BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
AB 418 (Chiu)
Version: April 20, 2015
Hearing Date: June 16, 2015
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
TH
SUBJECT
Tenancy: termination: victims of violent crime
DESCRIPTION
Existing law authorizes a tenant to terminate a tenancy in 30
days when he, she, or a household member, becomes a victim of
domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking,
or abuse of an elder or dependent adult. In order to terminate
a tenancy under this provision, the tenant must notify the
landlord in writing of the intent to terminate the tenancy and
provide either: (1) a copy of a court order protecting the
tenant or household member from further violence or abuse, as
specified; (2) a copy of a report by a peace officer stating
that the tenant or household member has filed a report alleging
he, she, or the household member is a victim of violence or
abuse, as specified; or, until January 1, 2016, (3)
documentation from a qualified third party indicating that the
tenant or household member is seeking assistance for physical or
mental injuries resulting from violence or abuse, as specified.
This bill would extend the above provision regarding
documentation from a qualified third party indefinitely, and
reduce the time limit for a tenant to give notice of intent to
vacate to their landlord from 30 days to 14 days.
BACKGROUND
Victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking,
elder and dependent adult abuse, and stalking face numerous
challenges when seeking to regain control of their lives.
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 2 of ?
Depending on the situation, a victim may need to change his or
her telephone number, participate in the Safe at Home Program
through the Secretary of State, or even move to create a safe
environment for themselves and their family. Victims who rent
their homes face additional challenges when attempting to leave
a dangerous environment if they are a party to a long-term
lease. Absent a voluntary release from their landlord, victims
who are forced to relocate in order to find safety - prior to
recent changes in state law - could find themselves subject to
liability for breaching their leases.
In response to concerns regarding the inability of victims to
terminate leases without liability, AB 2052 (Lieu, Ch. 440,
Stats. 2008) authorized a tenant to terminate his or her lease
within 60 days of the issuance of a temporary restraining order,
emergency protective order, or written report by a peace officer
alleging that the tenant, or household member, is a victim of
domestic violence or stalking. AB 2052 also provided that a
tenant who terminated his or her lease under this provision
would be discharged from having to pay rent for any period
following 30 days from the date the tenant notified the landlord
of their intent to terminate. Subsequently, AB 588 (Perez, Ch.
76, Stats. 2011) increased the allowable time to terminate upon
issuance of a court order or police report from 60 to 180 days.
SB 1403 (Yee, Ch. 516, Stats. 2012) extended these protections
to victims of elder or dependent adult abuse and included
protective orders among the appropriate supporting documentation
allowed when victims seek to terminate leases prematurely. SB
612 (Leno, Ch. 130, Stats. 2013) further extended these
protections to victims of human trafficking, and, until January
1, 2016, included documentation from a qualified third party
indicating that the tenant or household member is seeking
assistance for physical or mental injuries resulting from
violence or abuse among the allowable types of supporting
documentation.
This bill would extend indefinitely the provision recognizing
documentation from a qualified third party as among the
allowable types of documentation supporting a tenant's notice to
terminate a tenancy. This bill would also reduce from 30 to 14
days the period during which a tenant is responsible for payment
of rent following the giving of notice to a landlord of a
tenant's intent to terminate their tenancy.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 3 of ?
Existing law defines the rights and duties of landlords and
tenants, including presumptions regarding the terms of the
hiring, the lawful means of terminating a lease or rental
agreements, and the remedies available to the respective parties
in the event of a breach of a lease or rental agreement. (Civ.
Code Sec. 1940 et seq.)
Existing law provides that if a tenant or lessee of real
property breaches the lease and abandons the property before the
end of the term, the landlord may deem the lease terminated and
seek damages, or continue to perform under the lease and seek
rent as it becomes due. (Civ. Code Sec. 1951.2; 250 LLC v.
Photopoint Corp. (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 703.)
Existing law allows a tenant to terminate his or her tenancy if
the tenant, or a household member, was the victim of domestic
violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking, or
dependent adult or elder abuse. The notice to terminate a
tenancy must be in writing, with one of the following attached:
(1) copy of a temporary restraining order, protective order, or
emergency protective order, as specified; or (2) copy of a
written report by a peace officer, as specified. (Civ. Code
Sec. 1946.7(a)-(b).)
Existing law also provides, until January 1, 2016, that
documentation from a qualified third party based on information
received by that third party while acting in his or her
professional capacity, as specified, may be used to support a
notice to terminate a tenancy under the above provision. (Civ.
Code Sec. 1946.7(b).)
Existing law requires the notice to terminate tenancy to be
given within 180 days of the date that any order was issued, or
within 180 days of the date that any written report was made, or
the time period otherwise required for termination of tenancy.
(Civ. Code Sec. 1946.7(c).)
Existing law states that if notice to terminate the tenancy is
provided to the landlord under the above provisions, the tenant
shall be responsible for payment of rent for 30 days following
the giving of the notice, as specified, and thereafter shall be
released from any rent payment obligation under the rental
agreement without penalty. (Civ. Code Sec. 1946.7(d).)
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 4 of ?
Existing law provides that, if within the 30 days following the
giving of the notice under the above provisions the tenant quits
the premises and the premises are rented to another party, the
rent due on the premises for that 30-day period shall be
prorated. (Civ. Code Sec. 1946.7(e).)
Existing law states that the above provisions shall not relieve
a tenant, other than the tenant who is, or who has a household
member who is, a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault,
stalking, human trafficking, or abuse of an elder or a dependent
adult and members of that tenant's household, from their
obligations under the rental agreement. (Civ. Code Sec.
1946.7(f).)
This bill would extend indefinitely the authorization to use
documentation from a qualified third party based on information
received by that third party while acting in his or her
professional capacity, as specified, to support a notice to
terminate a tenancy under the above provisions.
This bill would state that if notice to terminate the tenancy is
provided to the landlord under the above provisions, the tenant
shall be responsible for payment of rent for no more than 14
calendar days following the giving of the notice, as specified,
and thereafter shall be released from any rent payment
obligation under the lease or rental agreement without penalty.
This bill would also state that if the premises are relet to
another party prior to the end of the obligation to pay rent,
the rent owed under this provision shall be prorated.
This bill would make other technical and conforming changes.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
The author writes:
For survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault,
elder/dependent abuse, human trafficking or stalking, fleeing
a dangerous situation could mean life or death. Unfortunately,
many survivors are unable to leave their current situation
because of their residential lease agreements and rent
obligations. Assembly Bill 418 would remove the sunset date
of an existing state law that allows a survivor of domestic
violence to terminate a residential lease in order to move to
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 5 of ?
safer housing without any economic ramifications. The bill
would also decrease the survivors remaining rent obligation
from 30 days to 14 days.
If the existing sunset date is not removed, a survivor could
only terminate a lease by going to court and obtaining a
restraining order or by filing a police report. Many
survivors cannot currently take either of those actions. In
many cases, survivors who seek restraining orders or contact
the police face a real risk of escalating violence by their
perpetrators. Furthermore, in 2005, the California Attorney
General's Task Force on Criminal Justice Response to Domestic
Violence reported that there were significant burdens placed
on survivors seeking family court restraining orders. These
burdens included completing lengthy forms that were hard to
understand. In addition, immigrant survivors are often
reluctant to contact the authorities due to their cultural
aversion to involving outsiders in family matters or prior
negative experiences with the police and the justice systems
in their native countries. Also, limited English proficient
individuals continue to face language barriers when
interacting with the court system. Removing the sunset would
ensure that survivors can continue to terminate leases for
safety reasons without having to turn to the courts or the
police.
Even with the streamlined procedure that AB 418 would make
permanent, there are barriers to early termination because the
survivor must still pay for 30 days of additional rent after
he or she provides notice to the landlord and must wait 21
days after vacating the unit to get back the security deposit.
Together, these time periods deprive survivors of funds they
desperately need to secure new rental housing. AB 418 would
additionally reduce a survivor's rent obligation from 30 days
to 14 days.
2.Aiding Victims of Violence and Abuse
By removing the January 1, 2016, sunset date on the provision
allowing the use of documentation from a third party and
reducing the required time for notice, this bill would ensure
that victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking,
human trafficking, or elder or dependent adult abuse, continue
to be able to terminate their rental or lease agreements early
upon providing written notice and acceptable substantiating
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 6 of ?
documentation to their landlord showing that they have become
the victim of violence or abuse. According to a study on
housing and sexual violence conducted by the National Sexual
Violence Resource Center, sexual violence survivors commonly
reported difficulty in finding replacement housing after
becoming a victim of violence or abuse because they lacked
adequate funds to break leases and secure alternative housing.
(National Sexual Violence Resource Center, Housing and Sexual
Violence: Overview of National Survey (Jan. 2010)
[as of June 9, 2015].)
Participants in the study indicated that they had sexual
violence clients who "cannot afford to pay for deposits and
other moving expenses as a result of being traumatized" and
"often stay in dangerous relationships due to lack of financial
stability," and others who "had to break leases in order to find
safety." (Id.) Writing in support, the California Conference
of Catholic Bishops states:
Between 22 and 57 percent of all homeless women report that
domestic violence was the immediate cause of their
homelessness. Fifty-two percent of all sexual assaults occur
where the victims live, and a study found that nearly 80
percent of sexual assault survivors living in public housing
wanted to relocate because the perpetrator was nearby, but
could not due to a lack of funds and housing options. Over 80
percent of domestic violence survivors entering shelters
identified "finding housing I can afford" as a need, second
only to "safety for myself."
The California Apartment Association (CAA), also in support,
states:
CAA members don't believe that a landlord should hold victims
liable for extended rent when they are fleeing a dangerous
domestic situation. In many cases, a move from the property
is the best decision for the victim and the family as well as
other tenants at the property.
This bill would make it easier for victims to find replacement
housing and escape from potentially dangerous environments by
allowing them to support a notice to terminate a tenancy with
documentation provided by a qualified third party, like a doctor
or counselor. This bill would also lower the financial
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 7 of ?
obligation of a victim who has to break a lease or rental
agreement because of violence or abuse by limiting their
post-notice responsibility to pay rent to just 14 days instead
of 30 days as required by existing law. Lowering the financial
obligations of victims who lease or rent housing should provide
them with additional financial resources to quickly secure
replacement housing without having to, for example, wait for the
refund of a security deposit. Keeping with existing law, this
bill would not relieve tenants or co-tenants other than the
victim from their obligations under a lease or rental agreement.
3.Documentation from Qualified Third Parties
SB 612 (Leno, Ch. 130, Stats. 2013) authorized victims of
domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking,
and dependent adult or elder abuse, to provide documentation
from a qualified third party based on information received by
that third party while acting in his or her professional
capacity to support a 30-day notice to terminate a tenancy and
be released without penalty from their lease or rental
agreement. At that time, some stakeholders voiced concern that
expanding supporting documentation to include statements from
qualified third parties would invite abuse by tenants who aim
only to terminate a lease or rental agreement early without
penalty. Noting the possibility of abuse, this Committee added
a two-year sunset provision to the qualified third party
provision to re-evaluate whether any misuse of this provision
had occurred.
Since that time, the Committee has not received any specific
evidence demonstrating exploitation or misuse of the qualified
third party provision, nor have any stakeholders repeated
concerns about potential misuse. Absent evidence to the
contrary, it would appear that the passage of time has assuaged
concerns that tenants would misuse this provision to try and
avoid their rental obligations. This bill would, consequently,
eliminate the sunset provision and extend the qualified third
party provision indefinitely.
4.Opposition Concerns
Several apartment and property owners associations have voiced
concern that lowering from 30 days to 14 days the period for
which tenants are responsible for rent after providing notice of
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 8 of ?
their intent to terminate a tenancy "will be impossible to
comply with." They state:
When multiple tenants rent a dwelling unit, [each] tenant is
jointly and severally liable for the entire rent-they are all
responsible for the full amount of rent. Because they are all
responsible for the full rent amount, landlords typically only
accept one rent check a month for the full amount.
Tenants often make agreements with one another about how much
each tenant pays toward the entire rent. Sometimes tenants
agree that each owes an equal amount, like 50/50, or split
into thirds if three tenants are renting a unit. More often
than not, however, tenants split the rent into unequal shares
depending on a variety of factors including who makes more
money, or who gets the bigger room.
Landlords are never privy to the agreements tenants make about
how much of the rent each tenant is responsible for . . . A
landlord in this circumstance would have no idea what share of
the rent was paid by the terminating tenant. It would be
unfair to the other tenants, and the subject of a lawsuit, if
a landlord assumed the tenant's share of the rent was
precisely 1/3 and paid her back accordingly.
Given that existing law already requires landlords to release
qualifying tenants from a lease or rental obligation whether or
not they have co-tenants, it is unclear why lowering the rental
obligation period from 30 to 14 days, as proposed by this bill,
would create an unworkable situation. Existing law specifies
that release of a qualifying tenant shall not relieve any other
tenant, other than the qualifying tenant's household, from their
obligations under a lease or rental agreement. Consequently,
existing law should address the apportionment problem identified
by stakeholders. Regardless, to the extent landlords are drawn
into apportioning rent between co-tenants, the changes proposed
in this bill would not appear to impact that process. Whether
the relevant period of time to apportion is 14 days, 30 days, or
any other number of days, the apparent difficulty of
apportioning rent among co-tenants responsible for unequal
proportions of the total rent remains the same. This bill is
unlikely to create any new difficulties for apportioning rent
among co-tenants.
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 9 of ?
Support : Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus; American Civil
Liberties Union of California; American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees; California Apartment
Association; California Catholic Conference of Bishops;
California Coalition Against Sexual Assault; California
Communities United Institute; California Women's Law Center;
Casa de Esperanza; Catalyst Domestic Violence Services; City and
County of San Francisco; Community Overcoming Relationship
Abuse; Greater Napa Valley Fair Housing Center; Housing Equality
Law Project; Interface Children & Family Services; Junior League
of San Francisco; Laura's House; Law Foundation of Silicon
Valley; Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office; Monarch
Services; National Association of Social Workers, California
Chapter; National Council of Jewish Women California; Next Door
Solutions to Domestic Violence; Peace Over Violence; Rainbow
Services; Safe Alternatives to Violent Environments; San
Francisco Domestic Violence Consortium; Shepherd's Door Domestic
Violence Resource Center; Strong Hearted Native Women's
Coalition; Tenants Together; Wild Iris Family Counseling &
Crisis Center; YWCA of Glendale; one individual
Opposition : Apartment Association, California Southern Cities;
Apartment Association of Orange County; East Bay Rental Housing
Association; Nor Cal Rental Property Owners Association; North
Valley Property Owners Association
HISTORY
Source : California Partnership to End Domestic Violence;
National Housing Law Project; Western Center on Law & Poverty
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
SB 612 (Leno, Ch. 130, Stats. 2013) See Background.
SB 1403 (Yee, Ch. 516, Stats. 2012) See Background.
AB 588 (V. Manuel Pérez, Ch. 76, Stats. 2011) See Background.
AB 2052 (Lieu, Ch. 440, Stats. 2008) See Background.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 78, Noes 0)
AB 418 (Chiu)
Page 10 of ?
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
**************