≡Menu

Home

1.21 Petitions

^$575,000

Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco couple who were forced to give up their home of over twenty years after their landlord's dog attacked and killed their dog.

^$800,000

Recovered on behalf of an Oakland tenant who suffered a serious injury due to her landlord's negligent maintenance of her home.

^$850,000

Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco tenant who suffered personal injuries and was forced to vacate his home of fifteen years after dealing with many months of environmental contamination and disruptive and nuisance construction conditions.

^$1.56 Million

Recovered on behalf of a group of 30 tenants living in an SRO in San Francisco who were living with horrendous conditions in their rent controlled apartments, including rodents, bedbugs, mold, water leaks, and harassment.

^$300,000

Recovered on behalf of three families living in a building in San Francisco's SOMA neighborhood who were forced to live with substandard conditions for years as a result of their landlord's negligence, including issues with lack of heat, lack of hot water, and cockroach/rat infestations.

^$750,000

Recovered on behalf of a couple living in a rent-controlled home in the outer Sunset neighborhood. Our clients were forced to vacate after the landlord served them with an Owner Move-In Eviction Notice. After the landlords failed to move into the property, our clients filed suit for wrongful eviction.

^$300,000

Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco tenant in Russian Hill. The tenant was forced to vacate her illegal apartment in retaliation for reporting unlawful rent increases to the San Francisco Rent Board. Our client was forced to vacate after her landlord served our client with a series of eviction notices and told her the apartment was unsafe to live in.

^$700,000

Recovered for a long-term tenant in San Francisco. Our client was forced to move out of his apartment as a result of extreme landlord harassment.

^$300,000

Recovered on behalf of three long-term tenants in San Francisco's Castro neighborhood who were constructively evicted due to noise and nuisance conditions created by their downstairs neighbors, which the owner refused to address.

^$575,000

Recovered on behalf of an elderly, disabled San Francisco tenant who was forced to move out of her rent-controlled San Francisco apartment of 50 years after the landlord/owner failed to resolve numerous building code violations that remained outstanding for over a decade.

^$325,000

Recovered on behalf of seven tenants living in a makeshift boarding house in East Palo Alto.

^$560,000

Recovered on behalf of two San Francisco tenants who were wrongfully evicted via a fraudulent owner move-in eviction where the owner failed to occupy the property as their principal place of residence.

^$375,000

Recovered on behalf of an elderly long-term tenant who was forced to vacate her long San Francisco apartment as a result of her landlord's refusal to address longstanding defective conditions, including lack of heat, mold, rodent infestations, and defective plumbing.

^$550,000

Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco tenant who was forced to vacate his home as a result of ongoing, disruptive construction and the owner's refusal to provide him with alternative housing.

^$375,000

Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco family that was constructively evicted from their home in the Richmond District as a result of unlawful rent increases, defective conditions, and tenant harassment.

^$525,000

Recovered on behalf of a tenant living in an illegal unit who was wrongfully evicted. Our client was forced to vacate under false pretenses while her landlord undertook supposedly necessary construction and then was never allowed to return.

^$395,000

Recovered on behalf of two long term San Francisco tenants who were fraudulently evicted from their home of over twenty years under the pretext of an owner move-in eviction.

^$450,000

Recovered for a San Francisco tenant who was injured when her stairway railing collapsed.

^$450,000

Recovered in action for a group of tenants forced to vacate their San Francisco apartment due to severe habitability defects, including mold and water leaks.

San Francisco Rent Board Attorneys

Although rent control applies to many properties in San Francisco, a landlord can impose an unlimited rent increase where a tenant is no longer “in occupancy” by filing a “1.21 Petition” with the San Francisco Rent Board. “1.21” Refers to section 1.21 of the San Francisco Rent Ordinance Rules and Regulations.

To implement a rent increase on these grounds a landlord must file a 1.21 Petition with the San Francisco Rent Board.

Get Started

over

35

years of experience in representing tenants.

What Does it Mean to be a Tenant in Occupancy?

Tenants do not have to live in their apartment 100% of the time or continuously. Instead, the unit must be the tenant’s “usual place of return.”
After a landlord files a 1.21 Petition the Rent Board will hold a hearing to determine whether or not the tenant in question is in fact occupying the unit. The Rent Board considers several factors in reaching their determination, including:
(1) whether the subject premises are listed as the individual’s place of residence on any motor vehicle registration, driver’s license, voter registration, or with any other public agency, including Federal, State, and local taxing authorities;
(2) whether utilities are billed to and paid by the individual at the subject premises;
(3) whether all of the individual’s personal possessions have been moved into the subject premises;
(4) whether a homeowner’s tax exemption for the individual has been filed for a different property;
(5) whether the subject premises are the place the individual normally returns to as his/her home, exclusive of military service, hospitalization, vacation, family emergency, travel necessitated by employment or education, or other reasonable temporary periods of absence; and/or
(6) whether there is credible testimony from individuals with personal knowledge, or other credible evidence, that the tenant actually occupies the rental unit as his or her principal place of residence.

I live in my Apartment But My Landlord is Claiming I don’t, What Can I Do?

I Own A Home But I Don’t Live There, Can This Hurt Me?

What Can I Do to Protect Myself?

I Live in My Apartment But My Landlord is Claiming I Don’t, What Can I Do?

In many circumstances, landlords will file a 1.21 Petition without ever confronting the tenant about whether they actually live in the unit.

Landlords often hire private investigators to run a background check on their tenants in an effort to determine if a tenant actually lives in their unit. Depending on what the investigator finds a landlord may file a petition even if the tenant does live there.

To fight this type of petition, a tenant may submit evidence that the unit is, in fact, their principal place of residence, such as voter or DMV registration, utility bills, and declarations from friends or neighbors. After a hearing, a judge will determine the validity of the landlord’s claims.

I Own A Home But I Don’t Live There, Can This Hurt Me?

Potentially yes. The Rent Board looks at a tenant’s ownership of a home very seriously in analyzing whether or not a unit is a tenant’s primary residence. One thing to be very careful about is taking a home owner’s tax exemption. To be eligible for such an exemption, the owner must claim that they live in the home. Since a person can only have one primary residence this creates a contradiction and will hurt a tenant’s chances of prevailing at the Rent Board.

What Can I Do to Protect Myself?

Most of the factors for a principal place of residence listed under 1.21 of the Rent Ordinance have to do with your paper trail – your address on your driver’s license, where you get your mail, where you are registered to vote, and so on. By updating your information to reflect your current address you can reduce the chances that a landlord pursues a 1.21 petition/rent increase and that the Rent Board will find in a landlord’s favor.

Remember that your landlord may be keeping tabs on these things – especially if your rent is low, and be mindful of the home address your paper trail may reflect.

Awards & Associations

Get Started

For more information or to discuss your legal situation, call us today at (415) 649-6203 for a phone consultation or submit an inquiry below. Please note our firm can only assist tenants residing in San Francisco, Oakland & Berkeley.

We are committed to fighting for the interests of San Francisco, Oakland & Berkeley tenants.

facebook Twitter Linked-in google instagram

Contact Us

220 Montgomery St STE 1100
San Francisco, CA 94104

1901 Harrison St STE 1100
Oakland, CA 94612

Phone: (415) 649-6203

Fax: (415) 649-6739

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Attorney Advertising. This information is designed for general information only. The information presented should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Past results and testimonials are not a guarantee, warranty, or prediction of the outcome of your case, and should not be construed as such. Past results cannot guarantee future performance. Any result in a single case is not meant to create an expectation of similar results in future matters because each case involves many different factors, therefore, results will differ on a case-by-case basis. By providing certain contact information herein, you are expressly authorizing the recipient of this message to contact you via the methods of communication provided.
Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved. | Accessibility Notifications | Privacy Policy

415-737-9795