Week 7 - Pacific Heights

In the movie “Pacific Heights” a tenant comes in and decides to drive the landlords absolutely insane. The rights of the landlords seem to be blurred in the movie because of the fact that laws are different in every state. In San Francisco, California, apparently if you take possession of the room you attempt to rent before any rent is given to the landlord and change the locks the landlord has to evict you through the court because the tenant now has rights. Although the rights were forcibly taken, they are granted by the state and therefore have to be fulfilled by the landlord or legally removed from the premises. This was the law in the movie. I am not sure if this is true in the state of California. To my knowledge if a lease was never signed nor consideration given then the tenant has no legal right and the landlord would have a certain amount of time to remove the tenant from the premises.

Another law that I know of that is in San Francisco is that if a person who signed a lease and has children but decides to not pay their rent, they have six (6) months free to be able to find another home. But they can only do so if they have children.

Laws like that tend to protect the tenant over the landlord. I personally believe it should be the other way around. There are a million more risks being a landlord than a tenant. The landlord would have to open his/her home to a stranger and take a lot of liabilities that would/could end with court, fees, and/or the loss of the home entirely. As far as having a family and being kicked out on the streets, I can understand why the courst would feel it was correct to keep a family in a home for a period of time, but for six months is rediculous. It should never be that long.