Urgent Legislative Alert For California Landlords

Added: 2026-05-24

[00:00:14]Stay tuned for the next edition of Zoom Landlord Tenant Talk Radio. The opening topic will be urgent legislative alert for California landlords. Well, hello everybody. Yes, another edition of Zoom Landlord Tenant Talk Radio coming at you every Saturday at 300 p.m. If you were listening live, the name of the song was The Times They Are Changing. And it was performed and written by Bob Dylan. And I played this song because the times are demanding that we return to an age of common sense. Which brings me to the opening topic, which is urgent legislative alert for California landlords. We have yet another attack on property rights regarding a proposed assembly bill number 2042 and why many landlords, debt collectors, and process servers see it as another bill that destroys basic legal rights and allows tenants and debtors to bastardize the legal systems. Supporters will say that this is just another due process bill, but in the real world, AB 2042 makes it easier to attack default judgments and harder for housing providers and creditors to rely upon the court process once a lawsuit has been successfully prosecuted.

[00:01:46]And the people who will be hurt most are not giant corporations. There will be the small landlords and routine debt collectors and independent process servers who now have to operate under a much more burdensome and expensive compliant reg regimen. Now what does AB 2042 do? Well, the law requires actual notice of the lawsuit. So even if a lawsuit was properly served in accordance with the law, tenants and debtors can easily assert they did not get actual service of the lawsuit and thereby set aside the judgment. Now in general there are three main ways that a lawsuit can be filed served on a tenant or any dead detor and that is number one you hand it to them. That's considered personal service. Number two substituted service. That's where you attempt to serve the defendant, the tenant several times and you cannot locate him and therefore someone might come to the door who's of a competent member of the household 18 years of old age or older and you hand it to that person. Then of course you mail it to the defendant.

[00:03:01]That's called substituted service. And then akin to unlawful detainers, you're allowed a another type of service which is called an order to post. that allows you to serve the lawsuit by just posting it on the door. But it does require a court order where a process server has to provide a declaration of all the attempts that he made to try to serve the person. And then in that situation, once filing that quote order to post, if that's signed by a judge, you can merely serve the tenant by posting it on the door and mailing it by certified mail.

[00:03:38]Now, this law expands the ability to challenge defaults and default judgment.

[00:03:45]It gives license to defendants to vacate, reopen, or delay cases that otherwise would have been considered resolved. A tenant will now have six years after the entry of a default judgment or 180 days from actual notice in which to challenge the service. Now, why are landlords who are prosecuting eviction cases should be concerned?

[00:04:10]Well, for landlords, especially small landlords, the biggest problem is simply delay. If a tenant is not paying rent, every week matters to a landlord.

[00:04:22]Mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance payments, and repairs are still owed. But AB 2042 creates more opportunities for delay by making it incredibly easy to challenge the sufficiency of a legally served lawsuit.

[00:04:40]It clearly allows tenants to bastardize the legal system. And here's the practical problem. A landlord follows the legal process. A process server serves the lawsuit in accordance with the law. the tenant fails to respond to the lawsuit and the landlord obtains a default judgment. Then later the case can be challenged on the basis that the tenant act lacked actual notice the tenant can merely claim hey I was out of town and did not receive the lawsuit and even though it was properly served by way of an order to post or substituted service. So, you can imagine that in a scenario where the tenant owes the rent money, decides not to give it to the landlord, and decides to take a trip to Cancun. Well, of course, the landlord can't serve the notice since the tenants's not there, and quite frankly, living off your rent money on this wonderful vacation.

[00:05:40]And therefore, the landlord properly serves the lawsuit.

[00:05:44]But then of course the tenant who's sunbathing in Cancun can merely say, "Hey, I didn't actually get the lawsuit and can challenge the judgment that was obtained." That means the landlord is forced to go back into court, forced to spend more money, and forced to wait longer. For a larger institutional owner, that might just be a line item, but for a mom and pop housing provider, that can be a financial emergency.

[00:06:14]And this is why debt collectors should be concerned. Years after obtaining a judgment for rent, the judgment can easily be set aside, thereby making judgments harder to secure and harder to keep. If every default becomes easier to challenge, then the value of the legal process is weakened and this will clearly affect efforts to recover unpaid rent, property damage, and other obligations tied to landlord tenant disputes. And this bill creates an undue burden on process service. For process service, it makes the service of a lawsuit much more technical and it's opened up to fraud by tenants. Instead of the service being evaluated on a sworn proof of service by a process server or a process server's testimony, process servers are increasingly being pushed to the limits. And what is that?

[00:07:11]Well, now you have to have photo documentation of the location where the process was served. And if you're handing it to somebody, and this is incredulous, you have to now take a picture of the person you were serving. Can you imagine a process server trying to serve somebody and then when you finally get to hand the paperwork to someone, you're going to ask this person to please pose for a picture? This is insanity. absolutely insanity. And if in fact you don't take a picture of the person, then you have to have as a process server a declaration a detailed statement as to why you feel your safety was jeopardized and that's the reason why you couldn't take a picture. And the same thing is true that if you don't serve them directly, then you're have to take a photo which states the time and date and GPS location of where that photo was taken. And of course, if you can't take that photo, you have to have a detailed explanation as to why technically a photo couldn't be taken. This is a major operational burden. Process servers are not supposed to function like forensic investigators with a surveillance package attached to every service attempt. Yet, this is effectively where California is heading. And if any piece of documentation is missing, incomplete or challenged or technically flawed, the service can become the target of an attack.

[00:08:48]So this is the realworld consequences.

[00:08:51]California makes it impossible for persons to enforce their property rights. It allows the system to be hit by fraud. Anybody can just say, "Hey, I never got it." Landlords are told to provide housing, absorb risk, and follow the rules. Debt collectors are told to use the court systems instead of self-help. Process servers are told to serve documents lawfully and professionally. But AB 2042 adds more cost, more technical traps and more uncertainty for the very people following the legal system and creating which creates three bad outcomes. And those are number one higher costs, number two longer timelines through more hearings, challenges and delays before resolution. And number three, less confidence in judgments. If a judgment can easily be attacked, the system becomes less reliable. Clearly, 98 out of a hundred, it is the defendant attempting to abuse the legal system, not the other side. There is no reason to establish this bill which clearly opens up pandemics's box for fraudulent behavior. Now, this is a call of action to everybody listening to me. It has already passed the California State Assembly and is now in front of the California State Senate. I'm going to be giving you a website which will allow you to easily locate your state senator.

[00:10:29]And from this website, you're going to be able to directly message your state senator and explain that it is imperative that this bill should not pass as it will open a floodgate for tenants to challenge lawfully lawfully acquired judgments and turn our legal system upside down. Now, I will have this in the show notes on YouTube, but the website is findyourep.legisl legislator or legislature.ca.gov.

[00:11:04]Find your rep.legislature.ca.gov.

[00:11:10]And on this website, I will give you a sample of what you should express to your state senator. This bill must fail.

[00:11:18]This bill will literally turn uh judgments and landlords and unlawful detainers upside down. And that, my friends, concludes the topic of the day, which is urgent legislative alert for California landlords.

[00:11:37]We're now going to open it up to questions and answers, and we know the rules, and that is this broadcast is forformational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. If you do want to talk to me and you're in the Zoom meeting room, please electronically raise your hand. And remember, this broadcast is for general questions only. If you do have a uh pending case with my law firm, I am happy to talk to you about it at my office only. This broadcast again is for general questions only. And last but not least, if you are talking to me and you are in the Zoom meeting room, well, please keep your camera on because it makes much more enjoyable for myself and for people listening and you guys listening uh on YouTube. If you like what you're hearing dealing with landlord tenant law and property management, then I would ask you please to hit that like button and subscribe to the channel because it really does help.

[00:12:31]If you guys in YouTube want to know how to join my broadcast every Saturday at 300 PM, then it's uh pretty simple. just head on over to my website which is evict 123.com and I will be happy you'll be happy to get the credentials so that you can join the zoom meeting room. I do have anformational announcement and that is next Saturday I will not be doing uh this broadcast. It'll be in two weeks because I will be attending a wedding in the Santa Barbara area. And with that I'm going to open it up to questions and answer. And the first one I'm going to talk to is an old friend of mine, Julia Jordan. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself.

[00:13:13]>> I did. Can you hear me, Dennis?

[00:13:14]>> Perfectly.

[00:13:16]>> Okay. And as always, thank you for what you do. So, quick question. I'm trying to figure out if I am exempt from mandatory rent reporting.

[00:13:27]Um, I have two properties in the city of Inglewood, but collectively they only make up 13 units.

[00:13:36]>> Okay. Okay. Well, what you're talking about for the audience is that a a tenant is can be asked a landlord to every time that they make a positive a rent payment on time that that's reported to a credit institution, but that only is for buildings that have 16 or more units. So, you are exempt, Julia.

[00:13:57]>> Great. Thank you so much.

[00:14:00]>> My pleasure.

[00:14:01]>> Moving on to John Thomas. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself, >> Dennis. I don't know why it says John Thomas. Anyways, this is Harold Rose, your friend. Um, there's my question.

[00:14:17]Can you hear me >> perfectly?

[00:14:19]>> Okay. Um, back to the lodger situation.

[00:14:22]If I had to take this guy to, it's a two-part. If I had to take this guy to court, does that threshold rule apply to me as well since it's not a tenant?

[00:14:32]like have to wait three months, four months because of the you know the threshold rule.

[00:14:36]>> Uh I believe the threshold would apply to you.

[00:14:39]>> Okay. And then the second part is if in the contract it said something about mediation arbitration. If I went that route the outcome to try to get somebody out um versus an attorney, it would it always make sense to go to mediation in in a situation like that versus going six months waiting? It absolutely makes no sense to attempt mediation for a tenant eviction. You need to just file the unlawful detainer process.

[00:15:05]>> Get the bum out. Okay. Thank you.

[00:15:07]Appreciate it. Enjoy the wedding.

[00:15:12]>> Moving on to Tony. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself.

[00:15:18]>> Hey Dennis, how you doing?

[00:15:20]>> I am good, thank you.

[00:15:21]>> Hey Dennis, um, quick question. Can a tenant install security cameras? Um, it's four units for individual dwellings. Would they be able to put uh security cameras like on the commons area like on on their on their unit?

[00:15:38]But, you know, just the camera showing the uh on basically filming the uh the commons area.

[00:15:46]>> Okay. The answer to that is no. Uh if it's in the common areas, they cannot do that. So, you would be able to um uh tell them to take it down and that would be a violation of the rental agreement.

[00:16:01]>> Okay, perfect. All right. Thank you, Dennis.

[00:16:04]>> My pleasure.

[00:16:06]Moving on to Mike. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself.

[00:16:12]>> Hi, Dennis. This is Sonia. I'm sorry I can't change the name. So, so today I'm Mike, but um but Dennis, my question is is um if a tenant and landlord I'm asking for a friend of mine, she's having a hard time with her tenant and they're going to agree that they move out and um and it's okay. They they both agree to go to move out. The question is is like um I'm recom should can I recommend that they see somebody or even you as far as to put that in writing so there's no issue afterwards because she was looking to do that. Is that something that you could work with?

[00:16:52]>> Absolutely. We do what we call voluntary vacate agreements where landlords and tenants come together and agree that the tenency should end and uh the date upon which that should be done and so that we can also have a full release by both parties.

[00:17:08]>> Perfect volunte.

[00:17:11]Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

[00:17:13]>> My pleasure. Moving on to Lynette. How are you?

[00:17:21]Ask you to unmute yourself. Lynette, >> there we go. Um, a question with the person with reporting their, you know, the rent. How do you do it? Because I have a 19 unit apartment and >> you have to offer the tenant uh the right to have their positive rent payments reported. you might want to just go through one of the associations uh like for example the apartment owners association and submit uh the the uh notice to that tenant. He can decline but otherwise if he does then you have to report each month. Now the reporting fee is generally around $10 and that has to be uh borne by the tenant not by the landlord. uh and uh you have to actually ask them once a year whether they want to have positive rent payments reported to a credit institution.

[00:18:20]>> Okay. And then what happens if they say yes, we want it, but they don't pay the $10 a month.

[00:18:29]>> Well, if they don't pay it, then you don't do it. It's simple.

[00:18:32]>> Got it. I just didn't know, you know, what the what the laws what that was about. Okay. So if they don't pay, I don't do it.

[00:18:41]>> You got it.

[00:18:42]>> Okay. Thank you.

[00:18:44]>> And thank you. Moving on to Ceette. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself.

[00:18:49]>> Hi Dennis. Can you hear me?

[00:18:51]>> Perfectly.

[00:18:53]>> Okay. I have a a duplex in the unincorporated county of LA and I live in one and I rent the other. Am I exempt from um rental increases?

[00:19:07]like >> you are under the county rent control ordinance and that affects every residential unit that unless it's a single family home, a townhouse or a condominium. Under statewide law, if you're an owner occupied duplex, then you're exempt from statewide rent control, but unfortunately, as you mentioned, you're in an unincorporated area of LA County, so you are uh under that rent control.

[00:19:32]>> Okay. Thank you, Dennis. And moving along to a responsible housing provider.

[00:19:42]>> Hi Dennis.

[00:19:44]Uh this is Ella. Um can you hear me?

[00:19:47]Okay.

[00:19:48]>> Perfectly.

[00:19:49]>> Great. Um anyways, I had uh someone that wanted to rent a place and she was approved and uh her and her boyfriend put on the lease and they gave the whole deposit. But before signing any paperwork, including before hold signing the whole deposit form, they decided to back out about it was uh it was about a day and a half after they gave the deposit. U meanwhile, we turned down other people and took it off the market.

[00:20:19]>> Okay. Well, first of all, they didn't sign a rental agreement, correct?

[00:20:24]>> No.

[00:20:25]>> Okay. So, they didn't >> That's correct. They did not sign They did not sign >> They didn't sign a rental agreement. Did they have did they sign any kind of a receipt for the security deposit which would indicate that certain amount of monies would be withheld if they chose not to take it?

[00:20:40]>> No.

[00:20:41]>> Okay. Then you have to give them then you got to give them back all the money.

[00:20:46]>> Okay.

[00:20:46]>> I have a deposit holding receipt on my website which says that we can keep I believe it says 50%. So you might want to head over to my website and if you're going to just take a deposit have them sign that deposit receipt. Um, and then uh you'd be able to keep some of that deposit. Um, >> ah, okay. Cuz be I I have on the uh invoice see holding deposit uh invoice or form.

[00:21:13]>> Yeah, it would have to be an actual contract where the tenant is agreeing that hey, if I offer you the unit and you don't take it, then a certain portion of this deposit will be retained by the landlord. If it doesn't have language like that, you're stuck.

[00:21:27]>> Okay. Okay. Thank you so much.

[00:21:29]>> Thank you. Moving on to says here Randall Riviera asked you to unmute yourself.

[00:21:37]>> Hello Dennis.

[00:21:40]>> Hello.

[00:21:41]I talked to you a couple weeks ago about cash for keys thing and I called your office and I spoke to uh Roxanne I think was her name and uh anyway it appears that probably both of the tenants in my duplex are are protected tenants and I just wanted to clarify is that I know that if they have if if they have minor kids no matter how old they are or how long they've been there they are protected. Is that correct? Totally incorrect because you're talking about a voluntary vacate agreement.

[00:22:15]>> Oh, I know. I know. Oh, I know a lot.

[00:22:17]>> For a voluntary vacate agreement, you're voluntarily vacating. I think what you're referring to is an owner movement.

[00:22:25]>> Well, I I think that um what I you know, I've been trying to see if I have any any any stick at all rather than just the carrot in the stick. Right. In other words, if they're if they if they know >> Well, what's the reason why you want them out? Let's first start that.

[00:22:40]>> Well, obviously rent. I mean, they're paying like $1,000 a month.

[00:22:45]>> Okay. So, then there there is there is no such thing as a protected tenant. I mean, that you have to have a reason to evict. But any voluntary vacate agreement, if the two parties agree to it, then you got yourself a deal.

[00:22:58]>> Yeah, I know that. But I I I thought without having any if I had other options that I could use as as as a stick, you know, the carrot and the stick thing, you know, I' I've heard you, you know, >> I think what you're trying to say is that you're going to tell them that you're moving in a close family member and that you're entitled to X amount of dollars, but uh if you agree to voluntarily vacate, then I'll pay you much more.

[00:23:23]>> Right. Right. That's the thing, >> right? That's what I think you're trying to say, but you're right. If they're protected tenants, that is they've been there longer than 10 year and they're also either handicapped or over the age of 62, then you're right, you cannot their protected tenants in in so far as a family member move in.

[00:23:40]>> Okay. And and uh if if they're over 62 but haven't been there 10 years, >> then you can certainly uh have a family member move in.

[00:23:50]>> Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you.

[00:23:52]>> Okay. My pleasure. Margaret O'Brien. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourselves.

[00:23:58]>> Yes. Um I still have a question with the uh positive rent reporting. If these units if I own three units with more than 15 um apartments in that case I do have to >> you talking three are you talking about three properties?

[00:24:19]>> Yeah. Three properties.

[00:24:20]>> No it has to be 16 or more units on a single parial.

[00:24:26]Okay, I just read up on it where it says even when it's in you have to report it when it's when you have more. Oh, forget it. Okay, >> it's 16 or more units on a single parcel. Anyway, thank you very much.

[00:24:42]Remember, next week we will uh suspend the show sadly because I'll be at this wedding. Uh and but we'll pick it up the following week. I want to wish everybody a very happy Memorial weekend and uh just take care and be safe. Thank you everyone.

[00:25:03]Hey, thanks for watching. We will have a show next Saturday at 300 p.m. If you do have a landlord tenant question, please feel free to call our office and speak with one of our attorneys at 1-80077 evict. Of course, there is no charge for this. And please subscribe to the channel and hit that like button. Thank you.