Here's as much info as I have:

​

I've lived in my building for a number of years. The landlord wants to sell the building and has given us a heads up(but not formal notice) that he has offers pending on the building and that if they go through, we as tenants would have to "move on."

​

The building is RSO(rent controlled) and I've confirmed this with the city/ZIMAS.

​

I signed a 1 year lease initially, and it went month to month after that. There are a few other tenants in the building, some have written and signed leases, some do not have anything. The verbiage in my lease says that the owner can terminate occupancy as long as he gives 60 day notice.

​

However, under RSO rules and regulations, it is verbatim illegal for him to "evict" us just because he wants to sell the building. See here: https://hcidla.lacity.org/Eviction-Tenant-is-Not-At-Fault-Owners

​

And there is a unit currently sitting completely empty, so I don't think they could Ellis Act any of us out either.

​

I'm not trying to prevent the inevitable, nor am I trying to create conflict because my landlord(owner) has been great to us over the years (all things considered) but I am trying to make sure I am taken care of, and I've heard stories about people getting paid to leave their buildings and things of that nature.

​

• Does the fact that we have a month to month lease prevent us from protections under rent control? There seems to be a lot of conjecture on this point online.

​

• Do I have the option of continuing my lease with the new owner unaffected/as is/ keeping status quo? If so, does the new owner have the ability to come in and up the rent by any large amount?

​

• If I don't have to leave, but they could theoretically pay us to leave, does that happen with current owner or new owner? How does that process happen?

​

Appreciate any and all insight or advice. We are looking into going to the Tenant Rights meetings and whatnot but I figured if someone has been through this before it couldn't hurt. Thanks.