SB 567 No-Fault Eviction Rules California 2026
Updated June 2026 | Part of the California Landlord Law Series | View full series
SB 567 (Homelessness Prevention Act), effective April 1, 2024, tightened California’s no-fault eviction rules under AB 1482. The most consequential change: landlords who use a no-fault just cause reason to evict a tenant and then re-rent or re-use the unit within 12 months now face treble damages, meaning the greater of 3 times monthly rent or actual damages, plus attorney’s fees. Relocation assistance also increased, and substantial remodel evictions now require actual permits before serving notice. Long Beach landlords face an additional layer: local Just Cause Ordinance Chapter 8.99. Call RPM Southland at (562) 270-1777 before serving any no-fault notice.
- What SB 567 Changed from AB 1482 (Pre/Post Comparison)
- The 5 No-Fault Just Cause Reasons Under AB 1482 After SB 567
- Owner Move-In Evictions: The 12-Month Rule and Treble Damages
- Substantial Remodel Evictions: Permit-First Rule (New April 2024)
- The 5 Ways Landlords Trigger the 3x Damages Penalty
- Long Beach Layer: How Chapter 8.99 Stacks with SB 567
- How RPM Southland Documents No-Fault Evictions to Prevent Liability
- SB 567 Quick Reference Cheat Sheet
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Related in This Series
If you own rental property in California, SB 567 changed your risk calculus in a very concrete way starting April 1, 2024. Before the law took effect, a landlord who made a mistake on a no-fault eviction faced actual damages: tenant relocation costs, back rent, maybe attorney’s fees. After SB 567, that same mistake exposes you to three times the monthly rent, on top of actual damages and attorney’s fees. That is a significant number on a Long Beach rental where average rents run $2,000 to $3,500 per month.
I’ve been managing properties in Long Beach, Downey, Lakewood, Cerritos, and across Southeast LA County since 2014. We currently manage over 730 properties, and I can tell you that the no-fault eviction process is one of the highest-liability areas in California landlord law right now. SB 567 was already complicated to begin with. Long Beach’s local Just Cause Ordinance layers on top of it. And the consequences of getting it wrong are not theoretical.
This guide breaks down exactly what SB 567 changed, what the specific rules are for owner move-in and substantial remodel evictions, and how we handle documentation at RPM Southland to protect our clients. If you’re a Long Beach landlord considering a no-fault eviction of any kind, read this before you serve any notice.
What SB 567 Changed from AB 1482: The 6 Key Provisions Affecting Every Long Beach Landlord
AB 1482, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, created California’s statewide just cause eviction framework for properties built before 2005 (and older than 15 years). SB 567 did not replace AB 1482. It amended it. The underlying structure of covered properties, just cause categories, and relocation assistance requirements stayed in place. What SB 567 did was sharpen the teeth: it increased damages for violations, added specific procedural requirements that did not exist before, and created a 12-month lookback window that landlords must manage carefully after any no-fault eviction.
The single biggest change is the treble damages provision. Under pre-SB 567 law, a landlord who violated the no-fault eviction rules faced actual damages. Starting April 1, 2024, a tenant can sue for the greater of three times the monthly rent or actual damages, plus reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs. On a $2,800/month Long Beach unit, that floor is $8,400. On a $3,500 unit in Lakewood, it is $10,500. These are not fees you recover from the tenant. They come out of your pocket.
Many landlords learned AB 1482 when it passed in 2019 and assumed they understood the no-fault rules. SB 567 changed the game in April 2024 without generating the same level of press coverage as AB 1482 did. Landlords who are operating on pre-2024 knowledge of the rules are the ones most likely to trigger treble damages. The law has been in effect for over two years, but we still see compliance gaps regularly.
We handle no-fault eviction documentation for over 730 properties. Call (562) 270-1777.
The 5 No-Fault Just Cause Reasons Under AB 1482 After SB 567
AB 1482 authorizes only five reasons a landlord can evict a tenant without fault on the tenant’s part, and each one comes with specific requirements that SB 567 made stricter. The covered properties are multi-family buildings built before 2005 (older than 15 years) and single-family homes and condos where the owner has not issued the required statutory exemption notice. If your property falls under AB 1482, every eviction must fit one of these five categories or it is unlawful.
The most common no-fault eviction. Owner or a qualified family member (spouse, children, parents, grandparents, grandchildren, sibling) must actually occupy the unit as a primary residence for at least 12 months. Relocation assistance: 1 month’s rent.
The owner is permanently taking the building out of the rental market. Governed by separate Ellis Act statute (Government Code 7060 et seq.). SB 567 did not change Ellis Act requirements, but the 12-month re-rental lookback still creates risk for partial re-entry.
A government agency orders the property vacated for habitability or safety reasons. Rarely used as a voluntary eviction tool since the trigger is external. Owner must comply with the order and cannot simply use a fake habitability citation to displace a tenant.
The most regulated reason under SB 567. Work must require permits and require tenant to vacate. Landlord must have actual permits in hand before serving notice, provide commencement date and permit numbers, and pay 3 months’ relocation assistance. Work must start within 30 days of vacancy.
The owner intends to demolish the unit. Requires permits and documentation similar to substantial remodel. Relocation assistance: 3 months’ rent. Demolition permits must be obtained before notice is served. This category is rarely used for individual units but applies to full building teardowns.
AB 1482 also authorizes at-fault evictions for nonpayment of rent, lease violations, criminal activity, subletting without permission, and other tenant failures. SB 567 did not change at-fault eviction rules. If a tenant stops paying rent or violates the lease, the normal at-fault process applies and the treble damages provision does not come into play. The high-risk zone is specifically the no-fault categories above.
Our team reviews which statute applies before any notice goes out. Call (562) 270-1777.
Owner Move-In Evictions: The 12-Month Occupancy Rule and the $3x Damages Exposure
Owner move-in is the most frequently attempted no-fault eviction in California, and it is the one that generates the most liability under SB 567. The rule seems straightforward: you want to move into your own property, so you give the tenant notice. But the requirements are specific, the documentation is real, and the 12-month window for treble damages creates ongoing exposure even after the eviction is complete.
Who Qualifies as the “Owner” for Move-In Purposes
The property owner includes a natural person who holds at least a 25% ownership interest. Corporations, LLCs, and trusts do not have “family members” who can use the owner move-in provision unless the trust or LLC is structured in a way that qualifies under specific statutes. Many landlords who hold property in an LLC discover this the hard way. Before serving an owner move-in notice on an LLC-held property, verify whether the structure qualifies.
Qualified family members for the owner move-in provision under AB 1482 are: spouse, domestic partner, children (including adult children), parents, grandparents, grandchildren, and siblings. This is a defined list. A cousin, niece, nephew, in-law, or other relation is not a qualified family member under this statute. Using the provision for a non-qualifying family member exposes you to the same treble damages as a fraudulent owner move-in.
The 12-Month Occupancy Requirement
Under SB 567, the owner or qualifying family member must actually occupy the unit as a primary residence for at least 12 consecutive months after the tenant vacates. This is not a soft requirement. If the owner or family member moves out before 12 months have elapsed, and the property is then re-rented at any price, the former tenant has a cause of action for treble damages. The 12-month clock runs from the date the tenant vacates, not from the date of the eviction notice.
“The owner move-in process is one of the most compliance-intensive things a landlord can do in California right now. You need documentation of intent before the notice, documentation of actual occupancy, and you have to track that 12-month window carefully after the tenant leaves. Doing it wrong exposes you to a damages number that easily exceeds what the property earns in six months of rent.”
Miles Williams, Broker/Owner, RPM Southland
The 12-Month Re-Rental Lookback and Treble Damages
If you serve an owner move-in notice, take possession of the unit, and then re-rent it at any price within 12 months (whether to the evicted tenant or a new one), the former tenant can sue for the greater of 3 times their monthly rent or their actual damages, plus attorney’s fees. On a $3,000/month Long Beach rental, the treble damages floor is $9,000 per violation. This applies regardless of whether the re-rental price is higher or lower than what the displaced tenant was paying.
Re-rent within 12 months at any price
Owner claims owner move-in, evicts tenant, then re-rents the unit 8 months later. The 12-month window has not elapsed. Former tenant can sue for 3x monthly rent plus attorney’s fees.
Actual 12-month occupancy, documented
Owner or qualifying family member occupies the unit as primary residence for the full 12 months, with documentation (utility bills, mail, DMV records). No re-rental during that window.
We verify coverage, confirm qualified family status, prepare notice, and track the 12-month window. Call (562) 270-1777.
Substantial Remodel Evictions: The Permit-First Rule Effective April 2024
Substantial remodel evictions were already the most procedurally complex no-fault reason before SB 567. After April 1, 2024, the permit-first rule made them harder to execute and more expensive to get wrong. This section explains exactly what changed and what you must have in hand before serving any notice of this kind.
What Counts as a Substantial Remodel
A substantial remodel under AB 1482 must involve structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical work that requires a permit from the local building authority and that cannot reasonably be performed while the unit is occupied. Cosmetic repairs (new paint, carpet, appliance replacement) do not qualify. The work must be extensive enough that a reasonable person could not remain in the unit while it is being performed. This is a factual determination that depends on the scope of the work, and courts have looked at it closely.
The New Permit-First Requirement
Before SB 567, a landlord could serve a substantial remodel notice based on a statement of intent to remodel: a plan to pull permits, a contractor estimate, and a description of the work. SB 567 eliminated that option. Starting April 1, 2024, the landlord must have actual permits in hand before serving the notice. The notice itself must include the permit numbers, the estimated commencement date, and the estimated duration of the work.
A substantial remodel notice served after April 1, 2024 must state: (1) the permit numbers for the work, (2) the estimated commencement date (within 30 days of tenant vacating), (3) the estimated duration of the remodel, and (4) the amount of relocation assistance being paid (3 months’ rent). A notice that is missing any of these elements is legally deficient. A deficient notice does not start the eviction clock. It may also give the tenant a basis to claim the eviction was fraudulent, which triggers treble damages.
The 30-Day Commencement Window
SB 567 created a presumption that a substantial remodel eviction is fraudulent if work does not commence within 30 days of the tenant vacating. This means you cannot evict a tenant for a substantial remodel and then let the unit sit empty for months while you shop for contractors. The work must start within 30 days. If it does not, the presumption of fraud applies and the former tenant can sue for treble damages even without proving you planned the fraud from the beginning.
The 2-Year Completion Rule and Right of Re-Occupancy
If the substantial remodel does not complete within 2 years of the tenant vacating, the former tenant has a right to re-occupy the unit at their original rent. This is an unusual remedy that most landlords do not know about. It means that a remodel that stalls or is abandoned for any reason (contractor disputes, permitting delays, financing issues) can come back to haunt you years later. If the project timeline is uncertain, the substantial remodel eviction carries significant ongoing exposure that does not fully resolve until the work is complete and 2 years have passed.
We verify permits, prepare compliant notices, and calculate the correct relocation amount. Mistakes here are expensive. (562) 270-1777.
The 5 Ways Long Beach Landlords Trigger the 3x Damages Penalty Under SB 567
I want to be direct about this section: treble damages under SB 567 are not a theoretical risk. They are the actual penalty a court can impose when a landlord violates these rules. On a Long Beach rental at $2,500/month, the floor is $7,500. On a $3,200/month Lakewood unit, it is $9,600. These are the five scenarios that generate the most liability exposure in my experience managing properties in this area.
You serve a valid owner move-in notice, the tenant vacates, but circumstances change. Maybe you or the family member decided not to move in, or moved out before 12 months elapsed. If the unit is re-rented within that 12-month window, the former tenant can sue. It does not matter if the new rent is lower. The violation is the re-rental itself within the lookback window.
You plan a kitchen and bathroom remodel, serve notice to the tenant with an estimate and a plan to pull permits next month. Under SB 567, you needed the permits before the notice went out. A notice served without actual permit numbers in hand is deficient. The tenant may challenge the eviction and claim the notice was fraudulent, triggering treble damages exposure.
You have permits, you serve a valid notice, the tenant vacates. Then your contractor bails, or permits take longer to clear, and work does not start within 30 days of vacancy. SB 567 creates a presumption of fraud in this scenario. The former tenant can sue without having to prove you planned the fraud. The burden shifts to you to explain the delay.
You or a qualifying family member moves into the unit but then moves out after 6 or 8 months because the situation changed. Even if the original intent was genuine, the failure to complete the 12-month occupancy requirement creates liability. The former tenant can sue once the unit is re-rented, even months or years later, as long as they can establish the timeline.
Ellis Act has its own re-rental restrictions: if you take a building off the rental market, you cannot re-rent any unit in the building within 5 years without first offering the unit back to the displaced tenants at the original rent. Violating Ellis Act re-entry rules exposes you to separate statutory damages under Government Code 7060.2, layered on top of any SB 567 exposure.
To make this concrete: a Long Beach landlord who evicts a tenant at $2,800/month via owner move-in, then re-rents at month 10, faces a treble damages claim of $8,400 as the minimum floor, plus the tenant’s attorney’s fees (commonly $5,000 to $15,000 for a straightforward SB 567 claim), plus the tenant’s actual damages (any excess rent they paid to relocate). Total exposure: $15,000 to $30,000 or more on a single violation. This is why we treat no-fault eviction documentation as the most important compliance function we provide.
Call before you serve any notice. The conversation is free. The mistake is not. (562) 270-1777.
Long Beach Layer: How Local Ordinance Chapter 8.99 Stacks with SB 567
California landlord law operates on two tracks: state law and local law. For most rental properties in most California cities, state law (AB 1482 as amended by SB 567) is the only framework that applies. Long Beach is different. Long Beach enacted its own Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance (Chapter 8.99 of the Long Beach Municipal Code) which applies to certain properties that the state law either does not cover or covers with less stringent protections. The operative rule is that whichever law provides greater tenant protections applies.
Which Properties Does Chapter 8.99 Cover?
Long Beach’s local ordinance applies to multi-family residential rental units in buildings constructed before 1995, with some specific exemptions. This is distinct from AB 1482’s 15-year-from-current rule. A building constructed in 1994 is covered by the Long Beach ordinance. Under AB 1482, a building constructed in 2008 would be covered (15 years old), but under the Long Beach ordinance it would not be. You must check both frameworks for every property.
The “More Protective” Standard in Practice
When both Chapter 8.99 and AB 1482/SB 567 apply to the same property, a Long Beach landlord cannot choose which law to follow. The tenant is entitled to whichever set of rules is more protective. In practice, this means that a Long Beach pre-1995 multi-family building faces the relocation assistance requirements of both laws, and the landlord must meet or exceed the more generous amount. On any point where the two laws differ, the tenant gets the benefit.
This stacking effect is why I tell Long Beach landlords who own pre-1995 multi-family buildings that no-fault evictions there are extraordinarily high-risk. You are not navigating one law. You are navigating two laws simultaneously, with a treble damages overlay from SB 567, and the interaction between them is not always clear from reading the statutes alone.
Most of the other cities in our service territory, including Downey, Lakewood, Torrance, Carson, Norwalk, Bellflower, and Cerritos, do not have local just cause eviction ordinances. For properties in those cities, only AB 1482 and SB 567 apply. This is actually a meaningful difference. Long Beach landlords with pre-1995 multi-family buildings face the most complex compliance landscape in our territory. Owners in the surrounding cities face AB 1482/SB 567, which is complicated enough on its own, but without the local layer on top.
We confirm coverage, ordinance applicability, and correct relocation amounts before anything else. (562) 270-1777.
How RPM Southland Documents No-Fault Evictions to Prevent Liability at All 5 Stages
At RPM Southland, a no-fault eviction is not a simple task we execute at the owner’s direction. It is a multi-stage documentation process that we treat with the same seriousness as a legal proceeding. The reason is simple: if a treble damages lawsuit lands a year after the eviction, our file needs to demonstrate that every step was taken in good faith, in full compliance, with contemporaneous documentation. This is the standard we hold ourselves to across all 730-plus properties we manage.
Stage 1: Statute Determination
Before any notice is drafted, we confirm which statutes apply to the specific property. Is it covered by AB 1482? Is it covered by Long Beach Chapter 8.99? Was the required statutory exemption notice ever served on the tenant for an SFR or condo? This step is non-negotiable. A notice served under the wrong legal framework may be legally deficient even if the underlying reason is valid.
Stage 2: Reason Verification
We verify that the stated no-fault reason actually qualifies. For owner move-in: confirm ownership structure qualifies, confirm the family member is on the defined list, document the intent to occupy with an affidavit, and confirm the owner understands the 12-month occupancy requirement before we proceed. For substantial remodel: we require actual permits in hand before drafting the notice, and we do not draft based on a plan to get permits.
Stage 3: Notice Preparation and Delivery
The notice is prepared to include all required SB 567 elements: for substantial remodel, permit numbers and estimated commencement and duration; for owner move-in, the identity of the occupant and their qualifying relationship to the owner. Relocation assistance is calculated at the correct amount (1 month for owner move-in, 3 months for substantial remodel or demolition) and proper delivery is confirmed with proof of service.
Stage 4: Post-Vacancy Tracking
After the tenant vacates, we set a 30-day commencement check for substantial remodel evictions and a 12-month calendar reminder for owner move-in situations. If we are still managing the property after the eviction, this tracking happens automatically. If the owner is taking the property back for self-management, we provide a written timeline of the compliance windows so they understand the ongoing obligations.
Stage 5: File Maintenance
Every no-fault eviction generates a permanent file in our system: the original notice, proof of service, relocation assistance payment record, and all post-vacancy tracking notes. If a former tenant files a complaint or initiates litigation 18 months after the eviction, we have contemporaneous documentation of every step. This is the protection that matters when treble damages are on the table.
The best way to reduce no-fault eviction risk is to reduce the scenarios where a no-fault eviction becomes necessary. RPM Southland’s 6-month tenant replacement guarantee and 60-day satisfaction guarantee are not just sales features. They reflect a genuine commitment to placing tenants who pay on time, respect the property, and stay for multiple lease cycles. Good placement means fewer tenancy problems, fewer no-fault situations, and fewer legal exposure windows. That is playing the long game.
RPM Southland’s 3 Guarantees
Reducing the scenarios where no-fault evictions even arise.
If a tenant we placed leaves within 6 months for any reason, we find a replacement at no additional leasing fee.
We fill your vacancy within 29 days or management fees are waived until the property is rented.
If you are not satisfied with our management within the first 60 days, you can cancel with no penalty.
SB 567 Quick Reference: What Every Long Beach Landlord Must Track in 2026
SB 567 Compliance Cheat Sheet
Frequently Asked Questions About SB 567 No-Fault Evictions in California
Protect Your Long Beach Rental from SB 567 Liability
Over 730 properties managed. Over 800 five-star reviews. 95% owner retention rate.
5.9% to 8.9% management fee | $399 flat leasing fee | $0 setup fee | 6-month tenant replacement guarantee
(562) 270-1777 | Call Now
Get Free Property Evaluation
Locally owned and operated franchise of Real Property Management, a Neighborly company. Serving Long Beach, Downey, Lakewood, Cerritos, Torrance, Carson, Norwalk, Compton, Signal Hill, Bellflower, Lynwood, San Pedro, and Hawthorne.
This content is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, tax, or investment advice. Readers should consult with licensed professionals regarding their specific circumstances.
We are pledged to the letter and spirit of U.S. policy for the achievement of equal housing opportunity throughout the Nation. See Equal Housing Opportunity Statement for more information.
