Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. Cancel anytime.
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
California Real Estate Q&A Discussion Forum
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated almost 7 years ago on . Most recent reply

Account Closed
  • Rental Property Investor
  • San Francisco, CA
13
Votes |
31
Posts

Eviction Rules in Oakland

Account Closed
  • Rental Property Investor
  • San Francisco, CA
Posted
Quick question for the board. Looking at a triplex with 2 units currently occupied and one vacant. Property is located in Oakland. I would like to do an owner move in eviction on one of the occupied units but not sure if that is legal given one unit will be vacant. Does anybody know? Also my reading of the just cause ordinance in Oakland it seems that triplexes are exempt from rent control laws? Any info on the subject or if you can point me to somebody with experience here would be greatly appreciated. Thanks all.

Most Popular Reply

User Stats

910
Posts
889
Votes
Johnson H.
  • Investor
  • San Francisco, CA
889
Votes |
910
Posts
Johnson H.
  • Investor
  • San Francisco, CA
Replied

Hi Martin,

Is the vacant unit similar to the unit you are trying to OMI? If it's completely different there should not be a problem. If its similar, it could be considered an issue. 

Owner occupied triplexes in Oakland are considered exempt from rent control when you lived there for a year. However, there are some ordinances getting voted on this year that may change this.

I would speak to a reputable lawyer about your situation, Bornstein does a lot of work in SF and Oakland. Don't believe everything you read on the internet :)

Good luck,

Johnson

Units That Are Exempt From the Rent Adjustment Law

  • Section 8 units and other units that have rents that are controlled, regulated, or subsidized by a governmental unit, agency, or authority.
  • Accommodations in motels, hotels, inns, tourist houses, rooming houses, and boarding houses, provided that such accommodations are not occupied by the same tenant for thirty (30) or more consecutive days.
  • Housing accommodations in any hospital, convent, monastery, extended care facility, convalescent home, nonprofit home for the aged, or dormitory owned and operated by an educational institution.
  • Dwelling units in a nonprofit cooperative, owned, occupied, and controlled by a majority of the residents.
  • Dwelling units which were newly constructed and received a certificate of occupancy on or after January 1, 1983.
  • Buildings that were substantially rehabilitated after January 1, 1983. (See O.M.C. 8.22.030 B(2))
  • Dwelling units exempt pursuant to the provisions of the “Costa-Hawkins Act” (see Ca.Civil Code § 1954.52; these exemptions generally apply to single family dwellings and condominiums).
  • 2 or 3 units on a single assessor's parcel when one of the units is occupied as the owner's principal residence for at least one year.

NOTE: Exemptions from Measure EE (the "Just Cause for Evictions" law) are not the same as for the Rent Adjustment Law

http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/o/hcd/s/LandlordResources/DOWD008759

  • Johnson H.
  • Loading replies...