Tenent in a hotel?

[BarleyMob]

What is the name of your state? CA

I know when staying at a hotel you are considered a guest and therefore you don't have the rights of a tenent. I've been doing some reading and have a question about residence. I know your considered a guest in a hotel as long as your staying under 30 days, but once you hit that 30th day, that hotel is considered your primary residence. My question is, if that is considered your primary residence, are you then considered a tenent and entitled to the rights of a tenent? Meaning if you didn't pay your room charges on the 31st day, the hotel couldn't legally lock you out?

 

[CALIF-LAWPRO62]

What is the name of your state? CA

I know when staying at a hotel you are considered a guest and therefore you don't have the rights of a tenent. I've been doing some reading and have a question about residence. I know your considered a guest in a hotel as long as your staying under 30 days, but once you hit that 30th day, that hotel is considered your primary residence. My question is, if that is considered your primary residence, are you then considered a tenent and entitled to the rights of a tenent? Meaning if you didn't pay your room charges on the 31st day, the hotel couldn't legally lock you out?

My response:

Excellent questions! Innkeepers (proprietors) have a statutory "self-help" remedy to evict transient hotel guests (i.e., true "lodgers" not treated as tenants under Ca Civil § 1940, below) who fail to timely vacate on the agreed-upon date despite written notice of the innkeeper's contractual obligation to provide the room to a new arriving guest. The innkeeper may enter the holdover guest's room, take possession of his or her property, re-key the door, and make the room available to a new guest. [Ca Civil § 1865(c)]

While the rental of a room to a lodger does not necessarily create a tenancy, several statutory landlord-tenant rights and obligations (Ca Civil §§ 1940-1954.1) are made applicable to many persons who would have been deemed in a mere "proprietor-lodger" relationship at common law. [See Ca Civil § 1940]

However, these rights and obligations do not extend to "lodgers" who are "transient" hotel occupants or occupants at a hotel or motel where the innkeeper retains a right of access to or control of the dwelling unit and offers certain residential services (central telephone service, maid, mail and room service, food service, etc.). [See Ca Civil § 1940(b)(1),(2)]

"Transient" occupants in a hotel or motel are not afforded the rights of "tenants". However, proprietors who force occupants to move or check out and reregister before the expiration of 30 days' occupancy for the purpose of triggering the "transient" occupancy exemption are subject to statutory civil penalty damages. In an action to recover the statutory penalty, the "prevailing" party "shall be" entitled to an award of "reasonable" attorney fees. [Ca Civil § 1940.1(b)]

IAAL

 

[BarleyMob]

My response:

Excellent questions! Innkeepers (proprietors) have a statutory "self-help" remedy to evict transient hotel guests (i.e., true "lodgers" not treated as tenants under Ca Civil § 1940, below) who fail to timely vacate on the agreed-upon date despite written notice of the innkeeper's contractual obligation to provide the room to a new arriving guest. The innkeeper may enter the holdover guest's room, take possession of his or her property, re-key the door, and make the room available to a new guest. [Ca Civil § 1865(c)]

While the rental of a room to a lodger does not necessarily create a tenancy, several statutory landlord-tenant rights and obligations (Ca Civil §§ 1940-1954.1) are made applicable to many persons who would have been deemed in a mere "proprietor-lodger" relationship at common law. [See Ca Civil § 1940]

However, these rights and obligations do not extend to "lodgers" who are "transient" hotel occupants or occupants at a hotel or motel where the innkeeper retains a right of access to or control of the dwelling unit and offers certain residential services (central telephone service, maid, mail and room service, food service, etc.). [See Ca Civil § 1940(b)(1),(2)]

"Transient" occupants in a hotel or motel are not afforded the rights of "tenants". However, proprietors who force occupants to move or check out and reregister before the expiration of 30 days' occupancy for the purpose of triggering the "transient" occupancy exemption are subject to statutory civil penalty damages. In an action to recover the statutory penalty, the "prevailing" party "shall be" entitled to an award of "reasonable" attorney fees. [Ca Civil § 1940.1(b)]

IAAL

So if your a "transient" occupant, then your not afforeded the rights of "teneants." So if one did pay all their bills on time for thirty days straight, they would no longer be considered "transient" and they would be afforded the rights of "tenents," correct?

Also, in your last paragraph:
"However, proprietors who force occupants to move or check out and reregister before the expiration of 30 days' occupancy for the purpose of triggering the "transient" occupancy exemption are subject to statutory civil penalty damages."
I know of a hotel that has had guests staying at their hotel for a year or more, but they have them check-out and check back in every 7 days. Wouldn't that be a violation and due to civil penalty damages?