Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. 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 over 4 years ago,

User Stats

6
Posts
5
Votes
Michael D.
  • Attorney
  • Laguna Niguel, CA
5
Votes |
6
Posts

AB 1436 - Additional tenant protections

Michael D.
  • Attorney
  • Laguna Niguel, CA
Posted

Since I'm still new here I figured I should start contributing by sharing this to the group.  A bill pending with the California legislature just came across my desk, AB 1436.  A link and a summary appear below.  It's just a proposed bill at this point, and while it may or may not become law (at least in current form), I think that it is a good indicator of where Sacramento is going towards in terms of tenant protections related to COVID-19.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca....

According to the legislative summary, the bill:

-"Prohibits a landlord from applying a security deposit or monthly rental payment for the satisfaction of an obligation other than the prospective month’s rent if the obligation accrued  between the date a state of emergency
relating to the COVID-19 pandemic was declared and either April 1, 2021, or 90 days after termination of the state of emergency, whichever is earlier (hereafter “effective time period”), unless the payment or security is specifically designated by the tenant for the obligation." 

-"Provides that a covered tenant, as defined, who failed to pay rent that accrued during that effective time period shall not be deemed to be in default and would prohibit any action for recovery of unpaid rent until 12 months after the effective time period. The bill would define “covered tenant” as a tenant who is unable to satisfy rent accrued during the effective time period due to a loss of income or increased expenses resulting from COVID-19 and who provides a written statement to that effect to their landlord, as specified. The bill would prohibit certain entities, including a housing provider, from using an alleged default in rent that accrued during the effective time period as a negative factor for the purpose of evaluating creditworthiness or for other specified purposes."

Loading replies...