California Assembly Bill 878 requires that, upon request, landlords (or their agents) make their best efforts to provide “reasonable accommodations” to tenants—or household members—who are victims of abuse, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking, elder abuse, or other violent crimes

What counts as a “reasonable accommodation”?

The bill defines “reasonable accommodation” broadly, including—but not limited to:

• Transferring the tenant to a different unit (if available)
• Reassigning parking spaces
• Permitting installation of a doorbell camera or an indoor security camera (at tenant’s expense)
• Providing additional time to move under lease terms (if the unit hasn’t already been re-rented)
• Offering extra time to pay rent, with landlord working with tenant to set a reasonable timeframe
• Assisting the tenant with documentation of abuse or violence if the landlord has factual information about it

Process and responsibilities for landlords

• Landlords must respond in writing, approving or denying the request—and if denying, they must explain reasons for denial.
• If a request cannot be granted, landlords are mandated to engage in a timely, good-faith, interactive process with the tenant to identify a suitable alternative accommodation.
• Requests may be made orally, in writing, or through a representative, and at nearly any stage—before, during, or even after tenancy or litigation.
• Landlords may request documentation (“certification”) to verify the survivor status; this information must be kept confidential, and disclosures are permitted only under authorized circumstances—e.g. legal obligations, safety needs, administrative necessity, or tenant’s written authorization.

Legal protections and limitations

• Landlords are not required to accommodate requests that would impose an undue hardship, as defined under the Government Code.
• Landlords who retaliate or discriminate against a tenant for making a reasonable accommodation request may face legal liability. Violations expose them to civil liability for actual damages plus statutory damages between $100 and $5,000.
• The duty to accommodate is ongoing, and landlords must consider each request individually.

Impact on Rental Housing Providers

For landlords and property managers, AB 878 introduces several new obligations and potential liabilities:

1. Expanded Policies and Training

• Landlords must update policies to define “reasonable accommodations,” outline the process for requesting and responding, and clarify how they will evaluate undue hardship.
• Staff should be trained to manage such requests with sensitivity, understanding that they may involve trauma-induced circumstances.

2. Added Administrative and Operational Burden

• Responses: Landlords must respond in writing within a reasonable timeframe (commonly within 5 days, barring exigent circumstances) and manage interactions in good faith LegiScan.
• Individual review: Each request requires individual evaluation—a one-size-fits-all approach won’t suffice.

3. Infrastructure and Safety Considerations

• Accommodations like unit transfers, parking reassignment, and camera installations may entail logistical coordination, access to units, and policy adjustments.
• Allowing security or doorbell cameras—especially indoors—raises privacy and technical considerations.

4. Financial and Legal Risk

• Failure to comply—even if unintentional—can lead to legal action, with potential statutory damages up to $5,000, plus actual damages.
• Retaliation or denial without good-faith engagement in an interactive process can trigger liability CitizenPortal+4LegiScan+4Senate Judiciary Committee+4.

5. Balancing Equity and Reasonableness

• While landlords are shielded against undue hardship, they must balance operational constraints with tenant safety needs.
• Engaging collaboratively in the interactive process is both a legal mandate and practical approach to finding workable solutions.

Concluding Summary

In practical terms, AB 878 represents another layer of government mandate that places the responsibility for tenant safety squarely on the shoulders of rental housing providers. While well-intentioned, the bill expands landlords’ legal exposure by obligating them to actively engage in an “interactive” request process, make individualized determinations, and potentially absorb operational costs tied to transfers, camera installations, parking adjustments, and payment flexibility. Failure to comply—or even a misstep in communication—can result in costly civil penalties and lawsuits. For landlords, the legislation underscores the need to update policies, train staff, document every interaction, and tread carefully when dealing with sensitive tenant requests. Ultimately, AB 878 increases the administrative burdens and risks associated with rental housing ownership and management at a time when providers are already facing mounting compliance costs and regulatory pressures.