Evictions are BLOCKED by the judicial council emergency rule (No. 1) linked in the article. Except in rare cases where a judge orders it, no summons will issue on an unlawful detainer complaint until 90 days after the Governor's declaration that the Covid-19 emergency is over. I have explained in prior posts on Voice article what that means. It appears some "non-profit corporations" are just looking for more money.

@Gary

Those rules could be rescinded as soon as next week.

Web Link

Yes,

SOMEONE is going to have to extend this moratorium perhaps at least till the end of the year.

Even Donald Trump is saying he will issue an executive order for this. Thus there is no reason why we don't do it already.

Whether it is by Governor Executive Order, The Legislature passing it, the County Supervisors passing it, the Courts passing it, or the Cities passing it, this is going to be necessary given that unemployment insurance does not cover rent costs, and it is likely that that is not getting any fix.

You cannot even use the EDD Telecert to get you benefits, The service is down, and the postal services is slowing down. only 5% of people trying to call the EDD get through.

The GRIMM reality is that this second wave of COVID destruction will either hit us, or someone is going to have to put a stop to it.

The reporter has now posted a link to the Chief Justice of the CA Supreme Court's statement on July 24 that the emergency rules blocking evictions could be "rescinded" by vote of the Judicial Council - perhaps effective August 14. Good information that should have been in the article. But the Chief Justice is one of 21 voting members of the Judicial Council. So. Fine. We shall see. Handing money to a non-profit corporation to dole out some of the money for a few dozen - or even a hundred - rent payments will not help much. The reporter might try to look into what percentage of MV renters are behind in rent payments and what percentage are now unemployed.

Well,

Now that Trump is extending the eviction moratorium by executive order, there is good cause to do the same in California.

To me it is simply a no brainer, but I know it is going to put landlords in a ugly position.

BUT, many of them gambled on the rental business and in my case my landlord overpaid for the property I live in. He spent $5M on a property whose last appraisal was $1.15M. My property has problems now with our patio/balconies with cracks and bowing floor boards, and our windows need serious work to deal with insulation and I know of one window that has a broken part that needs a knife or screwdriver to open it.

These people knew the risks but then try to blame the government and the tenants for their mistakes. Sorry, if you didn't have the ability to swallow the losses, maybe you should not have signed the contracts for purchase?

But they will try to go to court to block eviction moratoriums, but many lawyers say it will not work you can see this report "Calif. Judge Backs San Francisco Evictions Moratorium" (Web Link

Another hint is from the story "U.S. District Court Upholds Constitutionality of New York Moratorium on Evictions" found here (Web Link

As long as there is a means for back rent to be repaid is provided either by the state, county or city is provided, this situation is not unconstitutional. Thus these landlords better get ready to feel a greater level of stress.

President Trump's eviction moratorium is for federally subsidized units only. And as an executive order, it can be HERE TODAY AND GONE TOMMORROW.

Gary,

Any legitimate landlord or property owner is using a federally insured mortgage. And if they are not federally insured, they better be appropriately insured none the less. If they are not, then they left themselves completely defenseless regarding this situation. Any purchase of land or a building without sufficient insurance is just a disaster waiting to happen. And you know it.

What your describing is the likelihood of landlords involved with some other kind of CREATIVE financing, the most notorious is money laundering. Those are the ones that are at highest risk. They probably CANNOT buy any appropriate insurance regarding their purchase. Most likely it is just a shell insurance with loopholes so big that they never can collect any benefits. And you know this too.

Gary, if you are saying that Donald Trump will revoke his executive order under these circumstances, simply because of his wants, would be a very bad examples of instability. Given that he is desperate to get reelected, the only way is for him to provide sufficient benefits to the majority of voters.

Obviously, when he loses the election he will retract the executive orders, in effect burn the whole country down just for spite. This may be the best example to support that no BUSINESS men should ever be in a presidential position ever again.

Steven. Take a hard look at Trump's executive order and see how widely his eviction moratorium reaches. You like research. Trump could amend his executive orders every few hours. But in the meantime, maybe an order would provide a defense to some evictions being predicted. Renter-rights advocates cannot count on elected officials previously endorsed by landlords to block evictions. Renters need a PLAN B.

Gary,

Given that we are losing about 10 times more jobs than hiring regarding the latest news, there is going to some action.

Given that the EDD currently has such a lag on processing, and that the federal government only counts active recipients in its report regarding unemnployment, we really have a worse situation regarding unemployment than anyone can count.

Something will need to be done in the meantime, I suspect that the California Judges may extend their eviction processing, or the state or county is going to have to extend their actions.

Otherwise, if the evictions start, you are going to see an economic nightmare that may be twice the size of the great depression.

I really believe NO ONE wants to go there.

Gary,

I have learned an ugly lesson, do not believe what Donald Trump says.

His executive order is NOT a moratorium. In fact it is nothing but a complete waste of paper. CNN reports that that executive order only orders agencies to TRY to block evictions. It doesn't do a single thing.

The fact is though we have to do something about evictions or the state of California will fall apart even worse than what it already has.

Tent cities will be required to be provided, workers will not have any chance of doing work because they have no address, and the businesses will not be able to reopen ever.

This is just getting worse by the day.

If the Judicial Council repeals or otherwise ends emergency rule 1, renters-rights advocates would need to lean on the state government and counties and cities to extend the eviction moratorium for those who qualify.

There is some point at which landlords should expect to be paid the rent they are owed, or be allowed to cut their losses and find tenants who can pay the rent. It isn't just renters who are hurting. Evictions are gonna happen, like it or not. There's no getting around that. But they need to happen gradually, not all at once. Maybe when the eviction block lifts, it can be replaced by a phased-in approach, say, by designating an eviction quota for each landlord, or something like that.