Unlawful Detainer Defense Strategy

Summary

In an unlawful detainer case, defendants can argue against eviction due to billing errors. California law requires accurate billing, especially when its the sole payment method. The managers failure to correct errors led to unjust notices, despite defendants reliable tenancy. The court may dismiss the eviction due to the landlords error and defendants prompt payment attempts. Consider consulting a local attorney for personalized advice.

Full Conversation

Trying to create a legal argument using CRAC
Alright, ****! CRAC is a great method for structuring legal arguments. It stands for Conclusion, Rule, Application, and Conclusion. Could you share a bit more about the specific legal issue or case you’re working on? This way, I can guide you more effectively.
Unlawful detainer case. Defendants live in mobilehome park. Plaintiff has a sewer fee increase implementing on December *, *. Defendant noticed the increase on their November rent statement. Defendant asked manager to correct the amount to reflect on the resident portal payment page so defendant could pay. Manager issued a late notice followed by a 3day notice to pay with a combined 60 day notice for possession. This was the first time defendants were late with their payment in almost 6 years of tenancy. Defendants cured the default by paying November using the only payment method, the online resident portal. December * rent statement was also incorrect. Defendants again asked manager to correct amount so they could pay it. And again received a late notice followed by a 3 day notice to pay combined with a 60 day notice for possession
Here are some general considerations for your unlawful detainer case using the CRAC method:
- Conclusion: Defendants have a valid defense against the unlawful detainer due to administrative errors in billing.

- Rule: According to California law, landlords must provide accurate billing, especially when it's the sole payment method.

- Application: The manager failed to correct the billing error despite requests, causing unjust notices. Defendants have been reliable tenants for nearly 6 years.

- Conclusion: The court should dismiss the eviction due to landlord's error and defendants' prompt payment attempts.
Is there any specific part you want more information on?