Renting out bedrooms in a single family home might seem like an easy way to bring in extra cash, but it can quickly turn into a complex battle royale. If your tenants each have their own lease and locked door, you could be running a rooming house—and triggering rent control laws without even knowing it. The appellate opinion in Chun v. Del Cid (2019) 34 CA5th 806,817 makes it clear that what really matters is how you use your property, not how it was originally designed.

In that case, Brian Chun owned a house that he rented out as individual rooms to four separate households. The tenants shared access to the kitchen and bathrooms, but each had exclusive control over their own locked bedroom. Chun tried to evict them using a 60-day notice, arguing that his property was exempt from the Los Angeles Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) because it was a “single-family dwelling.” That exemption, if it applied, would allow him to bypass many of the restrictions imposed by the RSO—including notice requirements, rent caps, and registration.

But the tenants disagreed, and challenged the notices and the unlawful detainer. They argued that the exemption didn’t apply because the way the home was currently being used made it function more like a rooming house than a single household. The trial court agreed with the tenants, but the appellate division later reversed in favor of Chun. Ultimately, the Court of Appeal weighed in and reversed again—this time siding with the tenants and issuing a decision with broader implications for landlords across the city.

Here’s the key: under the RSO, the exemption for a “single-family dwelling” applies only if the home is a detached structure containing just one “dwelling unit.” That might sound straightforward, but “dwelling unit” has a very specific definition under the Los Angeles Municipal Code. It means a group of two or more rooms—one of which must be a kitchen—designed for occupancy by one “family.” And under the law, “family” doesn’t mean related by blood or marriage. It means one or more people living together with common access to and shared use of all living, kitchen, and eating areas.

That’s where Chun’s arguments were not persuasive. The court emphasized that his tenants did not have common access to the full home—they each had exclusive use of their own locked bedroom. That meant the occupants weren’t “living together” as one family unit under the legal definition. As a result, the court held that the house was no longer a single dwelling unit, and the exemption from rent control no longer applied (34 Cal.App.5th at pp. 817–818).

One important point made by the court is that it doesn’t matter how the property was originally built or zoned. Chun argued that because the house was originally designed in 1908 as a single-family home, it should always be treated that way under the RSO. The Court rejected that position, stating that a property’s current use and configuration determine its legal status—not its original design. As far back as 1946, the property had been structurally altered and used as a rooming house. That long history, combined with the present arrangement of locked, exclusive-use rooms, confirmed that the home no longer qualified for the exemption (id. at pp. 815, 819).

For landlords, the consequences of this ruling are clear and significant. If your property is subject to the RSO, you must register it each year with the City’s Housing Department. You also need to use only the legal reasons for eviction listed in L.A. Municipal Code § 151.09, such as non-payment of rent or violation of lease terms, and the Just Cause Ordinance. Even then, you have to serve the correct notices, serve and file with the Los Angeles Housing Department, and in some cases pay relocation fees. If you try to remove tenants without following those rules, the eviction can be denied, and you may be found in violation of the ordinance.

It’s also worth noting that exemptions from rent control are interpreted narrowly by courts. That means if there’s any doubt about whether the exemption applies, the court will likely rule in favor of tenant protections rather than landlord convenience. This is especially true in Los Angeles, where the stated goal of the RSO is to preserve affordable housing and prevent unjust evictions (see L.A. Mun. Code § 151.01).

The big takeaway from Chun v. Del Cid is simple: if you rent out multiple bedrooms to separate households—each with exclusive use of their own space—you are likely creating multiple rental units within a single structure. And when that happens, the home is no longer treated as a single-family dwelling under city law. That puts you squarely within the scope of the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, with all the responsibilities that come with it.

If you’re unsure whether your property qualifies for an exemption, you should get clarity before issuing notices or raising rent. Consult with real estate counsel and the Los Angeles City Housing Department. As this case shows, relying on assumptions about how your house was originally designed could land you in court—and on the losing side.

Written by Nate Bernstein, Managing Attorney of LA Real Estate Law Group

and Moriah Foreman- summer legal intern at LARELG

Nate Bernstein, Esq., is the Managing Counsel of LA Real Estate Law Group, and a member of the State Bar of California and his practice concentrates in the areas of complex real estate title litigation, commercial litigation, landlord tenant law, employment law, and bankruptcy matters. Attorney Bernstein served as in house corporate litigation counsel at Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, and represented the company subsidiaries and insured institutional lenders.  He is a 32 year veteran Los Angeles real estate and business attorney and trial lawyer.   Mr. Bernstein also has expertise in bankruptcy law, the federal bankruptcy court system, creditor’s rights and out of court workout solutions. He serves as an expert witness on real estate, title, joint venture, and other business issues.

Mr. Bernstein, a frequent speaker at apartment owners association seminars, and has been a featured speaker with the ANP, AAGLA, California Associations of Realtors, and the Collateral Lenders Association, and the Beverly Hills Bar Association. He created www.laquiettitleattorney.com, a leading educational resource on quiet title real estate litigation.  LA Real Estate Law Group handles litigation in Los Angeles, Ventura County, Orange County, Inland Empire, and San Diego. For more information or to schedule a professional consultation, please contact the office at (818) 383-5759, or email natebernstein44@gmail.com.