What are the opening hours?

Monday 8:30am - 5pm Tuesday 8:30am - 5pm Wednesday 8:30am - 5pm Thursday 8:30am - 5pm Friday 8:30am - 5pm

Kriger Law Firm, 8220 University Avenue, La Mesa, CA (2026)

06/14/2023

Appellate Court Finds No Vested Right in Renewal of Term-Limited Short-Term Rental Licenses

Some California cities have enacted ordinances to regulate the proliferation of short-term rentals. These ordinances often limit the number of homes that can be offered as short-term rentals by requiring licenses subject to random nonrenewal. The recent case of Hobbs v. City of Pacific Grove (2022) 85 Cal.App.5th 311, involved a challenge to such an ordinance.

The City of Pacific Grove’s ordinance allowed short-term rentals subject to licensing, taxes, and other regulations. Owners could apply for one-year licenses subject to earlier revocation for good cause. The City capped the number of short-term rental licenses at 250 and established a density cap of 15 percent per block. After the City later discovered that it had issued rental licenses exceeding these caps, it selected licenses to “sunset” after a grace period after their current term expired. It adopted a random lottery to fairly and equitably reduce the number of licenses without favoritism. The City’s voters approved a ballot measure that prohibited and phased out all existing short-term rentals in residential districts, except for those located in the City’s “Coastal Zone.”

The owners of two homes sued the City, alleging it unconstitutionally deprived them of “their right to allow guests to stay in their home.” They alleged the ordinance violated the right to due process by (1) arbitrarily limiting how many homes could be offered as short-term rentals, (2) subjecting them to random selection for license nonrenewal, and (3) prohibiting short-term rentals outside the Coastal Zone. The trial court disagreed, and the owners appealed.

Click to read more https://tinyurl.com/yxsvz3vn

06/14/2023

Appellate Court Finds No Vested Right in Renewal of Term-Limited Short-Term Rental Licenses

Some California cities have enacted ordinances to regulate the proliferation of short-term rentals. These ordinances often limit the number of homes that can be offered as short-term rentals by requiring licenses subject to random nonrenewal. The recent case of Hobbs v. City of Pacific Grove (2022) 85 Cal.App.5th 311, involved a challenge to such an ordinance.

The City of Pacific Grove’s ordinance allowed short-term rentals subject to licensing, taxes, and other regulations. Owners could apply for one-year licenses subject to earlier revocation for good cause. The City capped the number of short-term rental licenses at 250 and established a density cap of 15 percent per block. After the City later discovered that it had issued rental licenses exceeding these caps, it selected licenses to “sunset” after a grace period after their current term expired. It adopted a random lottery to fairly and equitably reduce the number of licenses without favoritism. The City’s voters approved a ballot measure that prohibited and phased out all existing short-term rentals in residential districts, except for those located in the City’s “Coastal Zone.”

The owners of two homes sued the City, alleging it unconstitutionally deprived them of “their right to allow guests to stay in their home.” They alleged the ordinance violated the right to due process by (1) arbitrarily limiting how many homes could be offered as short-term rentals, (2) subjecting them to random selection for license nonrenewal, and (3) prohibiting short-term rentals outside the Coastal Zone. The trial court disagreed, and the owners appealed.
Appellate Court Finds No Vested Right in Renewal of Term-Limited Short-Term Rental Licenses

Some California cities have enacted ordinances to regulate the proliferation of short-term rentals. These ordinances often limit the number of homes that can be offered as short-term rentals by requiring licenses subject to random nonrenewal. The recent case of Hobbs v. City of Pacific Grove (2022) 85 Cal.App.5th 311, involved a challenge to such an ordinance.

The City of Pacific Grove’s ordinance allowed short-term rentals subject to licensing, taxes, and other regulations. Owners could apply for one-year licenses subject to earlier revocation for good cause. The City capped the number of short-term rental licenses at 250 and established a density cap of 15 percent per block. After the City later discovered that it had issued rental licenses exceeding these caps, it selected licenses to “sunset” after a grace period after their current term expired. It adopted a random lottery to fairly and equitably reduce the number of licenses without favoritism. The City’s voters approved a ballot measure that prohibited and phased out all existing short-term rentals in residential districts, except for those located in the City’s “Coastal Zone.”

The owners of two homes sued the City, alleging it unconstitutionally deprived them of “their right to allow guests to stay in their home.” They alleged the ordinance violated the right to due process by (1) arbitrarily limiting how many homes could be offered as short-term rentals, (2) subjecting them to random selection for license nonrenewal, and (3) prohibiting short-term rentals outside the Coastal Zone. The trial court disagreed, and the owners appealed.

Click to read more https://rb.gy/piqo2

06/05/2023

Fumigation and Tenting

Under California Law, a homeowner association may require its residents to temporarily vacate their homes for fumigation and tenting in order to treat for termites. More specifically, under California Civil Code Section 4785, an association may “…cause the temporary, summary removal of any occupant of a common interest development for such periods and at such times as may be necessary for prompt, effective treatment of wood-destroying pests or organisms.”

To meet the notice requirements of Civil Code Section 4785, an association needs to take the following steps. First, an association should prepare a notice that specifically states “…the reason for the temporary relocation, the date and time of the beginning of treatment, the anticipated date and time of termination of treatment, and that the occupants will be responsible for their own accommodations during the temporary relocation.” Second, an association must provide a copy of the notice to the occupants of the separate interest and to the owners of the separate interest, if the owners do not reside in it. Third, the notice needs to be provided within a specific time frame, i.e., not less than 15 nor more than 30 days before the date of temporary relocation. Lastly, an association must provide notice to the occupants by personal delivery or individual delivery pursuant to Civil Code Section 4040. If the occupants do not own the separate interest, then the association must also provide notice to the owners by individual delivery.

Click on link to read more: https://tinyurl.com/275nx4e4

04/24/2023

How Assembly Bill 1410 Will Impact Your HOA

Assembly Bill (AB) 1410, authored by Assembly Member Freddie Rodriguez, was signed into law on September 30, 2022, and will take effect on January 1, 2023. This bill makes three changes to existing laws impacting homeowner associations, specifically regarding usage of social media and online resources, enforcement action during emergencies, and members’ right to rent or lease their separate interest.

Social Media and Online Resources: Existing Civil Code Section 4515 ensures that members and residents can exercise their rights to peacefully assemble and freely communicate with one another and with others regarding association issues or for social, political, or educational purposes. It listed five such types of activities which an association’s governing documents cannot prohibit. This bill would add subsection (6) to Section 4515(b) to prohibit anything in governing documents banning members from using “social media or other online resources to discuss any of the following, even if the content is critical of the association or its governance: development living, association elections, legislation, election to public office, the initiative, referendum, or recall processes, or other issues of concern to members and residents.” Thankfully, the bill does not require HOAs to provide social media or other online resources to members or require HOAs to allow members to post content on the HOA’s website.

Click link to read more: https://bit.ly/3AqSjur

03/08/2023

ANNUAL SOLICITATION OF OWNERS’ PREFERRED DELIVERY METHOD FOR RECEIVING ASSOCIATION NOTICES

Senate Bill 392 was legislation passed a year ago that, among other things, amended Civil Code §4040 regarding the definition of “individual delivery” or “individual notice” but delayed the effective date of that change to January 1, 2023.

The California Civil Code specifies that certain association notices must be provided by individual notice or delivery (as opposed to general notice or delivery). Examples of notices that must be provided by individual notice or delivery include, but are not limited to, notices of assessment increases, notices of significant changes to the association's insurance policies, and annual budget reports and annual policy statements. Prior to January 1, 2023, documents required to be provided by individual notice or delivery were to be provided to the owner, at the address last shown on the books of the association, by first-class mail, registered or certified mail, express mail, or overnight delivery by an express service carrier. Individual notice or delivery could also be accomplished by email if the owner had specifically consented in writing or by email to receiving individual notices by email.

Effective January 1, 2023, Civil Code §4040 will be amended so that documents required to be provided by individual notice or delivery must be sent “in accordance with the preferred delivery method specified by the member pursuant to Section 4041.”

Click here to read more https://tinyurl.com/3ejkj6yz

03/06/2023

JOIN US at 2023 CACM Law Seminar & Expo of Southern California, March 16-17, 2023. Be sure to visit us at booth #615 and let’s conquer California together.

Kriger Law Firm is a Proud Sponsor of
https://cacm.org/events/2023southerncalifornialawseminar/

01/25/2023

LEGISLATURE FURTHER LIMITS LOCAL REGULATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS

As the California legislature continues its efforts to address the shortage of housing in the state, the new year will usher in more revisions to the laws affecting accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”) and junior accessory dwelling units (“JADUs”). A number of the revisions expressly codify existing practices of local permitting agencies. However, some of the other revisions continue to lower the bar for construction of ADUs and JADUs. This article will briefly summarize the changes brought by Senate Bill (SB) 897, which was approved on September 28, 2022, becomes effective on January 1, 2023, and voids and nullifies any nonconforming local ADU and JADU ordinances.

SB 897 amends Government Code Section 65852.2 in various ways. It revises application review procedures and places more restrictions on denials. It now expressly requires that ADU standards be “objective” and defines an “objective standard” as one that (1) involves no personal or subjective judgment by a public official; and (2) is uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal.

Permits for ADUs and the demolition of garages they are replacing must be processed simultaneously. ADU application denials must include a full set of comments specifically listing the defective or deficient items and how the application can be remedied. ADU applications cannot be denied due to zoning, building code, or permit violations elsewhere on the lot that do not threaten public health and safety and are unaffected by the ADU’s construction.

SB 897 also loosens height and setback restrictions. Presently, an ADU can be an attached or detached unit and must meet certain locally-established size, height, and setback requirements, including a 16-foot height limitation and four-foot side and rear setback requirements.

Click link to read more https://bit.ly/3wunnHO

12/12/2022

COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION’S REMOVAL OF VICIOUS DOG UPHELD BY APPELLATE COURT

In the recent unpublished case of Sunset Greens Homeowners Association v. Spagenski, the Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld a San Diego Superior Court judge's entry of summary judgment for a community association on a case involving a vicious dog. The association had sued after the defendant owners' German Shepherd, “Kato,” attacked neighbors' dogs within the community, injuring both dogs and neighbors.

Kato had attacked four other dogs in three separate events over roughly six months, resulting in the death of one of the other dogs. In two of the events, Kato also injured neighbors. The association called the owners to hearings and warned that further incidents could result in the removal of the dog from the community. After the second attack, the association's board held another violation hearing, which the owners failed to attend. The board ordered the owners to remove Kato from the community.

The association sued the owners, seeking injunctive relief for breach of the CC&Rs and nuisance. The association asked that the trial court enforce the decision to remove Kato, permanently enjoin the owners from keeping Kato in the community, and award attorney fees and costs. The trial court issued a temporary injunction prohibiting the owners from keeping Kato in the community while the lawsuit was pending. The association then moved for summary judgment.

Click here to Read More https://bit.ly/3Bwt3DT

09/15/2022

PROTECTING 55+ COMMUNITIES – WHAT’S LEGAL? WHAT’S PRACTICAL

To create senior-specific communities, California carved out certain allowable restrictions in Civil Code Section 51.3 and its Riverside County-specific counterpart 51.11. Those statutes provide three distinct categorical definitions of people who can legally reside in communities designated for senior living:

1. “Qualifying resident” or “senior citizen” means a person 62 years of age or older, or 55 years of age or older in a senior citizen housing development.

2.“Qualified permanent resident” means a person who either meets the requirements of both (A) and (B) below or who meets the requirement set forth in (C) below:
(A) Was residing with the qualifying resident or senior citizen prior to the death, hospitalization, or other prolonged absence of, or the dissolution of marriage with, the qualifying resident or senior citizen.

(B) Was 45 years of age or older, or was a spouse, cohabitant, or person providing primary physical or economic support to the qualifying resident or senior citizen.

Or

(C) A disabled person or person with a disabling illness or injury who is a child or grandchild of the senior citizen or a qualified permanent resident as defined in paragraph (2) who needs to live with the senior citizen or qualified permanent resident because of the disabling condition, illness, or injury.

3. “Permitted health care resident” means a person hired to provide live-in, long-term, or terminal health care to a qualifying resident, or a family member of the qualifying resident providing that care. For the purposes of this section, the care provided by a permitted health care resident must be substantial in nature and must provide either assistance with necessary daily activities or medical treatment, or both.

Click here to read more https://bit.ly/3DpQoZF

07/20/2022

SHAKEUP ON EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMALS

Effective since the beginning of this year, Assembly Bill 468, signed into law by California Governor Newsom, imposes several new requirements intended to crack down on emotional support animal (“ESA”) fraud. Fraudulent practices surrounding ESAs are problematic for not only businesses but homeowner associations as well. HOAs have seen an influx of ESA requests for reasonable accommodation and an increase in the fraudulent selling of misleading ESA-related certificates and merchandise that frequently misrepresent emotional support dogs as service dogs.

The new law seeks to crack down on the increased misrepresentation of emotional support animals as service animals. It also aims to prevent businesses that sell ESA certificates, vests, tags, patches, holographic identification cards, and harnesses that attempt to mislead others into thinking the emotional support animal is a service animal. Until now, there was no law to punish those who knowingly and fraudulently represent ESAs as service animals.

To fully appreciate what this new law is attempting to accomplish, we must understand the difference between an ESA and a service animal. A service animal is specially trained to assist a specific individual with a disability with services such as guiding people who are blind, alerting a hearing-impaired person to a sound, alerting a person to the onset of a seizure and helping the person remain safe during the seizure, or pulling a wheelchair, among other assigned tasks. Furthermore, only a dog can qualify as a service animal. No other animal can be recognized as a service animal, even if that animal is trained to assist a person with a disability.

On the other hand, an ESA can be any animal and does not have training specific to the owner’s disability. According to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an ESA is any animal that provides emotional support that alleviates one or more identified symptoms or effects of a person’s disability. However, ESAs are not trained to perform specific tasks to assist people with disabilities. ESAs “do not need training to ameliorate the effects of a person’s mental and emotional disabilities.”

Click here to read more https://www.krigerlawfirm.com/shakeup-on-emotional-support-animals

Kriger Law Firm

06/14/2023

06/14/2023

06/05/2023

04/24/2023

03/08/2023

03/06/2023

01/25/2023

12/12/2022

09/15/2022

07/20/2022

Address

Opening Hours

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Monday	8:30am - 5pm
Tuesday	8:30am - 5pm
Wednesday	8:30am - 5pm
Thursday	8:30am - 5pm
Friday	8:30am - 5pm