Kick 'em out!... Maybe? - Posted by Chris In L.A.

Posted by Kristine-CA on January 26, 2005 at 15:09:47:

Rosendo: thanks for your reply. I understand your thinking about an
appeals process to a pay or quit notice. Trouble with pay or quit is
that the tenant can answer the claim, citing reasons why they
shouldn’t pay. But putting aside the issue of rent for a moment: if one
serves notice of termination (30 days), the sheriff lock-out would occur
the next month. So doing these simultaneously makes sure that you
are covered and the unlawful detainer would happen sometime within
the next 6 weeks. Or at least it’s working that way for me.

That being said, having the house trashed is a real problem. Which is
why most tenants that I’ve gotten rid of I’ve paid to leave by a certain
time without trashing the property. I have a legal eviction going now
and it’s my plan to let tenants know that if they don’t trash the
property and leave before the lock out date, that I’ll pay them

And you are right when you say these costs can ruin some investors.
But lost rent is just one of many costs that can take you down if you
are not prepared. Kristine

Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by Chris In L.A.

Posted by Chris In L.A. on January 26, 2005 at 02:38:19:

I am buying a duplex in West Hollywood, CA. One unit is vacant and the other one is occupied, when I close escrow and I am the new owner, if I don’t like the tenant, or they are paying a low rent can I evict them? Or where can I find this info out? Who should I talk to? please Help! Thanks.

Don’t Kick em out! - Posted by Will (Diego)

Posted by Will (Diego) on January 27, 2005 at 19:28:17:

I don’t own in W-Hollywood but I do believe that there is rent control in W-H. You may want to confirm this. Try for starters. If so, you ought to seek an attorney ASAP.


Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by Kristine-CA

Posted by Kristine-CA on January 26, 2005 at 13:42:25:

Chris in LA: you can’t “evict” them unless they are in breach of some
agreement. You can’t raise their rent unless they are on a month to
month agreement with the previous owner. What does their current
lease say?

You can give them notice of termination. However, in CA, tenants who
have been there more than one year are legally entitled to 60 days
notice of termination. 30 days notice for less than a year of tenancy.

You can also offer to pay them to leave if you want the property vacant
sooner than the 60 days.

If they have been month to month, what about raising their rent (with
proper notice) and finding out if they would be interested in paying
the higher rent.

So, have you read their current lease? The lease is in escrow, right? :slight_smile:

Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by Rosendo

Posted by Rosendo on January 26, 2005 at 12:23:21:

If you have a tenant who’s paying rent on time and does not thrash your property you may want to consider keeping them as a tenant whether you like them or not.
If they’re good tenants and the rent is below market rate then raise the rent to a level that will meet your needs and keep a good tenant. In California, it can be an extremely costly experience to remove a tenant who knows how to manipulate the laws.
I’m not saying to bent over backwards for a tenant. Just consider the possible costs of finding a new tenant…ie # of months w/o rent, cleaning costs, advertising cost, etc vs. finding a happy median on the rent.

Good luck!

Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by DCO

Posted by DCO on January 26, 2005 at 08:30:15:

If they have a lease, you have to honor it until it expires. If they are month to month, you simply give them appropriate notice (I believe it’s 30 days).

Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by TH

Posted by TH on January 26, 2005 at 07:03:45:

“If you don’t like them can you “kick” them out”? NO!You better do some DD on Fair Housing Laws


Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by Kristine-CA

Posted by Kristine-CA on January 26, 2005 at 13:50:16:

I’m wondering about your comment that’s it’s costly to remove a tenant
when they know how to manipulate the laws. Has this been your
experience? Because (with the exception of SF city) the law in CA and
the courts are pretty cut and dried on evictions.

What do you mean by costly? There is only so much time they can stay
without paying before a sheriff lock-out?

The reason I’m asking is I find this is one of those things that everyone
says but I haven’t found to be true. Even tenants who answer the
complaint have to have a good case against you for not paying, And
this can be avoided by serving a notice of termination. Assuming a
month-to-month lease, of course.

Just wondering about what tactics tenants are coming up with to
manipulate the laws. Kristine

Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by Mark (SDCA)

Posted by Mark (SDCA) on January 26, 2005 at 11:49:03:

I think it is 60 in California now.

Re: Kick 'em out!.. Maybe? - Posted by Rosendo

Posted by Rosendo on January 26, 2005 at 14:51:59:

I’ve never had a troublesome tenant in california but I have in nevada. It’s not necessarily the actual legal cost I’m referring to. It’s the fact that it can take up to three months to legally evict them if the they file the proper paperwork to protest the eviction. (in NV it’s only 2 months max). The appeals process in about three months in CA.
Not to mention odds are very high that the tenant is not going to pay rent during that three month period. so in CA that is at least $3k in lost rent. If the tenant is a real jerk then they will thrash your unit or house too. These costs can ruin some investors who do not have not properly prepared for these situations.