Breach of Warranty of Habitability & Security Deposit

[Gina_SC]

Jurisdiction

California

I rented a home in Santa Cruz and it is now apparent that the landlord did knowingly rent me a home that was unfit for habitation (records apparently go back 3+ years). A number of county officials have already been out, inspected the home and have issued warnings on code violations. As the renter, I received copies and noticed that all 4 of the notices clearly stated that if it wasn't for the home being occupied that it would in fact be declared Unfit for Human Occupancy. Considering what I'm dealing with, I've spent after hours and hours of time researching (and getting guidance) and have found that I can terminate my lease based on the breach of warranty of habitability along with specific references in the lease that call for the landlord to ensure the home complies with all local laws, ordinances and regulations.

So given the above, my question is... am I entitled to my security deposit? Can I reference California Civil Code § 1950.5 and state to my landlord that he has 21 days to issue my refund upon my vacating the premises?

Thank you in advance for your help

Gina

 

[adjusterjack]

Sorry but it's not uninhabitable if you still occupy it. Uninhabitable means you can't live there but, obviously, you can live there because you are living there.

You are free to pack up and leave and then sue for your deposit based on uninhabitability but until you leave it's not uninhabitable.

Unfortunately, you would then have to prove (with evidence, not just sayso) that the conditions of the property were in such distress that no reasonable person would be expected to continue occupying it.

I'm not seeing how you could accomplish that since you did continue occupying it all this time although, in small claims court, a judge might be sympathetic. No guarantees there.