Property owners have diminished due process rights when dealing with the regulatory morass of governmental entities. The best article I have read regarding this problem was written by Jeremy Talcotta, Attorney, entitled "Due Process: Criminals vs. property owners" published in PLF's Sword&Scales, Spring 2018 issue.
HOAs subject to the Davis-Stirling Act were not forgotten in Sacramento's annual enactment of ever more regulations. This is the first of four Blogs to address some of the changes in the statutory law in California affecting common interest developments.
On September 27, 2016, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill No. 1069 into law, which will help to reduce regulatory barriers facing homeowners when seeking to build a granny flat (referred to as an "accessory dwelling unit") on their real estate. According to State Senator Bob Wieckowski (D - Fremont), the author of SB 1069, "[r]emoving the most egregious obstacles to building these units will help to increase the supply of affordable housing in California and allow more people to remain in the communities they call home.... SB 1069 returns more power to homeowners and reins in some of the enormous fees and requirements levied by local agencies."
Residential landlords must be careful in the wording and explanation of arbitration provisions in lease agreements, especially with Spanish speaking residents. In a recent case, Penilla v. Westmont, a California Appeals Court found that an arbitration provision in a mobilehome park rental agreement was unconscionable, and thus unenforceable, when it (1) substantially benefited the landlord, (2) imposed fees and limitations that would have substantially deterred residents from asserting their claims and (2) 15 of the 46 named parties spoke little or no English. The arbitration agreement, attached to the lease, required the tenants to pay half of the arbitration costs up front and determined that a failure to do so would result in a default judgment in favor of the landlord. The court found that due to the low income nature of the tenants, virtually none of them would be able to afford the cost of arbitration.
The Loftin Firm, P.C. is pleased to announce it received an Excellence Award as one of the Top 20 Real Estate Firms in San Diego County for 2016 from Expertise. The award is made possible by the work of the entire Loftin Firm team - thank you!
In part 1 of this 3 part blog, we reviewed steps needed to understand what you own or have inherited. Now that you have an understanding of the property, you may have decided to keep the property and operate it for income purposes. This blog will review issues relating to owning and operating the property.
Many of our clients are multi-generational property owners; sometimes the junior family members are involved in the business and are ready to step into ownership of the commercial real estate. Other times, those who inherit the property have never owned the particular property or commercial properties before. In this 3-part blog series, we will review some key factors and options relating to owning commercial properties. Some of these factors will apply to first time buyers as well. Part 1 will cover briefly the steps needed to understand what you've obtained; Part 2 will cover issues relating to retaining the property; and Part 3 will cover issues relating to selling the property. For all purposes, these posts are intended to apply to commercial properties in all forms, but some of the options may relate to owning residential property for income purposes as well.
In a prior post, we highlighted the sunny outlook for commercial real estate projects in Southern California. Essentially, there is a strong sense of confidence among commercial real estate developers that is expected to last through 2018. With such optimism on the commercial side of real estate development, can the same be said for residential projects?