Retaliation Is Banned

In the June 1 “Apartment Life,” the answer to the question about the ability of a landlord to terminate a tenancy for “no reason” (“Landlord May Need to Show Just Cause”) failed to provide some important information.

The question noted that the landlord might be dissatisfied because of tenant requests for repairs to the apartment. State law prohibits termination of a tenancy when the termination is motivated by retaliation for a tenant’s assertion of a legal right.

Consequently, whether this apartment is covered by rent control or not, these tenants may be able to prevent termination of their tenancy by establishing retaliatory motive.

The response to a question regarding a tenant’s status after sale of a duplex (“If Duplex is Sold, Will Rental Pact Change?”) stated that the law permits a landlord, if the tenancy is covered by Los Angeles rent control, to evict a tenant for “no cause.”

In fact, in most cases a new owner “steps into the shoes” of the prior owner regarding his relationship to tenants. Therefore, the new owner could not terminate the tenancy for “no cause.” The new owner is bound by the same “just cause” requirement as the prior owner. This principle applies in most cases of voluntary sale of a rental unit, which appeared to be the situation these tenants faced.

Relocation benefits would be required only if the new owner chose to evict for a reason under which the rent control law provides relocation benefits. For example, if the new owner wished to occupy the unit.

TAI GLENN

West Hollywood

The writer is an attorney.