eviction (by dennis [CA]) Jan 17, 2017 4:04 PM
eviction (by mick [CA]) Jan 17, 2017 4:18 PM
eviction (by Robert,Ontario,Can [ON]) Jan 17, 2017 5:22 PM
eviction (by Moshe [CA]) Jan 17, 2017 6:18 PM
eviction (by John... [MI]) Jan 18, 2017 6:34 AM
eviction (by Moshe [CA]) Jan 18, 2017 10:38 AM
eviction (by DJ [VA]) Jan 18, 2017 7:29 PM
eviction (by John... [MI]) Jan 19, 2017 6:59 AM
eviction (by Moshe [CA]) Jan 19, 2017 2:27 PM
eviction (by John... [MI]) Jan 22, 2017 4:21 PM
eviction (by plenty [MO]) Jan 23, 2017 7:56 AM
eviction (by dennis [CA]) Posted on: Jan 17, 2017 4:04 PM Message:
State Specific Question About: CALIFORNIA (CA)
I have a tenant on a month to month. I am evicting them. if I accept any rent do I have to start the eviction process over? --108.82.xx.xxx |
eviction (by mick [CA]) Posted on: Jan 17, 2017 4:18 PM Message:
I believe you will have give them a new 3-day PQ. How far are you into the eviction process? Complaint filed? Trial set? --76.238.xxx.xxx |
eviction (by Robert,Ontario,Can [ON]) Posted on: Jan 17, 2017 5:22 PM Message:
Is the eviction just arrears of rent or other issues like illegal acts, disturbing the peace and enjoyment of other tenants. Consider contacting a landlords association where there are listings on this site or Google to find one near the rental. Landlord & tenant acts vary from province to province, state to state or territories. Some municipalities have variations in the act. Eviction usually has a time period for tenant to correct in other words pay up the arrears of rent. So as long there is arrears of rent then one needs a order to enforce if the arrears are not paid in full. Illegal acts there is no correction where disturbing the peace and enjoyment of other tenants there is a correction after the first notice is served where the second time there is no correction. A local landlord association will be familiar with local bylaws along with the eviction process along getting legal help. --74.220.xxx.xx |
eviction (by Moshe [CA]) Posted on: Jan 17, 2017 6:18 PM Message:
If you gave a Pay or Quit notice, specifying back rent that must be paid in 3 days, then if you accept rent, the P or Q notice is no longer accurate, is it? So, you will have to re-start the process from the point of a P or Q notice. That means, new P or Q notice with correct (up to date) rent to be paid, allow appropriate time according to the notice (3 days), then refile new lawsuit with facts of updated amount, re-serve it, allow 5 days for new answer, then new request for court date, and if there was an answer then your court case will have to reflect the new facts and new amounts.
Do you HAVE to accept rent? If you gave a 3 day Pay or Quit Notice, and the 3 days expired, then NO, you do not have to accept rent. So you have to weigh the idea of getting rent in hand versus the progress you have already made toward the eviction, and make your choice.
--47.139.xx.xxx |
eviction (by John... [MI]) Posted on: Jan 18, 2017 6:34 AM Message:
Moshe: So, if the 3 days have NOT expired, THEN do you have to accept rent? What if it is for less than the amount owed?
In other words, let's say tenant is $800 behind. He does a PorQ for the $800. 2 days later, the guy walks up and says that he has a partial rent payment. It is $1. Can he say that he will only accept the full amount of $800?
Is that allowed in CA? If so, does it have to be explicitly stated on the PorQ?
- John...
--207.241.xxx.xxx |
eviction (by Moshe [CA]) Posted on: Jan 18, 2017 10:38 AM Message:
3-day Pay or Quit notice for (say) $800: The notice is to pay or quit $800 within 3 days, so if tenant pays, he doesn't have to quit. He complied with the notice.
What if he pays less than the $800 demanded in the notice, within the 3 days? I would take the money and immediately re-serve a new P or Q notice for the remaining amount. Landlord would have wasted less than 3 days.
I would avoid the hassle of dealing in Court with the question of P or Q notice being invalid because amount is incorrect, based on landlord having rejected partial payment.
--47.139.xx.xxx |
eviction (by DJ [VA]) Posted on: Jan 18, 2017 7:29 PM Message:
You're making it too complicated. If it's month-to-month, just give 30 days notice of non-renewal
--68.105.xxx.xxx |
eviction (by John... [MI]) Posted on: Jan 19, 2017 6:59 AM Message:
Moshe: You didn't really answer my question. Can you refuse to accept less than the amount on the PorQ?
If not, then what stops a tenant from walking up to you every 3 days and handing you $1 for rent? Are you saying that you'd issue a new PorW for $799 and then $798 and then $797 every 3 days so that it was "accurate"?
What you are saying doesn't really make sense to me. It sounds like that is exactly what you're saying should be done to keep it accurate.
Unless you CAN refuse the take that $1 from them. Which, again, is the question I was asking.
- John...
--207.241.xxx.xxx |
eviction (by Moshe [CA]) Posted on: Jan 19, 2017 2:27 PM Message:
" Can you refuse to accept less than the amount on the PorQ? "
Not really. If you find yourself in the $1 position, then I suppose that I would simply make myself unavailable for the remainder of the 3 days.
But if you DO find yourself in that position, and it happens at least twice for the same debt, then I expect that you won't have much difficulty for a CA judge to understand the situation and rule accordingly.
--47.139.xx.xxx |
eviction (by John... [MI]) Posted on: Jan 22, 2017 4:21 PM Message:
I guess my thought was the situation where so many people here allow direct deposit into their account for rent payments. The person could walk into the bank every 3 days and make a $1 deposit.
In any case, my main point was that, at some point, you'd have to just continue the eviction and not do the PorQ over because it was no longer accurate. You had mentioned the potential hassle in court due to the "P or Q notice being invalid because amount is incorrect" and therefore doing it over. Maybe I'd do this ONCE -- but that's probably it (if that). Because, as you said, if they just made a small payment, I think I'd still go to court because "I expect that I wouldn't have much difficulty for a CA judge to understand the situation and rule accordingly."
I'm not sure I'd re-do the P or Q for a small payment. I think the judge would understand why and rule accordingly still.
In any case, thanks for your response. Appreciate it.
- John...
--75.134.xxx.xx |
eviction (by plenty [MO]) Posted on: Jan 23, 2017 7:56 AM Message:
Are the offering partical payment? --66.87.xx.xxx |
Reply:
|
|