Landlords Are Prohibited
from Threatening to Use Force to
Get Tenant to Vacate
11/06/05
Dear
Mr.
Duman:
Isn’t
there a
law which prohibits landlords from making harassing threats to tenants
to
intimidate them into moving out?
G.
S., Redwood City
Dear G. S.:
Yes there
is. California Civil Code, Section
1940.2., which became effective as of January 1, 2004, addresses this
subject.
This relatively new law, indeed, makes it unlawful for a landlord to
“use, or
threaten to use, force, willful threats, or menacing conduct” for the
purpose
of forcing a tenant to vacate a rented dwelling.
A landlord,
who engages in unlawful conduct in violation of this law, may be sued
by the
aggrieved tenant under its provisions. A landlord, who is found guilty
of
making unlawful threats, may be required to pay a prevailing tenant
civil
damages of up to two thousand dollars ($2,000) for each violation. An aggrieved tenant may sue in Small Claims
Court (to the extent that the claim does not exceed $5.000).
The remedy
available under this law is, also, available against landlords, who
engage in
certain offensive behavior made unlawful under other statutes,
including those
addressing “theft” (Penal Code, Section 484), “extortion” (Penal Code ,
Section
518), and “unlawful entry” (Civil Code, Section 1954).
The language
of this statute expressly states that a claimant tenant need not be
actually
evicted or have vacated the premises due to the coercion in order to
obtain
relief. Furthermore, the remedy
provided for under this law is in addition to and does not replace any
other
legal rights the tenant may have against a landlord (such as “assault”,
“civil
harassment”, “forcible ejectment”, “unlawful discrimination” and the
like).
In addition,
a landlord, who retaliates or attempts to retaliate against a tenant,
who
pursues a claim under this statute, can incur additional liability.
This statute
excludes certain acts of the landlord from the definition of “force, willful threats, or menacing
conduct”. For example, an oral or
written warning notice, given in good faith, which declares certain
conduct by
a tenant, occupant, or guest to be in violation of the rental agreement
(or
other applicable rules, regulations, or laws), is not a
violation of the
statute, nor is an oral or written explanation of the rental agreement,
rules,
regulations, or laws given in the normal course of the landlord’s
business.
It should
also be noted that this law specifically provides that its provisions
are not
intended to “enlarge or diminish a
landlord's
right to terminate a tenancy pursuant to existing state or local law;
nor...any
ability of local government to regulate or enforce a prohibition
against a
landlord's harassment of a tenant”.
Our readers
with questions regarding the application of this statute or any other
aspect of
landlord-tenant law, should consult directly with their own attorneys,
for
specific attention.
FD770 10/28/05
4\column\threats.ten
Readers may address their
questions to The Real Estate
Lawyer, Fred M. Duman, 2807 Castro Valley Boulevard, Castro Valley, California
94546. Mr. Duman will answer those of
general
interest in his column. He reserves the
right to edit the letter for brevity and clarity.
Each real estate problem
usually has its own distinct
circumstances, and frequently is more complicated than realized by a
layperson. Readers are also encouraged
to consult with their own lawyers to obtain guidance concerning their
problems
when they first arise.
Readers are cautioned that
these answers are not intended
to be the basis for any action or reliance by the reader.
You are welcome to
visit our web site at “www.dumanlaw.com”.
© 2005, Fred M. Duman All Rights Reserved. Please see our disclaimer.
Back to Newspaper Columns
