When I said "she", I meant Brindle didn't pay rent. Brindle also doesn't have a job so Brindle is pretty f'ed right about now because how is Brindle going to be able to find a place to live if she is not working and has no income?
I was trying to confirm the no rent issue. Nothing more.
Since brindle didn’t pay rent she wasn’t a single lodger. She was a resident of the property.
Even if she was a single lodger she would be due more than three days, based on what has been stated here. I’ve found nothing that would support a period of only three days notice. There is a requirement to provide the same amount of notice as the rental period. If one doesn’t pay rent, it’s hard to say it should be any particular length of time and that shows the single lodger issue doesn’t fit.
I see no lawful right to remove brindle without an unlawful detainer action which cannot be brought until brindle has been served properly. If she has been served and refused to leave, the trustee would then have to file an unlawful detainer suit and seek the the eviction of brindle.
The problem; apparently the police have now taken it upon themselves to make the legal determination of brindles status and have concluded she is a single lodger. If they are willing to physically remove brindle there isn’t much brindle can do to prevent being removed without getting into court before they come back.