit free of rodents and other vermin, etc. And San Francisco landlord-tenant law attorney Gregory J. Brod would note that another important issue that can render a rental unit uninhabitable is the presence of lead or lead-based paint, a danger that should be of particular concern to renters with children.

Disclosure is a key element of regulations on lead in the United States that apply to landlords, which is spelled out in the so-called Lead Disclosure Rule, or Title X Section 1018 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992. In that federal law, Congress directed the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Environmental Protection Agency to require the disclosure of known information on lead-based paint and lead-based paint hazards prior to the sale or lease of most housing units constructed before 1978. The 1978 date is important because lead was prohibited from all housing build from that date forward. Landlords must include an addendum to a lease, or language within a lease, that includes a Lead Warning Statement and confirms that the landlord has complied with all notification requirements.

A major potential problem with pre-1978 housing, of which there are plenty of examples in the Bay Area’s housing stock, is whether lead that may have been used in the construction process will ever get released in the form of paint chips or dust. In that form, it is particularly toxic to children, especially those age 6 and younger, who may inadvertently inhale or ingest it. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there are at least 4 million households in the United States that have children living in them who are exposed to high levels of lead. In addition, there are approximately 500,000 children ages 1-5 in this country with blood lead levels above 5 micrograms per deciliter, which is the reference level at which the CDC recommends the initiation of public health actions.

In California, a landmark case was decided in December 2013 in which a California Superior Court judge in San Jose ruled that three major current or former paint companies – Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc. and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. – must contribute $1.1 billion to a fund that has been earmarked for cleaning up the hazardous substances present in lead paint in hundreds of thousands of homes in California. According to the Wall Street Journal, the three firms would have to decide among themselves how to apportion the cost of the program that has come about as a result of the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by 10 city and county governments in the state, including San Francisco, Alameda and San Mateo counties.

The cleanup plan does not mandate removal of all lead paint from homes, but it does require work to remove lead from household areas such as window frames and doors where friction may lead to the release of lead dust or chips.
Continue Reading ›

Major Settlement Reached in Des Moines Class-Action Bedbug Case

June 6, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

bedbug%201%20pic.jpg
As the official onset of summer fast approaches, the season in which a small yet very nasty and hard-to-eradicate pest – the bedbug – tends to thrive is around the corner. So with bedbug season upon us, San Francisco landlord-tenant law attorney Gregory J. Brod has taken note of a major settlement this week in a class-action lawsuit brought on behalf of tenants of two buildings in Des Moines, Iowa, that were infested with bedbugs.

According to the Des Moines Register, Polk County District Judge Robert Blink on Wednesday approved a settlement for $2.45 million between a class-action group of tenants and former tenants of Elsie Mason Manor and Ligutti Tower and First Baptist Elderly Housing Foundation, First Baptist Housing Foundation and American Baptist Homes of the Midwest, which were the operators of the two buildings in downtown Des Moines besieged by bedbugs. The roughly 225 residents of the buildings are low-income and disabled, and they will share payouts from the settlement that will be based on the amount of time they resided in the buildings between October 2007 and August 2013.

The problems with the bedbugs at the two buildings in question in Des Moines began in 2007, and the residents, assisted by a team of lawyers, employed a state law called the “Private Right of Action” to forward their case. That law permits consumers to sue businesses that engage in deceptive practices, unfair practices or misrepresentation, or that fail to disclose material facts. In 2009, Iowa became the last state in the United States to enact such a law.

The settlement was reached with the former owners of the two buildings making no admissions related to negligent conduct, which was a charge that the class-action group stood by. Landlords whose property has been found to have bedbugs routinely deny negligence and often point the finger at tenants as the party to have introduced the pests into the property, which the operators in the Des Moines case also claimed was the case.

Regardless of who has been the host to have introduced bedbugs into a building, once they are established, bedbugs can spread like a wildfire from one apartment unit to another – and they are difficult to eradicate. Oftentimes, a landlord may employ inexpensive means for getting rid of the bedbugs that not only prove to be ineffective but also may very well worsen the infestation as well as the aggravations and inconveniences suffered by the affected tenants.

Des Moines is one of many cities across the United States that has experienced significant cases of bedbug infestations. In fact and much closer to home, San Francisco has had major problems with bedbug infestations in recent years. Indeed, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, in 2013 the city’s Department of Public Health received 586 complaints of bedbugs in hotels or apartment buildings, which was a five-year high. And while bedbugs are often associated with unsanitary conditions, the itch-inducing pests can even show up in top-of-the-line hotels.
Continue Reading ›

Bill May Curb Ellis Act Evictions, but S.F. Tenants Face Potential for Harassment

May 29, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

The problem of finding affordable housing in San Francisco has been a longstanding one, and as rents have skyrocketed in the city the ability of tenants to remain in their homes has become an increasingly salient issue as well. And as property values have gone up, so too has the incentive for landlords to exit the rental market altogether, with many who chose that course employing the Ellis Act to evict their tenants. After Thursday’s vote in the state Senate to pass a bill curbing Ellis Act evictions, there may be hope for renters who face such situations, but as San Francisco landlord-tenant attorney Gregory J. Brod would point out, there is another, insidious means, namely harassment, that some landlords may resort to in order to try to drive out their tenants.

First, though, the news for tenants on Thursday was promising on the issue of Ellis Act evictions. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the upper chamber of the state Legislature passed a measure, SB1439, sponsored by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, that would require a landlord to own a building for at least five years before he or she could evict tenants via the Ellis Act. That 1986 law permits property owners to evict tenants so that they may get out of the rental business, but in recent years speculators have, according to Leno, employed the Ellis Act in order to purchase affordable properties, evict tenants, renovate and then put the property on the for-sale market for profit. The process has been responsible, in part, for the city’s rent-controlled housing supply dropping by more than 1,000 units in the last two fiscal years.

While the news on the Ellis Act front may be good for renters, another method some landlords use to oust tenants is through out-and-out harassment, which can manifest itself in a variety of ways. The various guises of landlord harassment are spelled out by San Francisco’s Rent Board in Section 37.10B, including the following means that landlords, agents, contractors, subcontractors or employees of landlords are expressly forbidden from doing:

Interrupt, terminate, or fail to provide housing services required by contract or by state, county or local housing, health or safety laws;
Fail to perform repairs and maintenance required by contract or by state, county or local housing, health or safety laws;
Fail to exercise due diligence in completing repairs and maintenance once undertaken or fail to follow appropriate industry repair, containment or remediation protocols designed to minimize exposure to noise, dust, lead, paint, mold, asbestos, or other building materials with potentially harmful health impacts;
Abuse the landlord’s right of access into a rental housing unit as that right is provided by law;
Influence or attempt to influence a tenant to vacate a rental housing unit through fraud, intimidation or coercion;
Attempt to coerce the tenant to vacate with offer(s) of payments to vacate that are accompanied with threats or intimidation;
Threaten the tenant, by word or gesture, with physical harm;
Violate any law that prohibits discrimination based on actual or perceived race, gender, sexual preference, sexual orientation, ethnic background, nationality, place of birth, immigration or citizenship status, religion, age, parenthood, marriage, pregnancy, disability, AIDS or occupancy by a minor child;
Interfere with a tenant’s right to quiet use and enjoyment of a rental housing unit as that right is defined by California law;
Refuse to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant’s lawful rent payment;
Refuse to cash a rent check for over 30 days;
Interfere with a tenant’s right to privacy;
Request information that violates a tenant’s right to privacy, including but not limited to residence or citizenship status or Social Security number;
Other repeated acts or omissions of such significance as to substantially interfere with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of such dwelling unit and that cause, are likely to cause, or are intended to cause any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of a dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such occupancy.

The penalties and other monetary awards for violating the aforementioned provisions can be substantial. They can include liability for each and every offense for monetary damages equivalent to no less than three times actual damages suffered by the aggrieved tenant, including damages for mental and emotional distress, or for statutory damages in the amount of $1,000, or whichever is greater, and whatever a court deems appropriate. In addition, a tenant who is the prevailing plaintiff would be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs as well as potential punitive damages.
Continue Reading ›

Protecting Tenants from Unscrupulous Landlords in San Francisco’s Tight Housing Market

May 14, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

Our San Francisco tenant’s law firm believes that all San Francisco’s residents, whether they own or rent and whether they are very rich or struggling to make ends meet, deserve a safe and habitable residence. A lawsuit currently pending in San Francisco Superior Court and discussed in a San Francisco Chronicle report examines this right from a unique angle, focusing on the relationship between landlords and the city. It is a reminder that all tenants have rights, the same tenants’ rights we fight for on behalf of our clients throughout Northern California.

City Alleges Landlords Provided Unlivable Conditions Violating City Contracts and Risking Tenant Safety

City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed the suit naming four members of the Thakor family and 13 family-controlled companies as defendants, focusing on residential hotels the defendants owned and operated. The defendants claimed to provide stabilization rooms, units intended for homeless people identified by outreach teams, patients leaving San Francisco General, those enrolled in certain programs (i.e. the city’s sobering center), and people with other contracts through the Department of Public Health. Monthly invoices to the city associated with the units were in the $65,000 to $73,000 range.

California Lawyer on the Dangers of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

March 19, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

It’s a frightening opponent, a colorless and odorless gas that can kill people in their sleep – carbon monoxide. Our San Francisco carbon monoxide poisoning lawyer knows that exposure to this potent gas can be the result of shoddy construction or repair work, a faulty appliance, or other forms of negligence. When careless corner-cutting causes illness or death, including when improperly performed work leads to carbon monoxide poisoning, we believe in holding people accountable and in obtaining monetary damages for the victims.

Involuntary Manslaughter Claims Filed in Connection with Deadly Carbon Monoxide Exposure

Prosecutors in Nevada County, California are pursuing charges against a contractor whose negligence is believed to have led to the deaths of two men, a development detailed in an article in The San Francisco Chronicle. Last fall, Albert Senzatimore, age 69 of San Jose, and Gary Trovinger, age 57 of Los Gatos, both died as a result of carbon monoxide poisoning. The two men were exposed to the gas in a home in the Tahoe Donner ski community.

California Tenants’ Rights Lawyer on Security Deposits

March 17, 2014 | Gregory J. Brod

We’ve always had a fondness for the underdog. Perhaps this is part of the reason we are so committed to helping Northern California tenants, people who often feel like they are at the mercy of landlord. Often, relocating as a renter is a challenge because landlords, understandably, require a security deposit. Tenants who take care of their unit should be able to get this money back, money many rely on when planning their relocation. When this does not occur, our Santa Rosa security deposit lawyer can help.

Giants’ Pitcher Awarded $100,000 in Dispute with Former Landlord

A report in The Press Democrat serves as a reminder that even celebrity tenants can have landlord problems. For those unfamiliar with him, Tim Lincecum is a pitcher with the San Francisco Giants who has earned two Cy Young awards, been part of two World Series wins, and was once ranked among the world’s greatest pitchers. In addition to the battles on the baseball diamond, Lincecum has been embroiled in a dispute with his former San Francisco landlord since 2010. The dispute ended last month with a settlement awarding Lincecum $100,000.