Proposed CA Bill - Will prohibit ending a tenancy when selling

3 Replies

The bill seeks to limit how a landlord can end a tenancy. Included in this is ownership change, in ther words, the tenancy can not be terminated when you sell your rental. This might be fine for multi units but for single unit rentals, it is common to sell to a non-landlord. This bill would prohibit that. Please notify your state representatives http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/

Regerence 1646.2(b)(1)

SECTION 1.

Section 1946.2 is added to the Civil Code, to read:

1946.2.

(a) A landlord shall not issue a notice to terminate a tenancy pursuant to Section 1946 or 1946.1 1946.1, or seek to recover possession from a tenant under subdivision (1) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except upon good for cause, as set forth with particularity in the notice.

(b) The following shall not constitute good cause for termination of a tenancy or eviction of a tenant for purposes of this section:

(1) A change change, or anticipated change, in ownership of the property.

(2) Foreclosure of the property.

(3) Expiration of a fixed-term lease.

(c) It is the intent of the Legislature to encourage, incentivize, or require encourage or incentivize cities to enact just cause eviction ordinances in order to prevent unnecessary displacement of tenants.

(d) This section is in addition to, and does not supersede or preempt, any other state or local law requiring the showing of good cause prior to the regulating the grounds for eviction or termination of a tenancy.

Epilog

It was ammended on 5/29 to read

1946.2.
(a) A landlord shall not issue a notice to terminate a tenancy pursuant to Section 1946 or 1946.1, or seek to recover possession from a tenant under subdivision (1) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except for cause, as set forth with particularity in the notice.

(b)The following shall not constitute cause for termination of a tenancy or eviction of a tenant for purposes of this section:
(1)A change, or anticipated change, in ownership of the property.
(2)Foreclosure of the property.
(3)Expiration of a fixed-term lease.
(c)
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature to encourage or incentivize cities to enact just cause eviction ordinances in order to prevent unnecessary displacement of tenants.

(d)
(c) This section is in addition to, and does not supersede or preempt, any other state or local law regulating the grounds for eviction or termination of a tenancy.

This is a big improvement. It was put to vote on 5/31 and still lost. So this is now a non-issue.

If anyone contacted their state representatives, I thank you.

If anyone was annoyed that I posted in a general board about a California specific issue, I apologize. I felt this was important.

For everybody, in all states, I encourage you to keep track of what your legislatures are doing with regard to rentals. There is a war against landlords because we are perceived as greedy. Legislatures do not always come up with the best solutions, only solutions that they feel will garner votes.