If you’ve ever heard someone say, “Just evict them,” this story is the reality check. A Southern California landlord spent years trying to regain control of a Santa Monica apartment after an unauthorized occupant moved in, stopped paying, and then used every delay tactic imaginable—motions, mediation demands, perjury, emergency filings, and even attempted break-ins after the lockout.
This case was described by the landlord’s attorney as the worst “professional tenant” situation of his career: more than $100,000 in unpaid rent, more than nine months of litigation after filing, a jury trial, an appeal, and a sheriff lockout that took weeks to schedule due to staffing shortages. The bottom line: the landlord won in court, but the process was punishing, expensive, and—like many landlords learn the hard way—collection was basically impossible.
The Setup: A Santa Monica Unit, a Surprise Occupant, and “It’s a Civil Matter”
The property was a three-bedroom apartment in Santa Monica, about ten blocks from the beach. The rent being paid was around $3,700 per month (below market, which was closer to $5,500). In late 2021, the landlord went to the unit after being told the tenants were moving out.
When she opened the door, she didn’t find an empty unit. She found an unknown middle-aged woman who told her, in plain terms, “I’m living here. That’s my house.” The landlord called the police, but the response was the one landlords hear constantly in these situations: it’s a civil matter, and the landlord would need to evict.
Here’s the twist: the occupant wasn’t on the lease. One of the former tenants had subleased a room for extra cash without notifying the landlord. The unauthorized occupant was reportedly so hostile that the other tenants left shortly after she moved in. She had been found through Craigslist.
No Rent, No Access, No Options: The Moratorium Trap
The occupant paid only the first month. After that, there were no rent payments. Under the local COVID-era rules described in the case write-up, the landlord couldn’t even file an eviction until the moratorium ended (March 2023). Even worse for the owner, the moratorium also protected unauthorized occupants, and refusal to grant access for inspection was protected too.
That meant the landlord was stuck in a brutal holding pattern for more than two years—no rent, no meaningful access, and no quick legal remedy. For small landlords, this is where the financial bleeding becomes existential: mortgage, taxes, insurance, repairs, and utilities don’t pause just because the court system does.
Once the Case Was Filed, the Delay Machine Started
After filing, the occupant received free legal help from a local nonprofit, and the litigation became aggressive. Settlement offers were rejected. In mediation, the occupant’s demand was extreme: waive the back rent (around $80,000 at that time), give her a new lease for $1,300 per month, and even give her veto power over future roommates.
The landlord refused and went to trial.
Trial Day Chaos: “She’s Vacationing in Mexico”
On the day of the scheduled jury trial—after the landlord’s side confirmed availability in writing—the occupant didn’t show because she was vacationing in Mexico and her return flight was delayed. The trial was delayed again.
When trial finally happened, the occupant testified for hours in a 1.5-day trial. According to the attorney’s account, she perjured herself repeatedly, defamed the landlord and the landlord’s counsel, and admitted to fraud.
The Jury: 100% Renters
One detail landlords will recognize immediately: the defense removed every juror who owned property. The final jury panel was reportedly 100% renters. Even with that, the jury returned a unanimous verdict for the landlord—possession and damages.
The Rent Aid Twist: $9,000 Taken and Kept
In one of the most infuriating parts of the case, the occupant admitted on the stand that she took close to $9,000 in COVID-19 rent aid, pocketed the check, forged paperwork, and did not give the money to the landlord. The attorney stated she still had the money.
For landlords, this is the nightmare inside the nightmare: not only are you not receiving rent, but assistance that was intended to stabilize housing can be diverted—while you still carry the financial burden.
Winning Isn’t the End: Motions, Ex Parte Filings, and a Slow Sheriff Lockout
After the verdict, the occupant continued filing emergency motions. The attorney reported receiving 13 post-trial ex parte notices attempting to delay or cancel the lockout. Two hearings to vacate the judgment were scheduled; both were rejected.
Then came another real-world bottleneck: the sheriff’s office. Due to staffing shortages, it took about nine weeks from submitting the writ of possession to getting the sheriff to show up—roughly 2.5 months after the jury verdict.
Lockout Day: Door Rammed, More Delays, More Cost
On lockout day, sheriff officers arrived with a locksmith. The occupant refused to let them in, so the officers used a ram to break the door. The attorney described it as unnecessary—just another way to increase the landlord’s costs.
Even then, the occupant argued for roughly 45 minutes about why she should be allowed to stay. Eventually, she was removed.
Attempted Re-Entry: The Tenant Tried to Break Back In
Three weeks after the lockout, the occupant allegedly attempted to break back into the unit. Workers were present and blocked her. Police were called again, and the landlord had to produce paperwork to prove she was trespassing.
The attorney’s account also stated that this wasn’t her first rodeo: research showed four evictions over 12 years, following a similar pattern—jury trial, fraud, appeal, violence, and trespassing.
The Brutal Truth: You Can Win and Still Lose
The landlord received a judgment, but the attorney explained there was little to no chance of collecting. The occupant reportedly had no assets and no meaningful income. The landlord still had to pursue separate claims for certain rent amounts.
This is the part that pushes “mom and pop” landlords out of the business: the system can impose huge legal and time costs on the owner, and even when the owner wins, the tenant can walk away with few consequences.
What Landlords Can Learn From This Case
- Unauthorized occupants are not a small issue. Treat subletting and roommate violations as high-risk events, not minor lease breaches.
- Vacancy transitions are danger zones. When tenants say they’re moving out, confirm who is actually in possession before you lose control of the unit.
- Document everything. Every notice, every attempt to inspect, every communication—assume it will be evidence later.
- Expect delay tactics. Build time and legal cost into your risk planning, especially in tenant-friendly jurisdictions.
- Know the rent-aid process. If assistance is available, verify where the money is going and what documentation is required to prevent diversion.
- Plan for enforcement delays. Even after a win, sheriff scheduling can add weeks or months.
Conclusion: Protections Shouldn’t Mean Zero Consequences
Tenants deserve real protections. But when the system can be exploited by repeat bad-faith actors, it doesn’t just hurt landlords—it reduces housing supply, raises rents, and pushes responsible owners out.
If you’re a landlord, don’t wait until you’re in a crisis to get serious about lease enforcement, documentation, and legal strategy.
Want more resources, legal guidance, and landlord protections? Join AAOL today for practical help on tenant screening, lease enforcement, eviction strategy, and protecting your property rights.
Key Takeaways
- Unauthorized occupants can become long-term, high-cost eviction cases
- Moratorium-era rules created loopholes that bad actors learned to exploit
- Even after a court win, lockout enforcement can take weeks
- Judgments are often uncollectible—risk planning matters
Sources: Publicly available reporting and first-person legal case account.
