Must month-to-month tenant give 30-day notice to move?
Question: I moved a few weeks ago and disagree with a deduction for rent from my security deposit. The statement said I am being charged 30 days of rent because I didn’t give a 30-day notice to move. I was a month-to-month tenant, and the rental agreement didn’t say I had to give advance notice of my plans to move. I don’t think the deduction is allowed. What do you think?
Answer: The period required to receive or give a notice to move is determined by the length of time between rent payments, as specified in California Civil Code Section 1946. If you paid the rent every month, roughly every 30 days, then you were obligated to give the owner a written 30-day notice.
On the other side of the equation, if your tenancy lasted less than one year, you would have been entitled to a 30-Day Notice of Termination of Tenancy from your landlord. If the tenancy were one year or more, you would have been entitled to a 60-day notice.
The only time a tenant is not obligated to give or receive a notice to move is when a fixed-term lease is coming to an end and the requirement for a notice is not part of the lease.
Most fixed-term leases, however, contain a clause requiring notice from either the tenant or property owner.
Even if you didn’t give notice, your landlord must have made reasonable efforts to rent the unit once you moved out. Your obligation for rent ends once the unit is re-rented or a new tenant begins paying rent.
A property owner can’t collect rent from two tenants for the same time period.
If the unit remained empty for at least 30 days despite the landlord’s reasonable efforts, you probably owe the rent.
New law changes eviction disclosure
Question: The management company I employ says there is a new law that prevents an eviction from being listed on a tenant’s credit report. Is this true?
Answer: The management company is probably referring to changes in the disclosure of eviction court records covered by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161.2(e).
Before Jan. 1, even when a tenant prevailed in an eviction court case, it could still appear on the tenant’s credit report or housing report.
Under the new law, all eviction records are closed to the public for the first 60 days after a landlord files an eviction case, also known as an unlawful detainer. If the tenant wins in court, the court records are to be permanently sealed within 60 days after the landlord’s initial complaint is filed. If the landlord wins, the records are not sealed and they become available to the public, including credit-reporting agencies, once the initial 60 days has passed.
Though it is still legal to reject an applicant who won an eviction case, it will be harder for landlords to learn of these cases.
Skin malady has put pool off-limits
Question: My 15-year-old has a skin disease on her face and hands that is not contagious. The resident manager at our apartment complex saw her in the swimming pool recently and told her she could not use the pool until her skin condition is gone. I offered a doctor’s note, but the manager refused to accept it. Can she keep my daughter from using the pool?
Answer: Under fair housing laws, it is illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities. A disability is defined under California law as a physical or mental impairment that limits one or more major life activities, such as caring for oneself, walking, seeing, hearing, learning or working. The laws also protect people who have formerly had a disability or who are regarded by others as having a disability.
Not only is it illegal to refuse to rent to such people, it is also illegal to charge them higher rents, impose stricter rules or prevent them from using common areas and enjoying amenities. Since your daughter’s condition is not contagious, the resident manager has no justification for her rule.
Questions may be sent to 1055 Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road, Suite 3, Sunnyvale, CA 94087.
