What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
Hi,
I live in Los Angeles, which is under rent control. I have a written rental agreement, with building management, for the two-bedroom apartment in which I live. Several months ago, I rented out the second bedroom to another person, pursuant to an oral agreement.
The rental agreement does permit my renting out my second bedroom. Any new tenant must fill out a rental application and pass a credit check. Then, management draws up a new rental contract, for the both of us to sign. Management did approve my roommate's application and credit check. However, the current rental agreement is still in my name only.
He did not pay for March rent. Therefore, on March 6, I handed to my roommate a signed and dated notice. The following is the rest of the text:
“I did not receive your rent, $[xx.xx], plus payment for your share of the utility bill. This is a 30-Day Notice to pay or quit.”
Later, I realized that I should have, instead, served him with a Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent Quit or Pay, pursuant to CCP 1161. Accordingly, on March 9, I served on him a Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit. In the body of the notice, I believe that I properly included the required information for a valid 3-Day Notice.
At the top of that notice, I wrote, “This notice supersedes any and all notices served to you.“
1. Notwithstanding the above statement (regarding the superseding of prior notices), can my roommate successfully argue that he still has that original thirty-day period to pay the rent or quit and therefore the three-day notice, which I served within that 30-day period, is not valid?
2. How does my prior serving of the thirty-day notice affect any future unlawful detainer action that I may file, where I base the suit upon that three-day notice?
3. I saw the following information in my research:
“If you have already served a Thirty-Day Notice of Termination of Tenancy, and you serve a Three-Day Notice for rent for any period beyond the Thirty-Day Notice, you may have waived the Thirty-Day Notice.”
a. What is the meaning of the above statement?
b. How does it relate to my situation, if at all?
4. I did not include my telephone number in that Three-Day Notice, as required by CCP 1161. Does that make the notice fatally defective?
--------------------------------------------------------------
(Below, is an excerpt from the relevant Three-Day Notice statute.)
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161
A tenant of real property, for a term less than life, or the
executor or administrator of his or her estate heretofore qualified
and now acting or hereafter to be qualified and act, is guilty of
unlawful detainer:
1. …
2. When he or she continues in possession, in person or by
subtenant, without the permission of his or her landlord, or the
successor in estate of his or her landlord, if applicable, after
default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement
under which the property is held, and three days' notice, in writing,
requiring its payment, stating the amount which is due, the name,
telephone number, and address of the person to whom the rent payment
shall be made, and, if payment may be made personally, the usual days
and hours that person will be available to receive the payment […] shall have been served upon him or her and if there is a subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, also upon the subtenant.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you,
WilliamC
Hi,
I live in Los Angeles, which is under rent control. I have a written rental agreement, with building management, for the two-bedroom apartment in which I live. Several months ago, I rented out the second bedroom to another person, pursuant to an oral agreement.
The rental agreement does permit my renting out my second bedroom. Any new tenant must fill out a rental application and pass a credit check. Then, management draws up a new rental contract, for the both of us to sign. Management did approve my roommate's application and credit check. However, the current rental agreement is still in my name only.
He did not pay for March rent. Therefore, on March 6, I handed to my roommate a signed and dated notice. The following is the rest of the text:
“I did not receive your rent, $[xx.xx], plus payment for your share of the utility bill. This is a 30-Day Notice to pay or quit.”
Later, I realized that I should have, instead, served him with a Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent Quit or Pay, pursuant to CCP 1161. Accordingly, on March 9, I served on him a Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit. In the body of the notice, I believe that I properly included the required information for a valid 3-Day Notice.
At the top of that notice, I wrote, “This notice supersedes any and all notices served to you.“
1. Notwithstanding the above statement (regarding the superseding of prior notices), can my roommate successfully argue that he still has that original thirty-day period to pay the rent or quit and therefore the three-day notice, which I served within that 30-day period, is not valid?
2. How does my prior serving of the thirty-day notice affect any future unlawful detainer action that I may file, where I base the suit upon that three-day notice?
3. I saw the following information in my research:
“If you have already served a Thirty-Day Notice of Termination of Tenancy, and you serve a Three-Day Notice for rent for any period beyond the Thirty-Day Notice, you may have waived the Thirty-Day Notice.”
a. What is the meaning of the above statement?
b. How does it relate to my situation, if at all?
4. I did not include my telephone number in that Three-Day Notice, as required by CCP 1161. Does that make the notice fatally defective?
--------------------------------------------------------------
(Below, is an excerpt from the relevant Three-Day Notice statute.)
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161
A tenant of real property, for a term less than life, or the
executor or administrator of his or her estate heretofore qualified
and now acting or hereafter to be qualified and act, is guilty of
unlawful detainer:
1. …
2. When he or she continues in possession, in person or by
subtenant, without the permission of his or her landlord, or the
successor in estate of his or her landlord, if applicable, after
default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement
under which the property is held, and three days' notice, in writing,
requiring its payment, stating the amount which is due, the name,
telephone number, and address of the person to whom the rent payment
shall be made, and, if payment may be made personally, the usual days
and hours that person will be available to receive the payment […] shall have been served upon him or her and if there is a subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, also upon the subtenant.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you,
WilliamC
Last edited: