Landlord retaliation (CA Civil Code 1942.5)

[TGLL]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I am a landlord in CA. My home is rented to tenants on a month-to-month contract.

I put the home on the market and at first my tenants were amenable to showing the house but have begun to decline to let the house be shown during evening hours. It is their right to do so, but I think this will hinder my ability to sell the home.

I may have put my foot in my mouth. I sent them an email which said that I needed more flexibility or I'd have to terminate the month-to-month rental agreement.

It's certainly within my rights to send appropriate notification of termination (I haven't done so yet), but can they go after me for retaliation under CA Civil Code 1942.5? It seems hard to believe that I can't ask them to move out given the house has been on the market but I know CA is a tenant friendly state.

Could they really claim retaliation for me ending the contract since I did state that I'd issue a termination notice if the wouldn't be more flexible?

 

[babybaker7]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I am a landlord in CA. My home is rented to tenants on a month-to-month contract.

I put the home on the market and at first my tenants were amenable to showing the house but have begun to decline to let the house be shown during evening hours. It is their right to do so, but I think this will hinder my ability to sell the home.

I may have put my foot in my mouth. I sent them an email which said that I needed more flexibility or I'd have to terminate the month-to-month rental agreement.

It's certainly within my rights to send appropriate notification of termination (I haven't done so yet), but can they go after me for retaliation under CA Civil Code 1942.5? It seems hard to believe that I can't ask them to move out given the house has been on the market but I know CA is a tenant friendly state.

Could they really claim retaliation for me ending the contract since I did state that I'd issue a termination notice if the wouldn't be more flexible?

I could be wrong, but I don't see how they could say anything. You stated you are on a month to month lease with them. What did your email say (where you were asking for flexibility)?

 

[TGLL]

Yeah the email basically said that if they couldn't be more flexible I'd have to give notice to terminate. Pretty much an ultimatum

The email was an exchange between my real estate agent and myself which wasn't intended for my tenants but which accidentally got copied to them. Ugh, shoot me now...

 

[sandyclaus]

Yeah the email basically said that if they couldn't be more flexible I'd have to give notice to terminate. Pretty much an ultimatum

The email was an exchange between my real estate agent and myself which wasn't intended for my tenants but which accidentally got copied to them. Ugh, shoot me now...

You do not have to have a reason to terminate the month-to-month tenancy, unless your tenants live in a rent-controlled community governed by "just cause" evictions. You have every right to terminate if you wish, based on the fact that the tenants are refusing to cooperate with your sale of the house. They, on the other hand, need to realize that you are no longer under any obligation to continue renting to them. Some LL's find it easier to sell the property when empty, simply because it is less troublesome working around tenants who may interfere with showings at the LL's convenience.

 

[treese]

You do not have to provide a reason to terminate a month to month tenancy. There is no legal defense to a "no cause or reason" termination.

However, if the tenant is provided a reason, they can defend against that reason ... that e-mail gives them a reason ... an ultimatum ... a threat ...


Read up pages 33-35: http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/catenant.pdf

Normal business hours are generally 8am-5pm weekdays.

The landlord would need the tenant's consent to enter at times other than normal business hours.

Then read up on page 49:

California law protects a tenant from retaliation by the landlord because the tenant lawfully exercised a tenant right.