Depending on your lease (or lack thereof), your rights in relation to your landlord and housemates might vary a great deal. There are a number of different dynamics that come up in landlord/tenant situations and each one carries with it different rights and responsibilities. This month we explore these relationships and how they affect your rights.
Housemates who have equal rights in their relationship with the landlord are “co-tenants.” Co-tenants have a direct relationship with the landlord. Most commonly this is reflected in the form of a written lease agreement that names all co-tenants and the landlord/s. Co-tenants pay rent directly to the landlord. They can't evict each other, and are legally responsible for paying the entire rent if the other tenants can’t--or won’t--pay, or cause damage to the apartment.
A master tenant / subtenant relationship, by contrast, is created when one or more housemates move in before the other/s. The most common situation is one in which someone on the lease moves out and is replaced. The new person is a subtenant. Master tenants are typically named in the lease and are responsible for writing rent checks to the landlord. Most landlords will only deal with a master tenant and refuse to engage with subtenants as a means to avoid creating complicated landlord/tenant relationships (but this is a whole different topic).
As a rule, if you pay your rent directly to the master tenant, don’t have a direct relationship with the property owner, and are not named on the owner’s written lease agreement, you’re probably a subtenant.
Because a subtenant has no direct relationship with the landlord, a master tenant takes on the role of landlord in relation to any subtenants they may have. This means that the master tenant takes on many of the basic responsibilities and duties of a landlord, including the right to collect rent and to evict.
In practice, this often works out smoothly among housemates, with the master tenant simply acting as the point person in communications with the property owners. However, just like with landlords master tenants can abuse their power or neglect their duties. To avoid a messy situation for all involved, it’s important that both master tenants and subtenants be aware of their rights and responsibilities to one another.
To prevent subtenants getting pushed around, Section 6.15C of the SF Rent Ordinance Rules and Regulations clarifies certain rights.
First, just like all San Francisco tenants in buildings built prior to 1979, SF subtenants whose tenancies began in May 1998 or later cannot be evicted without just cause. BUT, under San Francisco law, a property owner can't deprive tenants of eviction protection, even if the tenants “sign away” those rights in a written lease.
In a sublease agreement, however, a subtenant may be deprived of eviction protection, provided the master tenant gave him notice in writing prior to commencement of his subtenancy. (See Section 6.15C(1) of the Rent Ordinance.) If a sublease states that a subtenant is not entitled to eviction protection, that subtenant can be evicted by the master tenant without any reason provided, upon proper notice.
Subtenants can petition the Rent Board for illegal rent increases, decreases in housing services, or failure to maintain or repair the unit. The difference is that subtenants have to file a “Subtenant Petition,” and name their master tenants (rather than the owner) as landlord.
Master tenants can only charge a "proportional" share of rent. If you’re renting a room in a three-bedroom flat, you should be paying close to one-third of the total rent.
However, there’s some wiggle room in determining each housemate’s “proportional share.” The share should be based on square footage, but extra amenities may also be considered. For example, your master tenant could charge you a larger share if you have a private bathroom, a primo view, or sole access to a parking space.
If the master tenant provides, for example, furnishings or kitchenware, or is solely responsible for dealing with rent and utility bills, these could be considered extra “housing services” that might justify higher rent. To contest a disproportionate share of rent or unlawful rent increases subtenants may file a petition with the Rent Board. The subtenant should provide the total rent for the unit (if known) and the amount paid by each housemate.
Once a hearing will be scheduled at which the master and subtenant will get the chance to provide additional evidence and argue their respective sides. If the subtenant prevails, the Administrative Law Judge may adjust their base rent and order the master tenant to refund back rent. Each party may retain an attorney to represent them at the hearing if they so choose, though representation is not required.
Of course, to figure out their equitable share of rent, subtenants first must find out how much the master tenant is paying to the landlord.
When a subtenant first moves in, the master tenant is obligated to disclose the unit’s total rent. And in order to petition the Rent Board to dispute their share of the rent, the subtenants must know both the rent that the master tenant pays the landlord, and the rents of all other subtenants in the unit. If you don’t have that information, and your master tenant refuses to disclose it, your first step would be to write your master tenant a letter.
To some degree, you should be able to tell if you’re getting overcharged based on whether 1) the place is rent control, and, if so, 2) how long the master tenant has lived there. For example, if your master tenant has lived in the unit for ten years but you’re paying $1,500 a month or more in rent - you’re probably being overcharged.
If you feel you’re being taken advantage of, it’s easy to let relations with your master tenant get contentious, and your home may get uncomfortable very quickly. Don’t lose sight of your end game: at the end of the day, your subtenancy is only “worth” something if you can stand to live there. And, as most long-term San Franciscans will tell you, it’s seldom desirable to start a war with someone you have to share your kitchen with.
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.Read More
Recovered on behalf of an Oakland tenant who suffered a serious injury due to her landlord’s negligent maintenance of her home.Read More
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.Read More
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.Read More
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.Read More
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.Read More
Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco tenant in Russian Hill. Tenant was forced to vacate her illegal apartment in retaliation for reporting unlawful rent increases to the San Francisco Rent Board.Read More
Recovered for a single long-term tenant in San Francisco. Our client was forced to move out of his apartment as a result of extreme landlord harassment.Read More
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.Read More
Recovered on behalf of elderly, disabled tenant who was forced to move out of her rent-controlled San Francisco apartment of 50 years after landlord/owner failed to resolve numerous building code violations that remained outstanding for over a decade.Read More
Recovered on behalf of seven tenants living in a makeshift boarding house in East Palo Alto.Read More
Recovered on behalf of two former San Francisco tenants who were evicted via an Owner Move-In Eviction and owner failed to occupy the unit as her primary place of residence.Read More
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. Read More
Recovered on behalf of a San Francisco tenant who was forced to vacate his home as a result of ongoing, disruptive construction and the owners’ refusal to provide him with alternative housing. Read More
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.Read More
Recovered on behalf of a tenant living in an illegal “in-law” unit. In this case, a new owner purchased the building and then demolished our client’s unit without permits while she was displaced for seismic retrofitting.Read More
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.Read More
Recovered for tenant who was injured when their stairway railing collapsed at the tenant’s Mission District apartment building.Read More
Recovered in action for a group of tenants forced to vacate their San Francisco apartment house due to severe habitability defects including mold and water leaks.Read More