Front Page  »  

California governor signs bill limiting security deposits to one month’s rent

October 18, 2023

By JOSH FRIEDMAN

California Gov. Gavin Newsom last week signed into law a bill that will prohibit landlords from making renters pay a security deposit that is more than one month’s rent. 

Eleven other states in the United Dtates limit security deposits to one month’s rent, said Assemblyman Matt Haney (D-San Francisco). Haney authored the legislation, Assembly Bill 12, which he says will stop the practice of California landlords charging amounts two or three times monthly rent as a security deposit. 

“Massive security deposits can create insurmountable barriers to housing affordability and accessibility for millions of Californians,” Haney said in a statement. “Despite skyrocketing rents, laws on ensuring affordable security deposits haven’t changed substantially since the 1970’s. The result is that landlords lose out on good tenants and tenants stay in homes that are too crowded, unsafe or far from work or school. 

“This new law is a simple common sense change that will have an enormous impact on housing affordability for families in California, while also balancing a landlord’s need to protect themselves against potential liability.”

Landlords who own no more than two properties with a total of four units or less are exempt from the security deposit limit in AB 12.


Loading...
Subjects:         
Related:


30 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A massive portion of rental units are now owned by large corporations. It varies by area but in LA and Riverside some articles say it’s like 60% or more. One company is the largest landlord in Sacramento. People with the money make the rules, there is no benefit to society for corporations and investment companies to own all the housing…


15

There should be no rent without equity built in. People who charge rent without Equity are called Slum Lords.

People who use a fake market to justify making money off folks who weren’t born with privalege are Scum Lords. Thank you Gavin for attempting to right wrongs and try to pry golden spoons out of boomers mouths given to them by the blood spilt from war loot. Sadly, they scream and cry the whole time. Sickening. Rent is literally endenturment and par to Slavery. Luckily for me, I’m a socialist. I don’t own stolen land. and I don’t believe in land ownership like my peaceful ancestors. I wasn’t a spoiled homestead act child either living on stolen land.


-30

You actually think that a homeowner should be giving you ownership for paying rent? wow. Doesn’t your beloved government charge you rent without equity?


14

I lieu of security deposits it is now all about credit scores. And forget about it if you have a pet and your landlord would allow it with a deposit that can no longer be charged


23

The housing market is extraordinarily tight, and landlords can really pick and choose right now. Not to mention rents are exorbitantly high across the board. It is not that hard for a good landlord, who is charging a reasonable fee, to set high standards and pick only tenants that come with really good references.


I have always paid rent on time in the decades I have been renting, have always left anywhere I lived in better condition than I found it and that would include the landscaping, as I love to garden. So, in that respect, I present as an ideal tenant.


That said, I am on a somewhat fixed income and the market is beginning to exclude me, so my excellent references become a moot point. The greed on the part of owners is becoming a real impediment to my remaining in the community where I have lived for 44 years. Anything that relieves that problem in any way is appreciated. This new ruling will not likely be of direct help to me, but I am far from the only one in a very similar predicament. I hope it helps others.


-19

Landlords have a right to make a profit in most cases it is minimal. Where the real greed lies is the continuing increasing operating expenses ie; taxes, insurance, fees, maintenance and upkeep, utilities (water & trash), Etc. Etc.


42

Hmmmm. Well, my current property owners are making $650 per month more than they were charging 7 years ago when I moved in. However, they plan to raise my rent by $1,000.00 more next July, when my lease runs out. Because they can. Because “It is their investment” and they “want to get it paid off as quickly as possible”.


Perhaps you consider that fair. I would agree that all the greed you mentioned above is definitely in need of corrective measures. Windfall profits kind of correction, etc. But it is definitely not the only factor at work here.


I do not consider myself to be part of a “leftist plot” for wanting some control over the situation hard working people are finding themselves in regarding adequate housing. Homelessness in any area is directly related to this skyrocketing inflation of rental prices.


-3

Should you desire to stay in the residence the Governor says 10% is the most your rent can be increased.


3

I wish!!! It is a single-family dwelling, not an apartment, and they can raise it to anything they want. Which they are poised to do when my lease runs out. Had the voters in this county approved rent control, you would have been right. But NOooooooOOoooooo.


-2

your comment seemed to piss off alot of Slum Lords here.


-32

Just curious; who determines what is a ‘reasonable fee”? It’s a subjective term.


Sounds like you want the California government to impose rent control.


6

Rent control would be great. Voters in this county had the chance to implement that and voted against it, presumably because of the campaign that stuffed our mailboxes declaring that it would “hurt veterans”. I wonder if they were referring to the ones forced into tents and cardboard boxes by unaffordable rents?


Before I moved into my current address 7 years ago, the owners were collecting $1750 per month. When I moved in, with a housemate, they raised it to $1850. I am now paying $2,300. When my lease runs out, the rent is going up to (KACHING!!!) $3,300. This has never included any utilities. The house is well maintained, but we do much of the outdoor maintenance. Do you consider this reasonable? If so, you will obviously not be my new landlord.


-6

My “greed” as you call it (I call profit), recently afforded me the ability to spend $42,000 on a new roof for a rental. The next “greedy” thing needed will be a new driveway. With inflation I expect that to be upwards of $80k.

Personally we have received three notices of non-renewal from insurance companies leaving the state in the last two years. I have to expect there will be more, and rates will increase because of it. We would be fools if we didn’t plan ahead for that.

We’ve had units that required almost no work when tenants moved out, and units that required far more than the security deposit collected to make it habitable for a new tenant. I’d much prefer to return a security deposit to a good tenant!


2

Sadly, a high deposit will not ensure that you are getting a “good” tenant, just a wealthy one. I had a cleaning business and often handled post-tenant clean-ups. In my experience, the high rent places with the big deposits were too often the ones that got trashed. People who could afford it seemed to think they were entitled.


What ensures respect for your property are really good references, which I have always had. But if the priority is how quickly the mortgage is paid off, I will not likely be the tenant. Substantial to begin with, my rent, if I remained here when my lease is up, would be close to double what it was when I moved in, in a short space of time. That is not how one keeps a “good” tenant.


Mercury Ins. still sells in Ca., by the way.


1

No where did I mention high deposits so I’m not sure what that has to do with my post.

Secondly, the fact you can list one insurance company writing policies in CA does little to assuage concerns about the number leaving and refusing to do business here.


1

Yeah lets drive up rent and lease prices when people can barely get by as it is….

Gavin… Please stop helping us!!!


29

Yet another blow to California property rights.


32

who originally lived on this land, is it stolen? and the answer is?


-39

Prospective tenants are gonna get looked at a lot closer. The rule of thumb has always been the higher the deposit, the greater the chance the tenants will leave the property in the same condition as when they found it. Lower deposits = Higher risk


43

With all the other tenant rights, they are able to stay longer after they stop paying rent while the landlord pays $ to evict them. They are now able to sit 60-90 days paying no rent, then trash the property while taking out anything (fridge, stove etc) and after all that the landlord costs will be in excess of 4 or 5 times the one month of security deposit they were able to get. That is not an exaggeration.


49

yes, it is an exaggeration.


-48

Seems this will make it harder for some to rent. Some landlords feel a higher security deposit is needed due to the damage caused by some renters, some if they are only able to obtain a certain amount for a security deposit they will more inclined to only rent to those who present a image that as a renter they will take care of the rental.


42

landlords need to stop enslaving renters like it’s the south pre civil war thinking providing slaves accomodations makes it Ok to be a slave holder.


-15

Kevin you are so off based. Property owners are trusting that their property will be cared for, tenants are trusting that the property owner will maintain their properties at a humane level or better… We need each other and there has to be securities in place to guarantee that. California is a tenant rights state. Where is the balance for property owners now? Security deposits was that and so is the eviction process both have been legislated away


13
1 2