logo
They tried to pay their overdue rent. Their landlord wouldn't accept it

They tried to pay their overdue rent. Their landlord wouldn't accept it

Crouching on the sidewalk in front of his apartment building in San Francisco's Tenderloin neighborhood last Monday, Bradford Berger shuffled through legal papers in a wrinkled manila folder. It was a stressful morning; he was scrambling to get ready for a chemotherapy appointment with his wife, who'd been diagnosed with lymphoma the month before.
In two days, sheriff's deputies were scheduled to evict the two of them from the subsidized apartment they'd shared for the last 15 years — even after a local rental assistance program offered to pay the landlord, an affordable housing nonprofit, the back rent they owed.
It was a gloomy way to mark their anniversary for the couple, who've been married 19 years as of this month. It was also a fairly common situation, legal aid attorneys say.
California law allows landlords to evict tenants for nonpayment regardless of whether they are willing and able to pay their overdue rent. Tenant advocates say that undercuts the effectiveness of rental assistance programs, a key strategy local governments and nonprofits use to keep people housed. They're pushing a proposal in the Legislature that would bring California in line with 21 other states that ban nonpayment evictions for tenants willing and able to pay up.
The California Apartment Association, which represents landlords, says the legislation is unnecessary because tenants can already delay evictions if they're facing financial hardship, and has dubbed it one of its top five 'rental housing killer' bills this year.
Nonpayment evictions plummeted during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when California banned them for tenants with pandemic-related financial challenges. They've since spiked in many areas. Of the 166,463 eviction notices filed in the city of Los Angeles between February 2023 and mid-November 2024, for example, 94% were for nonpayment of rent, according to the city controller's office. Rent delinquency accounted for more than 85% of eviction cases in San Mateo County in 2023, a Stanford study found.
Statewide data on eviction causes, and how often landlords reject tenants' attempts to pay, is difficult to obtain because eviction records are sealed, court statistics do not always include the cause of the eviction, and much of the negotiation takes place in mediation sessions and informal conversations in courthouse hallways.
Cities and counties have also expanded their rental assistance programs in recent years, helping to cover payments for tenants who fall behind due to temporary hardships such as a job loss or medical crisis.
In theory, the programs prevent homelessness. But payments can be slow in coming. Jacqueline Patton, supervising litigation attorney for San Francisco's Eviction Defense Collaborative, says the average time from when one of her clients applies to payment actually reaching the landlord is about three months. The landlord needs to cooperate by sharing information about the debt owed and agreeing to accept the payment.
Meanwhile, California tenants have just three business days to respond to a landlord's initial notice that they must pay rent or be evicted. After that, the property owner can proceed with the eviction regardless of whether the tenants have paid their bill. Tenants experiencing hardship can petition the court for a temporary stay to give them more time to find new housing, but it's not always granted.
'(Tenants) missed a shift, they've applied for rental assistance and time just runs out,' said Juliet Brodie, director of the Community Law Clinic at Stanford University. 'And they end up being displaced and homeless instead of giving that money to the landlord. And the landlord ends up chasing a money judgement that's uncollectible and incurring the cost to turn over the unit.'
A 'right to repair'
Landlords can work with tenants who've applied for help, and many do, often requiring that tenants commit to a payment plan or pledge to pay on time in the future. 'Owners would rather have the rent than go to court,' said Debra Carlton, executive vice president of government affairs for the California Apartment Association.
But tenant attorneys say it's also common for landlords to refuse payment once they've decided to evict. They say that because the property owner can choose whether to allow the tenants to catch up on rent, factors such as the tenants' relationship with an onsite manager, or even their race or disability, can sometimes play a role.
'Discriminating in housing on the basis of a protected class is illegal and we don't want landlords to have a workaround by saying I'll accept rent from some tenants and not others,' Brodie said.
Property owners who file a nonpayment eviction may have other reasons to want to evict particular tenants, such as if they are not keeping their unit clean or antagonizing other tenants, said Daniel Bornstein, a San Francisco attorney representing landlords.
'The easiest type to prove is nonpayment of rent,' he said.
If tenants can wait to pay their back rent until a sheriff is knocking at their door, he said, there's no incentive to pay on time, rendering the lease meaningless. 'There has to be a line in the sand from a public policy standpoint or there never is an end point when the debt has to be paid.'
The bill pending in the Legislature would require a court to dismiss a nonpayment eviction if at any point before tenants are actually removed from their home, they can pay all the rent accrued up to that date. A court would also dismiss the case if the tenants provides proof they've been approved for rental assistance in that amount.
'If you are struggling and able to recoup the funds and pay what you owe, that eviction proceeding should have stopped immediately,' said bill author Sen. Aisha Wahab, a Democrat from Fremont.
The bill, sponsored by the renter advocacy groups Public Advocates, Tenants Together and Western Center on Law and Poverty, is one of a number of efforts in recent years to extend the legal timeline for eviction cases, which in California unfold more quickly than a typical civil lawsuit. State lawmakers last year passed a measure doubling the time tenants have to file their official response when a landlord sues them to evict. Backers of those efforts point out that property owners who fall behind on their mortgages or utility bills often have months to catch up before facing consequences. Tenants, they say, should get the same grace.
The 21 states that allow renters to redeem their tenancy by paying back rent include blue and red states, according to a survey by the Stanford Community Law Clinic. Some allow tenants to pay their bills all the way up until they are physically evicted, while in others, they must pay before the case goes to trial. In some states, tenants also have to reimburse landlords for at least part of their attorneys' fees.
Falling behind
Eviction sagas are often convoluted, punctuated by the kinds of misfortunes that disproportionately affect people on the lower end of the socioeconomic ladder. Berger, for example, has supported himself on disability payments since his back was crushed while he worked at a mechanic's job years ago. He said he took in about $900 monthly after deductions, the sole income for the couple and their two cats since his wife stopped work after falling ill; their rent was about $250. 'There's not a lot left for food and cat supplies and laundry,' he said.
Last year, the couple fell behind on the rent, according to court documents. 'I was juggling a lot of balls, and I guess I dropped one,' Berger said. Their landlord, the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation, offered a payment plan with the condition that they pay on time going forward. They made two on-time payments, the couple said in court filings, but in December Berger lost his wallet and they again fell behind. The city's rental assistance program deemed them eligible for help, and Berger's wife, Kimberly, wrote to their landlord asking for leniency.
'I am sure that you can imagine the impact that eviction and homelessness would have on me at this moment, given the severity of my disability,' she wrote, attaching a record of her cancer diagnosis.
Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation proceeded with the eviction. Through their attorney, Bornstein, they declined CalMatters' requests for an interview.
To a landlord, the Bergers might simply look like unreliable tenants, who have more than once failed to pay rent on time. But Bradford Berger says he doesn't understand why an organization that leases property from the San Francisco Housing Authority in order to provide supportive housing wouldn't want to accept his checks. 'They're, like, contractors from the city. I would think they should be recouping as much money as they can however they can,' he said. 'Especially if there's no other problems and it's just strictly financial.'
Marvellus Lucas, a comedian and nonprofit outreach worker also living in San Francisco, wondered the same thing. He, too, fell behind on rent after suffering an intestinal infection and helping to pay for his brother's funeral. A second-generation San Franciscan, he worried about losing the $3,150 per month two-bedroom apartment that had become a gathering place for friends who'd been displaced to cities like Vallejo and Antioch.
He was relieved when his employer, the Booker T. Washington Community Center, helped him cover the $8,000 debt, he said — then stunned when his landlord (who also declined to be interviewed) moved to evict him anyway. After reaching out to San Francisco's city-funded eviction defense program, he negotiated a settlement and was able to stay in his home.
Patton, the Eviction Defense Collaborative attorney, represented Lucas and said Wahab's legislation would be a 'game-changer' for San Francisco's cadre of taxpayer-paid tenant attorneys, helping them save time and energy on similarly straightforward cases. 'It would be so much less posturing – we would just be like, 'We have the money, here is the money, dismiss your case.' Instead of (going) back and forth for three months,' she said.
The Bergers weren't as lucky as Lucas. On Wednesday, Bradford Berger said, eight sheriff's deputies knocked on their door to evict them. The Bergers were out on the street, with just enough money for a few nights' hotel stay and no firm plans.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses

timean hour ago

Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses

BATON ROUGE, La. -- As Louisiana Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates stood before her colleagues in the state's Legislature she warned that the bill she was presenting might 'seem strange' or even crazy. Some lawmakers laughed with disbelief and others listened intently, as Coates described situations that are often noted in discussions of 'chemtrails' — a decades-old conspiracy theory that posits the white lines left behind by aircraft in the sky are releasing chemicals for any number of reasons, some of them nefarious. As she urged lawmakers to ban the unsubstantiated practice, she told skeptics to 'start looking up' at the sky. 'I'm really worried about what is going on above us and what is happening, and we as Louisiana citizens did not give anyone the right to do this above us,' the Republican said. Louisiana is the latest state taking inspiration from a wide-ranging conspiratorial narrative, mixing it with facts, to create legislation. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a similar measure into law last year and one in Florida has passed both the House and the Senate. More than a dozen other states, from New York to Arizona, have introduced their own legislation. Such bills being crafted is indicative of how misinformation is moving beyond the online world and into public policy. Elevating unsubstantiated theories or outright falsehoods into the legislative arena not only erodes democratic processes, according to experts, it provides credibility where there is none and takes away resources from actual issues that need to be addressed. 'Every bill like this is kind of symbolic, or is introduced to appease a very vocal group, but it can still cause real harm by signaling that these conspiracies deserve this level of legal attention,' said Donnell Probst, interim executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education. Louisiana's bill, which is awaiting Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's signature, prohibits anyone from 'intentionally" injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' It also requires the Department of Environmental Quality to collect reports from anyone who believes they have observed such activities. While some lawmakers have targeted real weather modification techniques that are not widespread or still in their infancy, others have pointed to dubious evidence to support legislation. Discussion about weather control and banning 'chemtrails' has been hoisted into the spotlight by high-profile political officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Recently, Marla Maples, the ex-wife of President Donald Trump, spoke in support of Florida's legislation. She said she was motivated to 'start digging' after seeing a rise in Alzheimer's. Asked jokingly by a Democratic state senator if she knew anyone in the federal government who could help on the issue, Maples smiled and said, 'I sure do.' Chemtrail conspiracy theories, which have been widely debunked and include a myriad of claims, are not new. The publication of a 1996 Air Force report on the possible future benefits of weather modification is often cited as an early driver of the narrative. Some say that evidence of the claims is happening right before the publics' eyes, alleging that the white streaks stretching behind aircrafts reveal chemicals being spread in the air, for everything from climate manipulation to mind control. Ken Leppert, an associate professor of atmospheric science at the University of Louisiana Monroe, said the streaks are actually primarily composed of water and that there is 'no malicious intent behind' the thin clouds. He says the streaks are formed as exhaust is emitted from aircrafts, when the humidity is high and air temperature is low, and that ship engines produce the same phenomenon. A fact sheet about contrails, published by multiple government agencies including NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency, explains that the streaks left behind by planes do not pose health risks to humans. However, the trails, which have been produced since the earliest days of jet aviation, do impact the cloudiness of Earth's atmosphere and can therefore affect atmospheric temperature and climate. Scientists have overwhelmingly agreed that data or evidence cited as proof of chemtrails 'could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols,' according to a 2016 survey published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. In the survey of 77 chemists and geochemists, 76 said they were not aware of evidence proving the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program. 'It's pure myth and conspiracy,' Leppert said. While many of the arguments lawmakers have used to support the chemtrails narrative are not based in fact, others misrepresent actual scientific endeavors, such as cloud seeding; a process by which an artificial material — usually silver iodide — is used to induce precipitation or to clear fog. 'It's maybe really weak control of the weather, but it's not like we're going to move this cloud here, move this hurricane here, or anything like that,' Leppert said. Parker Cardwell, an employee of a California-based cloud seeding company called Rainmaker, testified before lawmakers in Louisiana and asked that an amendment be made to the legislation to avoid impacts to the industry. The practice is an imprecise undertaking with mixed results that isn't widely used, especially in Louisiana, which has significant natural rainfall. According to Louisiana's Department of Agriculture and Forestry, a cloud seeding permit or license has never been issued in the state. While presenting Louisiana's bill last week, Coates said her research found charts and graphics from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on spraying the air with heavy metals to reflect sunlight back into space to cool the Earth. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with support from NOAA, to develop an initial governance framework and research plan related to solar radiation modification, or SRM. A resulting report, which Coates holds up in the House session, focuses on possible future actions and does not reflect decisions that had already been made. SRM 'refers to deliberate, large-scale actions intended to decrease global average surface temperatures by increasing the reflection of sunlight away from the Earth,' according to NOAA. It is a type of geoengineering. Research into the viability of many methods and potential unintended consequences is ongoing, but none have actually been deployed. In recent years, misinformation and conspiratorial narratives have become more common during the debates and committee testimonies that are a part of Louisiana's lawmaking process. And while legislators say Louisiana's new bill doesn't really have teeth, opponents say it still takes away time and focus from important work and more pressing topics. State Rep. Denise Marcelle, a Democrat who opposed Louisiana's bill, pointed to other issues ailing the state, which has some of the highest incarceration, poverty, crime, and maternal mortality rates. 'I just feel like we owe the people of Louisiana much more than to be talking about things that I don't see and that aren't real,' she said.

Who won the first NYC Democratic mayoral primary debate?
Who won the first NYC Democratic mayoral primary debate?

Yahoo

time10 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Who won the first NYC Democratic mayoral primary debate?

Ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo won Wednesday night's Democratic mayoral primary debate — because his opponents' relentless attacks did more to elevate him than drag him down, a Post panel of veteran campaign strategists said. The thrice-elected Democrat took some gut punches, but there was no knockout blow or major blunder on his part, the political analysts on both sides of the aisle said. 'I tuned in to see a mayoral debate, not a debate about Andrew Cuomo,' quipped campaign strategist Ken Frydman of the nine-person debate moderated by NBC 4 NY and Politico. 'By making Andrew the debate, they elevated him,' said Frydman. Because Cuomo was constantly under fire, he got more airtime to respond to each jab and by default dominated the more than two-hour debate, the political experts said. 'Everyone tried to land a punch on Andrew Cuomo, but failed,' said campaign strategist O' Brien 'OB' Murray. 'The first 20 minutes gave Cuomo the center stage, literally and figuratively,' he said, referring to the ex-gov's position in the middle of the group of candidates standing on the dais at 30 Rockefeller Center. 'He handled the attacks and was able to deflect. They actually gave him more airtime than they should have,' Murray said. Republican campaign strategist Bill O'Reilly said the verbal pummeling Cuomo received from most of his eight primary rivals does not alter his status as the front-runner for the Democratic nomination. 'It was Andrew Cuomo vs. the Lilliputians, and the Lilliputians fell short. That's the bottom line,' O'Reilly said. 'Someone needed to trip up the former governor to slow his momentum, but it was clear from the jump that wouldn't happen. Cuomo hasn't lost a step since leaving Albany, and the field lacked the skill to crack him.' Cuomo also counter-attacked, taking shots at his biggest threats in the polls — 33-year-old Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani, a state Assembly member from Queens, and City Comptroller Brad Lander. The former governor delivered the best line when he said, '[President] Trump would go through Mamdani like a hot knife through butter,' O'Reilly noted. Frydman said the candidates and moderators did force Cuomo to squirm to defend his record as governor, including his controversial nursing home policy during the COVID-19 pandemic and his approval of the unpopular 2019 bail reforms. They also tried to make him answer for the spate of sexual misconduct accusations leveled against him — which he denied, but which forced his resignation in 2021. Some of the other candidates had 'breakout moments' — including former Bronx Assemblyman Michael Blake, City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams and Mamdani, said political adviser Yvette Buckner. 'That will have voters wanting to learn more about them, their policies and their candidacy,' she said. Frydman too said Adams' performance 'moved the needle' for her campaign, which has been slow to gain momentum despite support from state Attorney General Letitia James. 'She introduced herself to Democratic voters well enough on substance to move up in ranked-choice voting,' he said. But Cuomo's comfortable lead over second-place Mamdani in recent polls should hold, Frydman said. O'Reilly agreed, but said Mamdani remains Cuomo's 'greatest threat' for the nomination in the June 24 primary. Two of the panelists agreed that Lander is competent, but his persona didn't translate on TV. 'He oozes insincerity in a car-salesman-type way,' O'Reilly said. But he said Brooklyn state Sen. Zellnor Myrie's sincerity came across 'easily,' calling him a rising star in the Democratic Party. Murray concurred, saying Lander has a 'stage presence for radio and a delivery for print. He confirmed why he has his wife and daughter on videos, instead of himself.' Another candidate, former city Comptroller Scott Stringer, who previously ran for mayor in 2021, didn't break through, the panelists said. 'Stringer was Stringer — flat, and after a second run for mayor, still didn't connect to voters,' Murray said. All but two of the Democratic contenders will debate again on June 12, save for Blake and state Sen. Jessica Ramos, who failed to meet the campaign funding threshold. Nine days of early voting will precede the primary, beginning on June 14.

A New Social Security Garnishment Is Set to Begin This Summer -- but There Are 2 Legal Ways Most Retirees Can Avoid It
A New Social Security Garnishment Is Set to Begin This Summer -- but There Are 2 Legal Ways Most Retirees Can Avoid It

Yahoo

time10 hours ago

  • Yahoo

A New Social Security Garnishment Is Set to Begin This Summer -- but There Are 2 Legal Ways Most Retirees Can Avoid It

Getting as much as possible out of Social Security isn't a luxury for most retirees -- it's an absolute necessity. This summer, the Trump administration will begin garnishing up to 15% of Social Security benefits for delinquent federal student loan borrowers. Two perfectly legal solutions exist that may allow a majority of tardy federal student loan borrowers to avoid having their Social Security checks garnished. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › For most retirees, Social Security isn't just income that's deposited into their checking or savings account on a monthly basis. It represents a financial lifeline that many would likely struggle to make do without. In 2023, Social Security was responsible for lifting 22 million people above the federal poverty line, some 16.3 million of whom were adults aged 65 and above. Meanwhile, 23 years of annual surveys from national pollster Gallup find that up to 90% of retirees require their monthly benefit, to some degree, to make ends meet. Getting as much out of Social Security isn't a luxury -- it's often a necessity. But beginning sometime this summer, select retirees can expect their Social Security checks to shrink by up to 15%. For some of these beneficiaries, it's income they simply can't afford to lose. For well over six decades, the federal government has played a role in subsidizing and guaranteeing student loans. As of April 2025, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) notes that 42.7 million Americans had a cumulative $1.6 trillion in federal student loans outstanding. However, the collection of federal student loan repayments was halted during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) and was simply never lifted. According to the DOE, more than 5 million borrowers haven't made a payment in 360 days, and another 4 million are between 91 and 180 days late on their monthly payments. While higher education student loans may sound like something that affects relatively younger Americans, they've become a prominent issue for retirees. Whereas the aggregate number of student loan borrowers under the age of 62 has declined by 1% from 2017 to 2023, the number of student loan borrowers aged 62 and above has surged 59% to approximately 2.7 million over the same period, based on data from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Per the CFPB, an estimated 452,000 of these senior borrowers have defaulted on their federal student loans and are likely receiving Social Security benefits. Since President Donald Trump took office in January, his administration has targeted perceived government fraud and is aiming to make federal operations more efficient. One of the many changes under Trump, vis-à-vis the Social Security Administration (SSA), is the reimplementation of Social Security garnishments for delinquent federal student loan borrowers. Beginning "sometime this summer," per Trump's administration, tardy borrowers receiving a Social Security benefit -- this applies to all types of beneficiaries (retired workers, survivors of deceased workers, and workers with disabilities) -- could see their payouts garnished by up to 15%. The one caveat to this garnishment is that recipients must be left with at least a $750 monthly Social Security benefit. Thus, if your normal payout is $825 per month, the maximum garnishment would be $75 per month instead of the flat 15%. Additionally, the Trump administration isn't planning to offer delinquent federal student loan borrowers a 65-day warning prior to potential garnishment, as has been customary in the past. Rather, communications sent out provide just 30 days' notice that garnishments are possible if borrowers are still in default. According to the CFPB, 37% of the Social Security beneficiaries who have a federal student loan outstanding (delinquent or not) currently rely on their monthly check from America's leading retirement program for 90% (or more) of their income. Even a 15% garnishment for defaulted borrowers in this category has the potential to be financially devastating. It goes without saying that the easiest way to avoid this new garnishment by the Trump administration is to not be in default on your federal student loan(s). But for the roughly 452,000 Social Security retirees set to be impacted by this change in policy, there are two under-the-radar yet perfectly legal solutions that should allow a majority to avoid having their payouts garnished. To begin with, some of these defaulted borrowers may qualify for the Total and Permanent Disability (TPD) discharge program, which cancels federal student loans and stops forced collections. As the CFPB pointed out in a January research report, the DOE entered into a data-matching agreement with the SSA in 2021 to automate the TPD eligibility and federal student loan cancellation processes for beneficiaries who become disabled prior to reaching full retirement age (currently age 67 for anyone born in or after 1960). However, this TPD application process is failing Social Security beneficiaries who become permanently disabled after they reach full retirement age. The CFPB notes that the onus of applying for a TPD discharge of their federal student loans and/or garnishment falls onto aged beneficiaries. Census survey data shows that approximately 22% of Social Security recipients with federal student loans report having a permanent disability, per the CFPB's report. Social Security retirees currently in default on their federal student loan(s) can also potentially avoid having their monthly check garnished by applying for a financial hardship with the DOE. Defaulted borrowers will be required to provide documentation of their income and qualifying expenses to the DOE. If an individual's qualifying expenses are larger than their documented income -- especially pertaining to a possible 15% garnishment of their Social Security payout -- the DOE will likely grant a financial hardship exemption. Based on data from the Federal Reserve Board's Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking, the CFPB estimates that a whopping 82% of Social Security beneficiaries currently in default on their federal student loans would qualify for the hardship exemption -- in other words, their qualified expenses would exceed their documented income. Yet, a 2015 Government Accountability Office report found that fewer than 10% of Social Security recipients with forced federal student loan collections applied for a hardship exemption. If delinquent borrowers were to simply apply for this financial hardship with the DOE, a majority would likely be granted it. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. A New Social Security Garnishment Is Set to Begin This Summer -- but There Are 2 Legal Ways Most Retirees Can Avoid It was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store