I understand the moratorium does not stop landlords from submitting the notice to pay or quite and then unlawful detainer!

I understand the moratorium does not stop landlords from submitting the notice to pay or quite and then unlawful detainer!

Any appropriate unlawful detainer should still go forward.

Some of the red flags are:- Bad credit or name appear on civil court records relate to unlawful detainer.

@Russell Gronsky - you may need to evict the squatters with an ejectment or unlawful detainer; confirm with your lawyer.

California's Unlawful Detainer process is the only way to proceed now on the civil court side. 

Read CAA's letter opposing AB 828 here.This bill denies equal justice to housing providers by:Forcing landlords to reduce rents by 25% even if a tenant cannot demonstrate a hardship or need.Allowing judges and the court system to set rents and change the rental agreements already in place.Assuming every tenant is facing a hardship related to COVID-19 and must be compensated for this hardship.Protecting nuisance tenants as it does not require tenants to answer an unlawful detainer complaintMandating that rental property owners demonstrate an economic hardship to collect the contracted rent.AB 828 is an unfair attempt to allow the government and the courts to give reduced rent to all tenants even if they have face no economic hardship, and it provides safeguards for landlords.Contact your state legislator and ask him or her to VOTE NO on AB 828.

(unlawful detainer) At this point you don't know if they're planning to move in two days or not for the next 5 months.

I will only say that tenant tried to pay rent beyond the 60 days, I politely declined, and he got violent.We filed an unlawful detainer after they did not vacate.

When forcible detainer cases are heard in markets like mine where the 'care act' provided sufficient funds to cover rent for a number of months, I will be very surprised if these cases receive a lot of sympathy from court.