Experience with Oakland Uniform Relocation Payment?
Hello! My family and I own a single family home in Oakland. During covid, like many others, we decided to leave Oakland to be closer to family with the intention of returning once things returned to normal. In the interim we rented our property out and used a property management company to handle everything. Our tenant has been in the house for coming up on 2 years this summer and we have decided that we will be returning the following summer after our daughter finishes up 1 more year of school (so the tenant would have been in the property for 3 years at that point). I had verbally told our tenant in the beginning that we would be returning eventually and the lease agreement does include language that says we have the right to not renew the lease if we decide to return so I think we should be fine in that sense (barring any unexpected surprises). My question is about a new Oakland ordinance that I recently became aware of called the "Uniform Relocation Payment" which requires landlords to pay relocation costs to a tenant if they are being evicted. My understanding is that there is a clause in the Oakland Municipal Code that says as long as the house was my previous primary residence that I am returning to and that the lease includes language that says I have the right to return to the property then I don't need to pay the relocation fees. Does anyone have any experience with this and can provide some insight? When the time comes I do plan to reach out to a lawyer but am very interested in hearing first hand experience.
Parents, want to reply to this question? Sign in to post.
Unfortunately, I think you will be required to pay the fee, but definitely consult a lawyer. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/supreme-court-wont-hear-challe...
I consulted a lawyer on this when we tried to free up our ADU for the grandparents. It was 1 year ago when the covid eviction ban was still in place. But we were told that we would need to pay relocation costs, i.e., cash for keys. It was a headache, but the renter moved out voluntarily at the end and we didn't have to pay the fees.
Your rental agreement is key here--as you noted, it must state that you have the right to return to the house. I would ask a lawyer to review the language in your current lease to ensure that it meets the requirements of the ordinance and modify it for the final year of the lease if there are any issues, but it sounds like you're in good shape otherwise.
respectfully get off BPN and call a legal professional. yesterday ideally. good luck.
I'd like to speak up about my experience with these this law as a renter. It is an equity issue. Right now this law may be the only thing allowing me to stay in my current home as the landlady has told me she has relatives moving into the area she would like to rent to. My first experience with the law came a few years ago when a different landlady decided to sell her property only 8 months after I had moved in thinking it was a long time housing solution for me and my daughter. Without the money I would not have been able to maintain stable housing for my child. As a property owner you are in the better position financially. While you a living somewhere else your renters have been paying your mortgage for you. You are the one racking up equity in the house, the renter gets none. Moving in the bay area is extremely stressful and expensive due to the housing crises. This law just moves some of that burden for the move off the renter on onto the landowner who is benefiting both short and long term from the rental agreement. Sure consult a lawyer and if there is some wiggle room for you out but remember you as the landowner make out better in the deal even if you end up having to pay some move out costs