2br rent-controlled in nob hill. been here 11 years, paying $2,400 (market is ~$5,200). landlord just served a 60-day OMI notice claiming his daughter is moving in. she lives in seattle and has a job there. i don't believe this for a second.
SF has the just-cause ordinance and OMI is one of the listed reasons. but is "daughter moving in" a real OMI?
OMI requires the OWNER (not relative) to occupy as primary residence for at least 36 months under SF rent ordinance. there's a relative-OMI variant but it's narrowly defined and SF specifically excluded most relative-OMI evictions in recent reforms.
file an OMI challenge with SF Rent Board IMMEDIATELY. they investigate. if landlord violates OMI requirements, you have a wrongful eviction claim with statutory damages.
relocation payments are also required. 2026 SF amounts are around $9-11k per tenant household plus more for elderly/disabled/family with minor children. landlord must pay BEFORE you have to leave.
is the landlord trying to convert the unit to TIC after you leave? lots of OMI evictions in SF are pretextual covers for that. if so the wrongful-eviction damages can be huge.
SF rent ordinance OMI provisions are detailed and tenant-protective. The notice must comply strictly with form, content, and timing requirements. Even minor procedural defects (missing relocation payment calculation, wrong served party, missing rent board declaration) can void the notice.
Practical sequence: (1) file with SF Rent Board for review, (2) consult a tenant-side attorney, (3) compute relocation damages, (4) if landlord files unlawful detainer, defend on procedural and pretext grounds.
Don't move out until the legal process plays out — premature departure waives some claims. Informational only.