By Alyssa Garcia
DAVIS — Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, student concerns about the transition from in-person to online classes have coincided with concerns regarding apartment leases.
As many student residents of Davis feel uneasy about their ability to cancel leases and/or pay rent, ASUCD Legal Services released statements and advice on options available to students about both the renewal of leases and signing new leases for the 2020-2021 year.
ASUCD released this statement as a way to help people who may need it and the city of Davis has also taken action stating, “At a time like this where everything is uncertain the topic of rent and leases has proven to be one of the largest concerns for students and anyone who has been subjected to harsh conditions.”
One recommendation is subleasing, in which the tenant(s) find someone to take over their lease for some time or the lease period.
However, some students are unable to come back due to varying reasons, and with the amount of apartment vacancies in Davis, the supply of subleasers exceeds the demand for a place to sublease.
Taking this into account, ASUCD Legal Services also suggested negotiating with landlords/leasing agents where tenants may be able to obtain a buyout and only 
pay a partial amount of their whole lease.
Residents may also be able to cancel rent for a certain number of months depending on their landlords and what they may be offering. However, the feasibility of this is unclear as many landlords/leasing agents have not been very lenient.
ASUCD noted this in their memo that “it will take a cooperating landlord/leasing agent that wants to work something out before this will happen.”
In addition, ASUCD Legal Services recommended cleaning the place, turning in keys, and making it clear in writing that you will not be paying rent or staying in the apartment starting in September 2020.
This suggestion is the riskiest as it is possible that the landlord/leasing agent may sue you for unpaid rent. If this does happen, it is best to respond to the lawsuit right away, ASUCD mentioned.
For any Davis students/residents dealing with rent issues and who would like help, ASUCD Legal Services is available. Legal Services can connect students to an attorney who is able to answer questions and provide advice on how to pursue the situation.
On Aug. 26, 2020, the city of Davis extended the city’s urgency ordinance which allows for economic relief through Sep. 30, 2020.
Landlords will not be able to evict tenants that have been impacted by the pandemic as long as the tenants follow the provisions. The provisions include a written notice to the landlord about their incapacity of paying rent and document proof that COVID-19 financially impacted the tenant has no later than 30 days of the rent due date.
However, the payment will not be forgiven as the landlord may seek out the missing rent once the urgency ordinance expires and must be paid within six months of the expiration date.
The city of Davis has also decided to continue waiving new city utility bill late fees for residential and commercial customers, allowing late payments through September 2020. Therefore, the city will also not shut off water.
Despite this extension, many students feel that it is not enough.
Alejandra Melena, a third year human development major at UC Davis, has expressed her vexation on the subject stating, “It’s hard knowing that after September 30th this aid may not be available to people who have been significantly affected by COVID-19. I wish Davis would come up with a resolution that allowed us to leave our leases without any repercussions as none of us expected to be put in these difficult situations that not only involve us, but our families as well.”
Other students have voiced opinions that the city has not provided much help as people continue to face financial and employment problems that inhibit their ability to continue with rental leases.
For some, the extension does provide a temporary relief to the economic constraints that this unprecedented event created. Still, members of the Davis community continue to seek a long lasting and solid solution to the rent crisis that has continued for months now.
Will the annual vacancy rate survey be done this fall? It would be interesting to pin a number on what the actual vacancy rate is this fall, compared to the <1% of the last few years. Granted, it won’t tell us about next fall, but there is value in knowing.
I do not mean to minimize the unexpected hardship, and I mean this as a serious question. What do the students asking believe the source of the money should be to cover the contract loss? :
• City
• University
• State
• Federal Government
• Landlords
• Any/All of the above, as long as students don’t pay
” What do the students asking believe the source of the money should be to cover the contract loss?”
So put it on the backs of the students?
It’s already on the students, they signed the contracts. That’s why they are having trouble. Did the contract have an out for not being able to attend college in person? I doubt it. The issue is, if there is relief for students, who should pay? I listed several possibilities. Which source do you endorse, DG?
To me the compromise solution made the most sense – both sides give a little. Unless the state or federal government want to jump in to shore up the landlords.
Seems pretty obvious, Allen… DG goes with, “Any/All of the above, as long as students don’t pay”.
In the real world, signing contracts and then having “something go wrong”, is a reality… perhaps part of the ‘educational process’? Not to sound callous, but it is what it is… the ‘negotiation process’, where ‘the pain is shared’ seems reasonable.
Ex.: in early Feb we entered a contract for a 10 day trip thru Canada, and going to the Calgary Stampede… fully paid the non-refundable fee ~ April 1. Around $12 k. Since then, Calgary Stampede has been cancelled, train and buses to transport us, have been cancelled by the providers… and we cannot even enter Canada as of not, for ‘non-essential travel’… [we did have trip insurance, but with the flood of claims, that still has not been processed].
Real world. Stuff happens. In our case, the “providers” have decided they will not provide. But they’ve been ‘paid’… with the students, the landlords are still willing to provide… big diff…
I agree, but the landlords are under no obligation to give at all, except to the extent lawsuits to get the money cost more than what they will get back — so there is some negotiating room for students. I know people, especially small businesses downtown, but also some renters, who have negotiated rent deferment and/or decreases. By the nature of the matter, however, without government subsidy or intervention, the burden will be huge for some and less for others. I don’t see a way around that, and I don’t think any level of government is going to intervene on this, certainly not with full subsidies.
David, do you feel it should be on the backs of the landlords? What have the landlords done wrong? And we’re not always talking about large apartment complex owners, some landlords are small time and need their agreed to rent to pay their bills.
I actually agree with your post below – a compromise makes the most sense.
Yes, I think both parties can budge and come to a common ground.
IMO, that sounds like the best possible alternative.
If it were only that easy.
The City, County and local State authorities have done nothing about Leasemageddon. They barely even talk about it – same goes for City Council candidates. At the last City Council meeting in August, to his credit Council member Arnold brought up the issue during long range calendar, and there was even some preliminary discussion BUT as far I know there’s still nothing planned.
This situation has been building since spring. It doesn’t only affect students: It’s also a problem for non UCD-associated people who share homes with students and for smaller landlords. We know what the City can and cannot do in terms of finances. But that’s not all of what’s possible.
It seems fair to conclude that many landlords and property management companies have TOLD City Council members and senior City staff to not do anything new – beyond existing mechanisms provided by the City, UCD and legal services individually contracted etc. – to help renters.
What about bankruptcy or Force Mejeure?
Perhaps these strategies will be employed in individual cases; I am trying to emphasize that there is a very similar thing happening simultaneously with thousands of people and reasonable outcomes should not be based on the ability to afford lawyers or have the personal skill set, time and capacity to work well with those that provide free legal advice. The City (and State, and County) are tacitly approving a kind of inappropriate Libertarian approach to the whole mess. It’s decidedly anti-Equity, and flies in the face of an infinite number of proclamations by former and current politicians.
It may be “anti-equity”, but it’s “pro-contract”
Contracts are able to be amended all the time. That’s why we don’t always kill people or make them marry our daughters etc. when there is a disagreement or the situation has changed.
From what I can tell a very small minority of landlords are agreeing to modifications, meeting renters part-way, etc. Among other things the City needs to do more to make a lot more of it happen, ideally some kind of negotiated blanket agreement, etc.
When:
• Both sides agree
• It’s taken to court
• One side doesn’t agree but other side doesn’t take it to court (gives in)
• It is resolved through violence
Perhaps you lump bankruptcy into taking it to court but it is a different type of court. I find it interesting that there seems to be a media taboo around talking about bankruptcy. I remember during the 06-10 housing bust there were all sorts of stories about how to deal with a mortgage problem but they never suggested the obvious remedy of bankruptcy. Perhaps it goes back to before this republic was born when there were debtors prisons or debtors were sold into slavery. Then again perhaps its because the institutions that control finance and the media have too much to lose from masses of people exercising the constitutionally enshrined right to discharge un-payable debt in bankruptcy.
Many college students with limited resources and stuck in an obviously absurd lease contract based on new circumstances would likely be able to walk away from such a lease if no other settlement could be arranged. The court might ever order the return of any deposits made at signing of the contract.
“Anti-equity”? Property owners have ‘equity’ in the property they rent out… forgiving all contracts might jeopardize that… ‘anti-equity’ as it were.
Unless you ascribe to “all are equal, but some are more equal than others”…
The ‘meet and confer’ approach to having tenants and landlords ‘working it out’, is, in my opinion, the only reasonable and ‘equitable’ approach.
Silly homonyming, whatever.
Is exactly what needs to happen.
How many parents of students (in terms of percentages) co-signed for these leases? Seems to me that they’re the ones truly “holding the bag”.
I had to co-sign for my daughter.
It got kind of ugly when he tried to screw my daughter (therefor me) out of a $800 deposit.
I got involved and got the $800 back.
Glad to hear that it worked out for you and your daughter.
I don’t see any way that landlords (in general) are going to sue all those who are cancelling their leases.
But, maybe this will be “remembered”, when complaints about gouging arise again, next time. (Yeah, that was a joke, as I’m pretty sure it will be forgotten, soon.)
Hell, I can barely remember what the weather was, yesterday. Or what I had for breakfast.
What was the excuse? (I always enjoy the stories about reasons landlords give for withholding deposits in college towns).
I’m still there, KO.