Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Landlords campaign for veto of 2-month notice to tenants
Sacto Bee ^ | 2 Sept 2006 | Jim Wasserman

Posted on 09/02/2006 2:21:46 PM PDT by radar101

California's landlords, who face a possible return of two-month notices to move out long-term tenants, have launched a postcard campaign urging Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto the idea. Landlords across Sacramento and the state say a one-month notice is enough when asking tenants to leave for no cause. It's used to evict problem renters and to move out tenants for condo conversions and new ownership.

"The 30-days notice is one of the few remaining tools that owners and managers have to remove problem residents such as drug dealers and gang members," said Cory Koehler, deputy director of the Rental Housing Association of the Sacramento Valley.

The group represents 1,500 individual owners of about 85,000 apartments in the region. Members plan to barrage the governor with cards titled "Don't give crime more time." Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully also is urging Schwarzenegger to veto the measure.

Schwarzenegger is considering a bill to bring back the two-month notices that were required in California from 2003 through the end of 2005. The bill would affect only those who have lived in the same unit more than a year.

The Governor's Office said that Schwarzenegger has not yet taken a position on the issue.

At least six other states -- Massachusetts, Vermont, Delaware, Hawaii, Colorado and Georgia -- require more than 30 days to move out long-term tenants. Seven -- Illinois, Oklahoma, Indiana, Florida, Virginia, Missouri and West Virginia -- require 60- and 90-day notices for renters with yearlong leases, say the bill's backers.

(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: landlors; privateproperty; rental

1 posted on 09/02/2006 2:21:47 PM PDT by radar101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: radar101

I like one month as well.


2 posted on 09/02/2006 2:25:26 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101
The Governor's Office said that Schwarzenegger has not yet taken a position on the issue.

which ought to tell anyone what his position is...
3 posted on 09/02/2006 2:27:37 PM PDT by The Unknown Nobody (You can't hit stupid with a brick and build a house...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Unknown Nobody

90 days?


4 posted on 09/02/2006 2:44:56 PM PDT by Prodn2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: radar101
If a landlord rents to the wrong person in this day and age then they will lose there shirt. Most landlords are going to wait at least a month before even trying to evict someone. Then they have to get a lawyer and maybe pay him $1000.00 or more, and give a 30 day eviction. If the person is on public assistance then they get a team of lawyers for free that you have to pay your lawyer to fight a bunch of frivolous stuff that they make up. Even if they just ignore the 30 day eviction then you have to go to court to get if enforced and judge will give them some more time. In the mean time the tenant retaliates by vandalizing your property. Maybe even calling the health department and claiming that the damage they caused is your fault. If they do this early on then you can't evict them because then you will fined for retaliation. In any case you are likely to lose at least 3 months rent, have tons of lawyer fees, retaliation damage to fix. Deviants are protected. Many of them make it a way of life. They are called "Professional Tenants". They go from one place to another doing this.
5 posted on 09/02/2006 2:46:39 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

I lived in a small cottage with a garage for 16 years and had made the garage a work shop. Hard to imagine how I could have gone from receiving a letter to living in a new home in just 30 days.

When I remember just being a guy in an apartment it took me about 2 days to move, even married in a 3 bedroom apt I was fine with a 30 day notice because my living was easily transferable from one apt. to the next.

When people shift to long term house living everything changes, after a very long period of living in a house, it takes a while to get your life and packing in order and find a new suitable dwelling and get everything relocated to that new dwelling.


To me this sounds like a balance could be worked out, such as starting the 60 day notice after 3 years for apts. and 18 months for houses, that would eliminate the worst of the problems.

I spent a few years in the apt. business in maintenance, then management, so I know full well the horror stories, and can tell you many.


6 posted on 09/02/2006 2:52:14 PM PDT by ansel12 (Life is exquisite... of great beauty, keenly felt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

Ah heck, since we want to make LAW...

Make it a year!
No...make it 2 years...
Wait...3 years is even better.

Yep, that is why we elected them to government!

I remember when 10 days notice was sufficient.


7 posted on 09/02/2006 2:55:28 PM PDT by Prost1 (Remember, a democrat is a friend if it is time to vote or you have money to take.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

Anything over 30 days is nonsense. No landlord wants a turnover of tenants. That's a money loser - money to repaint and clean; some loss of rent; etc. Most will give a longer notice if a conversion is planned, but a 30 day notice is most often (I do not say always) used for a problem tenant - one who is a public nuisance or doesn't pay rent, for example.


8 posted on 09/02/2006 2:58:21 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

I had to evict a tennant recently. Talk about a nightmare. And the damage done to the unit was another story. On little tidbit....they filled the refrigerator with food and unplugged it 2 to 3 weeks before they left.


9 posted on 09/02/2006 2:59:49 PM PDT by skimask (People who care what you do don't matter.......People who matter don't care what you do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skimask

I once lived in a great apt until the landlady passed away. her siblings sold the house to some jerks who fix the place up etc...and then sell it for a lot more money. I had no problem with that except for the fact that the whole time they were in the process of buying the house, they told me how I could stay and they were going to fix it up etc... the day after the closing she turned into a spawn of Satan and told me to get out. Thank heaven I found a great place right away, but I did strip every single thing that was worth anything out of there (since they were redoing the whole place.

the best part was that I took an upper-decker in the toilet. Thats when you drop a poop in the upper portion of the toilet. It must have stank like hell.
I also pissed all over the stairs a few times and of course left the cat litter for them.

trust me--She was a b*tch and a half.


10 posted on 09/02/2006 3:17:37 PM PDT by Jaysin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Any improvements or changes you make to rental property you have to be willing to leave behind. That's the risk you take with renting.

I don't understand why a person would live in one place for 16 years without buying. It doesn't make sense.


11 posted on 09/02/2006 3:47:53 PM PDT by stands2reason (ANAGRAM for the day: Socialist twaddle == Tact is disallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Prodn2000

3 days seems about right. God created motels for a reason.


12 posted on 09/02/2006 3:49:45 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: skimask

One needs to "profile" prospective tenants quite carefully. I conduct my own informal "depostion" as to who moves into my units. It is very rigorous. Those that get in, however, are very lucky. I am a very generous and kind landlord, in my mind, and rarely say "no" to tenant requests. I am an easy touch. But I want to be an easy touch, for those whom I think of good character, and respect, rather than bounders. Most of my tenants say when they leave, they regret losing me as a landlord. :) Sure, no doubt, with another approach, I could make more money, but life is too short, and I choose not to live my short life that way.


13 posted on 09/02/2006 3:54:51 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

"Any improvements or changes you make to rental property you have to be willing to leave behind. That's the risk you take with renting."



I know that and had no interest in taking any improvements with me.

I couldn't buy the ocean front property my little shack was on, and it was an incredible little place on the ocean that was too rough for any one else to live in, so I rented it for next to nothing, when the last owner finally got a permit to tear it down (this isthe California coastal commission), he gave me a 4 month heads up which gave me enough time to relocate my business into a home I bought.

I had a good relationship with every investor that bought the property and was always prepared to move in my thirty days, (although I did breathe a sigh of relief when the 60 day notice for long term renters came to be law).

For 16 years people told me to get official recognition from the historical society people for the 1893 building, but I would never play that game, that is one reason the owners always liked my living in the place, it paid the taxes and they trusted me not to cause a real estate nightmare for them.


14 posted on 09/02/2006 4:11:37 PM PDT by ansel12 (Life is exquisite... of great beauty, keenly felt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Revel
A friend in Cali rented a house to a guy who seemed to have solid references. Within a few months the rent stopped. When she tried to evict, he had filed for bankruptcy which gave him a YEAR before she could move on it. When the year was up his WIFE filed for bankruptcy. Guess what? Another year. Meanwhile this poor hardworking ER nurse had to pay the mortgage, taxes and all the utilities. Some deal huh?
15 posted on 09/02/2006 4:16:25 PM PDT by Kozak (Anti Shahada: " There is no God named Allah, and Muhammed is his False Prophet")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

I like knowing that when a major repair is needed, like a new roof, garage door, A/C unit, it's not my expense.

I ran the numbers after we sold our last house, 13 years ago, and all told (all taxes, repairs, etc.), we would've saved a few thousand dollars had we rented at prevailing rental rates through the time we owned.

So, I'm happy to rent.


16 posted on 09/02/2006 4:30:37 PM PDT by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

There is that one risk when you rent though -- don't get too attached to your home. If you don't want to run the risk of having to be kicked out in a month's notice, it may be worth it to buy.

I rent, because I never know where I am going to be from one year to the next. I also usually get 10 days' notice when I have to move and it only takes me three days to pack.


17 posted on 09/02/2006 4:41:39 PM PDT by stands2reason (ANAGRAM for the day: Socialist twaddle == Tact is disallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: skimask

I know of an eviction currently in progress in San Diego Superior Court based on a 30 day notice. Tenants didn't warn the owner of a water leak and waited till the floor tiles were coming up then called the building department to have apartment declared uninhabitable. When the owner sent a plumber and a handyman to fix the unit, they wouldn't answer the door. Owner offered them an identical unit on identical terms in the same building if they would move so he could repair apartment - they refused. At the last court hearing, the judge ordered them to pay the unpaid rent for the last two months til the trial - tenants had several friends there with photos to testify. Who knows what will happen at the trial in Khalifornistan.
If the tenants had the unit (which was in good condition when they moved in) declared uninhabitable, why do they fight tooth and nail to stay in an uninhabitable unit?


18 posted on 09/02/2006 4:47:06 PM PDT by Howard Jarvis Admirer (Howard Jarvis, the foe of the tax collector and friend of the California homeowner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: Kozak

That is so sad. These laws are so cruel to good and honest people.


20 posted on 09/02/2006 4:54:28 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson