Code of Civil Procedure Section 1179 Motion for repair of loss of lease in California

The subject of this article is a California Code of Civil Procedure section 1179 motion for relief from lease forfeiture. This motion is made pursuant to the provisions of section 1179 of the Code of Civil Procedure for hardship reasons and may be used to obtain relief against any loss of a lease or rental agreement, whether written or oral.

Section 1179 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides in pertinent part that, “The court may hold a tenant harmless from the loss of a lease or rental agreement, whether written or oral, and whether the tenancy has terminated or not, and restore him or her to his or her prior estate or tenure, in case of hardship, as provided in Section 1174.”

The party filing a motion for relief of forfeiture of a lease or rental agreement under section 1179 must include a statement with detailed facts supporting their claims of hardship and their claims that any breach was unintentional or in bad faith. Tenants who missed rent due to job loss but now have the money to pay all back rent and all other damages and costs included in any judgment have a strong case for relief from forfeiture, especially if They can show that they had always paid their rent on time before losing their job and are now employed again and plan to pay their rent on time from now on.

A motion for relief from forfeiture of a lease or rental agreement must be served and filed at least five (5) calendar days before the hearing, although in certain situations the motion may be made orally.

A California Court of Appeals has ruled that a court has broad equitable discretion to exempt a tenant from forfeiture and restore them to their old tenancy in hardship cases. The law absolutely detests seizures. The Court must impose legal conditions such as full payment of the rent due or full compliance with all the conditions and clauses of the lease or rental agreement.

The forfeiture waiver is more likely to be granted if the landlord can be placed in the same position as if the breach had not occurred. The main reason for this is that the confiscation penalty is essentially designed to guarantee the payment of a certain sum of money. If that money is paid back with interest, the real purpose of the forfeiture is served.

The courts can also exercise their equitable powers and balance the equities that allow them to take into account all relevant circumstances, such as whether the breach by the tenant was willful or in bad faith, whether the landlord acted in good or bad faith, etc. .

To view the full text of any code section cited in this article or any other California code section, use the link below.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes.xhtml