This is a form in which a tenant fills out when served upon them to declare whether (1) they claim to be a "protected tenant"; and (2) they claim they will be protected in the next twelve months.
A Protected Tenant is defined under the SF Rent Ordinance as someone who is either (1) a tenant for at least 10 years and is 60 years or older; (2) a tenant for at least 10 years, disabled, and qualifed to receive SSI payments; and (3) a tenant for at least 5 years, disabled with a life threatening illness, and qualifed to receive SSI payments. SSI payments are a form of welfare which requires an asset and income test.
The fact that a tenant is "projected" is important because it may limit or prevent an owner from doing an owner move in or relative move in eviction. Also, the lawful eviction of a protected tenant will destroy any condo conversion rights a building may have had.
Under the Rent Ordinance, if a tenant is served with the 37.9(i) form, he must return it in 30 days or he is deemed to not be protected. However, tenant groups have asserted that tenants are not obligated to fill out or return such forms unless the person serving it is intending on doing an Owner Move In eviction. This issues has not yet been litigated or resolved Court.
Its should be noted that even if a tenant filled out the 37.9(i) form stating that they were not "protected" it would not lell you if they were disabled. A tenant could truthfully state that they are not protected while still being disabled if they have not lived in the premises for 10 years or were qualifed to receive SSI Payments. This is important because the eviction of a disabled person, even if not protected, will destroy condo conversion rights of a building.
Jeffery Woo, Esq.
Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP
We as Realtors work to support property ownerâ€™s rights both locally and nationally. There is an important time coming up in San Francisco where we have the opportunity of changing the makeup of the Board of Supervisors and possibly roll back some of the ordinances they have passed in the past 8 years.
It is very important to acknowledge that we as Realtors and concerned citizens that we do not desire or support a casting off of society's responsibility to the elders and differently abled. We just don't think that it is right to put the burden of support for any specific group on the shoulders of any other specific group. In this case property owners are told to give support to the elders and differently abled. Society as a whole should shoulder this very important need.
We don't tell a grocer to sell milk below cost to someone that needs it and can't afford it. We give vouchers, food stamps or other support to the person so they can pay for it and the grocer is paid market price for the milk.
The following information is from http:// http://www.g3mh.com. A law firm's site and written by Boyd McSparran.
On November 7, 2006, voters approved Proposition H, which requires
landlords who pursue certain types of landlord-motivated evictions to pay
$4,500 in relocation assistance to each â€œEligible Tenant,â€ regardless of
age, who has lived in the unit for 12 months or more, up to a maximum of
$13,500 per unit. Landlords must pay an additional $3,000 to each Eligible
Tenant who is disabled or is 60 years of age or older, plus $3,000 to each
household with an Eligible Tenant who has at least one child under the
age of 18 years living in the unit. Beginning in March 2007, the required
relocation assistance will be inflation-adjusted annually.
In May 2006, the San Francisco Subdivision Code was amended to restrict
an ownerâ€™s ability to apply for condo conversion if there is a recent history
of evictions in the building. A building with two (2) or more evictions,
with notice dates on or after May 1, 2005, may be temporarily barred from
entering the lottery or applying for condo conversion for ten (10) years.
A building with an eviction of a protected tenant, with a notice date on or
after May 1, 2005, may be permanently barred from entering the lottery
or applying for condo conversion.
The San Francisco Superior Court Appellate Division recently ruled that
an owner must hold a minimum 25% â€“ not 50% â€“ ownership interest in
a property to pursue an Owner Move-In Eviction. The Court of Appeal
recently denied review of this decision in a published ruling.
Effective August 8, 2006, a San Francisco landlord must have just cause
to withdraw certain housing services, such as parking and storage, from
The Protected Tenants Status Addendum is a form which must be filled out if a Tenant is claiming protected status. It will tell the Seller and the Buyer if the tenant is (1) over the age of 60 and has resided there for 10 years or more, (2) is disabled and have resided there for 10 years or more or (3) if the tenant has a catastrophic illness. This form is then filed with the Rent Board and signed off on by all parties in the Transaction before it can close. This form gives, in essence and as Liz said, a life tenancy" under rent control. You can offer to buy that person out but I would consult a real estate attorney who specializes in this before starting the process.
Proposition 98 which may or may not be on the ballot this year says that need no longer be done because it stops owners using the property as they see fit. Please study your ballot book and then, if you do not like what the Board of Supervisors and the Rent Control gang have done to make life almost impossible for Property Owners, vote to support it. I am biased as a Property Owner but I still think enough is enough. If you wish to discuss this further, please contact me. Tenants will always have some protections but it should be more equitable between Owners & Tenants in my opinion.