Proposed L.A. law banning landlords from harassing renters clears a key hurdle -- The proposed ordinance, which advanced through a key committee on Wednesday, would prohibit landlords from targeting renters in a range of ways, including threatening tenants with physical harm, telling others about their immigration status, falsely telling renters they have to clear out of a unit, and failing to follow standards to protect them from dust and asbestos. Emily Alpert Reyes in the Los Angeles Times$ -- 4/15/21

Protect the tenant against dust? In the desert that they are living in? How do you prevent dust? Pay for a maid to come in three times a week and dust everything?

Robert,

The problem in Los Angeles has always been unscrupulous landlords refusing to obey simple rules that do not suit them.

The present problem is that of landlords agitating or abusing their tenants in order to force them to vacate their residences, willingly although involuntarily. Rent control laws in CA allow for "vacancy decontrol", where the landlord can raise the rent to whatever he wants if the property becomes vacant, and thus landlords have an incentive to "encourage" tenants to leave. The Covid-19 crisis with the threat of mass societal homelessness has caused vast increases in complaints of landlords using persistent aggressive methods, fraud, coercion, or intimidation to get a tenant to do what the landlord wants, primarily to cause the tenant to leave "voluntarily".

Efforts to gain cooperation of the landlord community have long been a problem in Los Angeles,it is only the last few years that the local Apartment Association has taken steps to encourage its members to adhere to their obligations.

What THE landlords community seems unable to understand is the old saying, that what goes around, comes around. Landlord abuse leads to laws limiting landlord freedom.

The proposed ordinance defines harassment as “a landlord’s knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific tenant that seriously alarms or annoys the tenant, and that serves no legitimate purpose,” and prohibits harassing behavior, such as failing to perform unit repairs, refusing to acknowledge or accept lawful payments from tenants, and inquiring about a tenant’s immigration status. These are persistent tools used by landlords to encourage tenants to leave. The ordinance would help tenants make a stronger legal case if they pursue a civil suit against an abusive landlord, and would establish criminal penalties for landlords who are convicted of tenant harassment. Landlords who are found guilty of criminal charges would face fines and possible jail time. Thus, the actions of unscrupulous landlords cause the freedoms of honest, decent landlords to be limited.

There also needs to be some way to enforce said laws, because as we know laws without enforcement are meaningless. Let's see....how many bad LLs are there in LA do we think? I'm going to guess at least 3000 or so. Sounds like a job that could require an agency director, 3 executive assistants, and probably 20 or so field agents, plus office space, diversity training, and fair trade coffee. We can call them "Little Brothers Keepers." That will help curb but never eliminate the problem which ironically will continue to grow bigger, I'm sure, because once an agency and employees are hired, then it becomes a game of "find the illegal activity so we can keep our jobs intact". And what Govt agency have you ever known that actually SHRINKS in size? Usually, they request bigger budgets every year, so....

I'm thinking a $50 million annual budget sounds good for the 1st year, to be expanded as needed. To be paid for via a tax on rental property.

Complaints may be entertained by the Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department. They are able to file Civil Complaints and to refer Criminal Complaints to the City Attorney. They are already well established to carry on this work.

The draft ordinance calls for fines in addition to Civil judgements. Fines go into the City Treasury and may be used to support additional complaints. Civil judgements can include reimbursement for attorney expense. Civil penalties can be used to support community outreach to educate tenants about their rights.

Thus, we see how unscrupulous landlords not only constrain honest, decent landlords freedom. but also cause additional city expenses, which have to be made up by the housing community.

Ken, I disagree with you.

Your notion of a "free owner" is inconsistent with your obligations as a member of society, a contracting party, a housing provider and a responsible businessman. Responsible landlords have no problem to operate their property including making good profit under California laws. But those that thumb their noses at the law are finding themselves more and more constrained by additional laws and rules and unfortunately, responsible landlords can get caught by the conduct of the others.

J[FL}: Its not redundant law. It strengthens the ability to punish landlords FOR CARRYING ON A WILFUL COURSE OF CONDUCT THAT SERIOUSLY ALARMS OR ANNOYS THE TENANT AND THAT SERVES NO LEGITIMATE PURPOSE. An example might be telling a tenant that he has to leave, verbally without a good reason, but relying on his lack of knowledge about landlord-tenant law, or telling him that if he doesn't leave he is going to be deported. These might be part of the "course of conduct" that alarms or annoys the tenant and that serves no legitimate purpose. Or telling him that he broke the dishwasher and he will have to pay, or else leave, when it wasn't his fault. Another example that has been cited is threatening tenants with physical harm, eliminating parking or other amenities required under a lease, refusing to accept rental payments, and improperly demanding information that violates tenants’ privacy. Other acts contributing to such a "course of conduct" could be offers of cash buyouts that are accompanied by threats or intimidation or threats to report false information to government agencies, such as law enforcement or child protective services. The ordinance provides for civil suit damages plus criminal charges.

Since when does California - the state with most litigation need a platform to increase more civil litigation.

" ... tenants wouldnt create problems because they would understand the owner owns and controls his property.Basically the tenants would stay in line and not cause problems. "

And I suppose that you would agree that the role of government is to give themselves maximum control over what they consider to be THEIR property, and expect landlords to stay in line and not cause problems.

At the other end, our job as pet-owners is to give ourselves maximum control over our pets and expect the pets to stay in line and not cause problems. Beats having to feed them, house them and take them out to pee.

We all have our place in society, including our responsibilities and obligations. The feudal system has long since gone by, and our world today has more modern standards and relationships. I think that its a better world, especially my having come from the old world.

P.S., Ray-N-Pa [PA]:

I am not aware that CA has more civil litigation than should be expected by its population.

CA law has improved the CA experience greatly. I am aware that some landlords don't like that they have to honor any obligations that they don't want to honor(see e.g., post by Ken[NY]).

By the way, Ken[NY]:

I notice that New York law, Penal Code Section 240.26 says

" A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:

. . .

3.He or she engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no legitimate purpose. "

Language sound familiar? Do you suppose it could be applied to landlord-tenant situations?

More importantly, is it good law? Do most other states have similarly-worded statutes?

Really???

"...telling others about their immigration status..."

Some of you think that this should be illegal? That's exactly the same as seeing someone stealing and being forbidden to tell anyone what you saw.