Do I have Tenant Rights? San Francisco

[meatballmas]

San Francisco California
I'm gonna be a co-owner of my parents property in the city of San Francisco ca, I'm been a tenant there for over 33 years with my wife and 2 children who are now adults. When my parents were alive at the time paid rent for the first 23 years. When dad past away, I didnt have to pay any rent. I maintain the up keep on the house and i paid property taxes. Now my mom passed away, I'm gonna be the co-owner, along with my two siblings. My siblings never lived at the house, and is demanding me who I been the tenant for over 33 years to pay rent at market. What are my tenant rights? do they have the right to force a co owner who has 1/3 equal share as they do, and that is a tenant for 33 years to pay rent at market?

 

[Zigner]

San Francisco California
I'm gonna be a co-owner of my parents property in the city of San Francisco ca, I'm been a tenant there for over 33 years with my wife and 2 children who are now adults. When my parents were alive at the time paid rent for the first 23 years. When dad past away, I didnt have to pay any rent. I maintain the up keep on the house and i paid property taxes. Now my mom passed away, I'm gonna be the co-owner, along with my two siblings. My siblings never lived at the house, and is demanding me who I been the tenant for over 33 years to pay rent at market. What are my tenant rights? do they have the right to force a co owner who has 1/3 equal share as they do, and that is a tenant for 33 years to pay rent at market?

It is perfectly reasonable that you should be expected to pay rent to the estate at a market rate. That rent becomes an asset of the estate and would be distributed accordingly.

 

[quincy]

San Francisco California
I'm gonna be a co-owner of my parents property in the city of San Francisco ca, I'm been a tenant there for over 33 years with my wife and 2 children who are now adults. When my parents were alive at the time paid rent for the first 23 years. When dad past away, I didnt have to pay any rent. I maintain the up keep on the house and i paid property taxes. Now my mom passed away, I'm gonna be the co-owner, along with my two siblings. My siblings never lived at the house, and is demanding me who I been the tenant for over 33 years to pay rent at market. What are my tenant rights? do they have the right to force a co owner who has 1/3 equal share as they do, and that is a tenant for 33 years to pay rent at market?

Yes, your siblings have the right to demand you pay rent. Or your siblings could, as an alternative, force the sale of the property and collect their share of the proceeds.

 

[Eekamouse]

You haven't paid rent in 10 years. How much were you paying when you did pay rent? How big is the house? Is it just the house or has it been split into separate living quarters for your family and then for your mother when she was alive?

 

[quincy]

You haven't paid rent in 10 years. How much were you paying when you did pay rent? How big is the house? Is it just the house or has it been split into separate living quarters for your family and then for your mother when she was alive?

This could bring up another alternative for the siblings: Rent out the bedrooms once used by the parents and meatballmas’ now-adult children.

 

[adjusterjack]

What are my tenant rights?

You're an owner now. You have no "tenant" rights. Your free ride is over.

You can either find yourself another place to live and pay rent there or buy your own home.

Or you can negotiate a payment to your sibs that you can all live with.

Or sell the house and divide the proceeds.

 

[Litigator22]

San Francisco California
I'm gonna be a co-owner of my parents property in the city of San Francisco ca, I'm been a tenant there for over 33 years with my wife and 2 children who are now adults. When my parents were alive at the time paid rent for the first 23 years. When dad past away, I didnt have to pay any rent. I maintain the up keep on the house and i paid property taxes. Now my mom passed away, I'm gonna be the co-owner, along with my two siblings. My siblings never lived at the house, and is demanding me who I been the tenant for over 33 years to pay rent at market. What are my tenant rights? do they have the right to force a co owner who has 1/3 equal share as they do, and that is a tenant for 33 years to pay rent at market?

Goodness gracious, but you are being badly misinformed!

The truth is that you are under no legal obligation to pay rent to any one nor to the estate of anyone. (Not for your individual use of the property!) *

Without going into confusing legal detail upon the death of your surviving parent and by operation of law an estate in cotenancy was created in which you and your two siblings are to be classified as tenants in common (TIC) or co-tenants. With each owning and equal, undivided interest in the entire parcel.

As such (unless otherwise agreed in writing) each of you has equal non- exclusive rights to occupy, possess and use the entire jointly owned property.

Noting that by extension because all owners have an equal right to occupy and use the entire property, NO TENANT IN COMMON HAS THE RIGHT TO COLLECT RENT FROM ANOTHER CO-TENANT! (This is 101 real property law.)

[*] Note that here I used the word individual advisedly, as I can't say whether or not in California the rights of an individual (TIC) extend to his or her lawful spouse.

 

[LdiJ]

I disagree with everybody else. An owner of a house has the right to use the house. So would the other owners as well. They would not be able to stop you from using it, nor could you stop them from also using it. I do agree that the other owners could possibly force the sale of the house in order to get their equity out of it. You, of course, would be entitled to an equal share of any sales proceeds. Based on the value of real estate in San Francisco I think I can understand why your siblings want their fair share of the property. I suspect that they don't actually want you to pay market rent. I suspect that they know that you could not do that, so they are hoping that as an alternative you will agree to sell the home.

However, if you could pay market rent, and you are contemplating doing so, then keep in mind that any upkeep, repairs, insurance, property taxes and any other expenses directly related to the home (other than utilities) would need to be covered out of your rent, and then the remainder of the rent (the profits) split between you and the other owners of the home. You would no longer be responsible for paying for any of that directly. I also suspect that your siblings have not really taken all of that into consideration.

Bottom line however is that your siblings want their inheritance. You really cannot blame them for that. Therefore either you have to find a way to buy out their share of the house, agree to sell and split the proceeds, or work out some other method for them to get their inheritance.

 

[AlmostThere]

You could move somewhere else, and collect 1/3 of whatever rent is collected on re-renting the property.

 

[LdiJ]

You could move somewhere else, and collect 1/3 of whatever rent is collected on re-renting the property.

1/3 after expenses.

 

[quincy]

Goodness gracious, but you are being badly misinformed!

The truth is that you are under no legal obligation to pay rent to any one nor to the estate of anyone. (Not for your individual use of the property!) *

Without going into confusing legal detail upon the death of your surviving parent and by operation of law an estate in cotenancy was created in which you and your two siblings are to be classified as tenants in common (TIC) or co-tenants. With each owning and equal, undivided interest in the entire parcel.

As such (unless otherwise agreed in writing) each of you has equal non- exclusive rights to occupy, possess and use the entire jointly owned property.

Noting that by extension because all owners have an equal right to occupy and use the entire property, NO TENANT IN COMMON HAS THE RIGHT TO COLLECT RENT FROM ANOTHER CO-TENANT! (This is 101 real property law.)

[*] Note that here I used the word individual advisedly, as I can't say whether or not in California the rights of an individual (TIC) extend to his or her lawful spouse.

I disagree with the bolded and suggest you reread the exact wording of the posts that preceded yours.

The two siblings can demand that the third sibling (meatballmas) pay to continue living in the home, this in exchange for the two not moving to sell the house. I agree, however, that the two siblings cannot legally force meatballmas to pay. They can force the sale of the home, however.

meatballmas says he currently pays the property tax and maintains the home and these expenses will now fall on the three of them. With no income generated by the home, the two siblings could find the inherited home a financial burden.

Renting out the home is one way to generate the income necessary to pay the taxes and maintain the home. If meatballmas wants to continue living in the house by himself, he can pay to stay or purchase from his siblings their shares in the house. Or the house can be sold and the proceeds split.

 

[Zigner]

Folks - at this point, the OP is NOT an "owner" of the house. The estate owns the house. The administrator of the estate has a fiduciary duty.

I agree that AFTER the house is distributed, the OP couldn't be forced to pay rent (or face eviction)...but before then, yes, s/he can be.

 

[quincy]

Folks - at this point, the OP is NOT an "owner" of the house. The estate owns the house. The administrator of the estate has a fiduciary duty.

I agree that AFTER the house is distributed, the OP couldn't be forced to pay rent (or face eviction)...but before then, yes, s/he can be.

True. In fact, depending on all facts, the house may need to be sold to satisfy debts.

 

[LdiJ]

I disagree with the bolded and suggest you reread the exact wording of the posts that preceded yours.

The two siblings can demand that the third sibling (meatballmas) pay to continue living in the home, this in exchange for the two not moving to sell the house. I agree, however, that the two siblings cannot legally force meatballmas to pay. They can force the sale of the home, however.

meatballmas says he currently pays the property tax and maintains the home and these expenses will now fall on the three of them. With no income generated by the home, the two siblings could find the inherited home a financial burden.

Renting out the home is one way to generate the income necessary to pay the taxes and maintain the home. If meatballmas wants to continue living in the house by himself, he can pay to stay or purchase from his siblings their shares in the house. Or the house can be sold and the proceeds split.

Except that the OP could continue to pay all of the expenses that the OP was previously paying. Therefore the siblings would not necessarily be out of pocket. That would be unfair to the siblings in terms of realizing on their inheritance, but that is still an option for covering the expenses.

 

[LdiJ]

Folks - at this point, the OP is NOT an "owner" of the house. The estate owns the house. The administrator of the estate has a fiduciary duty.

I agree that AFTER the house is distributed, the OP couldn't be forced to pay rent (or face eviction)...but before then, yes, s/he can be.

Yes, but a judge would have to agree in order to make it happen. OP has lived there for 33 years. It is not very likely that a judge would agree that he needed to vacate before the property was sold.