SACRAMENTO, CA – On July 1, Assemblymember Matt Haney’s (D – San Francisco) AB 12 banning landlords from charging exorbitant security deposits went into effect in California.
This landmark tenant protection bill stops the practice of California landlords charging two times and (in some cases three times) the monthly rent as a security deposit. California now joins eleven other states in the country to limit security deposits to only one month’s rent.
“Massive security deposits can create insurmountable barriers to housing affordability and accessibility for millions of Californians” said Haney who chairs the California Legislature’s Renters’ Caucus. “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.”
53% of California renters indicate that they are able to afford their rent but they’re unable to get an apartment because they simply can’t afford to pay the two month’s rent as a security deposit. This pushes many families, including those with individuals making minimum wage, to either forgo necessities such as food and utilities or acquire more debt to be approved for housing.
“In California’s high-cost rental market, expensive security deposits are often imposed on immigrants and people of color, effectively limiting access to safe and affordable housing. By capping high security deposits, AB 12 advances a measure of equity and empowers immigrants and people of color across the state, who contribute daily to making our diverse state thrive.” said Masih Fouladi, the Executive Director of California Immigrant Policy Center.
AB 12, which went into effect on July 1, 2024, does not impact small landlords. Mom and pop landlords that own only 2 properties with a total of no more than 4 units are exempt. It also does not have any effect on potential liability–landlords will still be able to seek damages from tenants who are responsible for harm to the property that exceeds the amount of the security deposit.
Previous:
- Oct 2023 – Bill to Ban Expensive Security Deposits Signed by Governor
- Dec 2022 – Bill Aims to Stop Landlords Charging Skyrocketing Security Deposits
3 comments
Landlord should have the right to charge whatever they want for the security deposit. Tenants can make the choice whether or not they want to pay that and move in or not. Landlords need to protect their investment, the more that a tenant has invested in a security deposit, the greater chances of that tenant taken care of the rental. It’s not that hard to figure out.
That’s not the issue. The issue is pay wages. Not everyone is union making 40 to 60 an hour. A lot of my union friends make 8K on a slow month and 12+K on a really busy month. Compared to some of my other friends including me. Where 3 of us are making 20 an hour full time. And we still don’t have anything to show but a roof over are heads, bills paid and food…. Still No newer looking vehicles or family outings including movies to get out of the heat.
Point is someone making 40+ can Survive. And probably invest
Compared to
Someone making 20 an hour that can pay just to see the next day.
That’s the issue.
This “landmark tenant protection bill” will result in higher rents and tend to discourage rental housing. The claim that landlords are protected because they can still “seek damages” from irresponsible tenants is bogus and unrealistic.