COVID-19: Landlord-Tenant Disputes
Photo by: @introspectivedsgn
Landlord-tenant issues are almost always good mediation cases, and coronavirus-related disputes are exceptionally well suited for mediation. Between the backlog of cases, courts are already experiencing and the influx of the evictions and other claims that will be filed when state and local eviction moratoriums lift—there is more incentive than ever for parties to attempt to resolve their issues outside of court. Mediation also offers its advantages to taking these issues into court for both parties.
Los Angeles Superior court recently announced it would be prioritizing a backlog of 7,000 criminal cases waiting for trial and will postpone all civil trials until January. Attorney friends tell me many hearings and trial dates that had been pushed out when the pandemic began are now pushed out further and may very well be pushed back again.
Many people are not only currently struggling to keep themselves safe but also to make ends meet, in record numbers. While California has now extended the eviction moratorium to January 31st, the bill requires renters to pay at least 25% of their rent between September 1st and January 31st. This will require communication between landlords and tenants, and tenants must certify that they are experiencing COVID-related hardship in paying rent.
It seems pretty clear that there will be a lot of evictions filed at the beginning of the year unless things change drastically (in California, it is referred to as “Unlawful Detainer” or “UD” for short). Unfortunately, some of this is inevitable, as many people will have great difficulty paying the accrued back rent even after they return to work.
The eviction moratoriums outline how landlords go about collecting back rent. They are very likely to go after it. Not necessarily because they want to, as it could be costly and time-consuming, but because they also have financial strain and face difficulties because of the pandemic. Some renters will have to face the possibility of having a judgment against them if they do not find a way to pay. This can have significant effects on people when it comes to employment, obtaining loans, etc.
Considering all of these challenges, it is actually in both parties’ interests to get on board with resolving their issues outside court. Everyone has the opportunity to avoid the time consuming, comparably expensive, and uncertain journey at the courthouse. Solving these issues preemptively will also help everyone move forward without the increased tension of a process as adversarial as court.
Many tenants who face the possibility of being evicted are in the difficult position of deciding whether they can either find a way to pay the back rent and continue to live in the same home or move on to a more affordable living situation. But even the people moving to go elsewhere must come up with a solution to pay the back rent they owe. The risk of having to go to court or winding up with a judgment against them should motivate most to make it a priority.
It is empowering for both parties to come up with their own solution that satisfies the laws and takes aim at getting out from under this strain as soon as possible. It will take most of the guesswork out of knowing what to expect for both landlord and tenant. Likewise, the landlord will benefit by avoiding the time and money spent preparing for court. They will also have a better idea of their projected cash flow and some advance notice when they can expect to prepare to rent some units out if necessary, etc. Mediation also offers an opportunity for the mediator to alleviate some of the natural feelings of pressure and confrontation that tend to occur when landlords try to engage in these conversations with their tenants alone.
Many cities have caught onto these benefits and are offering programs. Some courts also have mediation available for unlawful detainer cases. I have been a mediator for one such program. Speaking from that experience, most judges strongly encourage the parties to mediate their cases, and many settle this way. Since the parties will likely be encouraged to participate when they reach court, there is no reason not to try mediation before doing so.
In a private mediation setting, it is likely that the landlord would be the one paying the mediator’s fees more often than not. If you’re a tenant reading this, know that it is quite common in this field for one party to pay or pay a more significant percentage than another for the service. The mediator’s purpose is not to act on behalf of the landlord; it is to help all parties collectively come to a resolution. Each party makes their own choices; the mediator is the one guiding them along the way. Mediation also must be voluntary. No one can force you into it. That being said, it is almost certain to be a more comfortable setting to solve your problems than court is.
It is a difficult time for everyone in this situation and in general. Since the likelihood the government steps in to help anyone further is uncertain, people may have to accept that they must find their own way. Mediation is an extremely helpful tool to help people move forward under these circumstances and one that should be used as often as practicable for these issues.
If you want to know more about mediating a landlord-tenant issue like this or anything else, please contact us!