A San Francisco landlord has offered tenant Serabeth Mullaney $35,000 to break her lease and move out, but she isn't rushing to sign anything. The catch, she says, is that the deal came bundled with a nondisclosure agreement, and finding a new place in the city's brutal rental market has her second-guessing whether the payout is even worth it.
Mullaney posted about her situation on TikTok, describing the experience as a nightmare in San Francisco, according to KRON4. She said the apartment hunt itself, not just the money, is what's stopping her from accepting the offer outright. The station reports her landlord asked her to sign the nondisclosure agreement as part of the arrangement.
Why Landlords Pay Tenants to Leave
Buyouts like this are common in San Francisco largely because of the city's strict tenant-protection regulations, the station notes. Once a rent-controlled tenant moves out voluntarily, landlords can reset rents to match the market rather than staying locked into below-market rates, creating a direct financial incentive to pay someone to go. That math matters in a city where the average one-bedroom apartment now runs more than $4,000 a month, according to Zillow data cited in the same report.
San Francisco doesn't leave these negotiations unregulated, either. Under Rent Ordinance Section 37.9E, landlords are legally required to hand tenants a written Pre-Buyout Negotiations Disclosure Form before buyout talks can begin and file a declaration with the San Francisco Rent Board. The form serves as a pre-negotiation notice of tenant rights.
Perhaps most notably for someone weighing a signed agreement, the ordinance gives tenants 45 days after signing to rescind an executed buyout deal. Buyout agreements must also be filed with the Rent Board.
How a $35,000 Offer Stacks Up
The offer to Mullaney lands somewhat below San Francisco's recent norms. Rent Board data compiled by SocketSite shows 389 recorded agreements in 2022, with an average agreement amount of $53,828 and an average payout of $35,720 per tenant. The same data shows buyout activity is heavily concentrated in neighborhoods including the Mission, Sunset, Haight-Ashbury, and Inner Richmond, with the Mission leading the city in recorded buyouts for five straight years through 2022.
At the extreme end, the record for a voluntary San Francisco buyout was set in May 2021, when a couple in a 30-year rent-controlled Presidio Heights apartment accepted $475,000 to vacate, per reporting from The Real Deal. Another buyout reportedly reached $410,000 in Pacific Heights the following year. Those are outliers, but they illustrate the ceiling landlords are sometimes willing to pay when a unit's market-rate potential is high enough.
Part of that incentive comes down to simple valuation math. Under California's Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, landlords can reset rents to market rate once a unit is voluntarily vacated, which is the same dynamic driving offers like the one made to Mullaney.
Why Not Just File an Eviction?
Voluntary buyouts also tend to be simpler than the alternative for landlords seeking guaranteed vacancy. For Ellis Act cases, relocation payments may also apply. No-fault evictions also carry strict legal restrictions on re-renting the unit afterward, which makes a negotiated buyout more attractive to owners who just want the tenant gone.
San Francisco's buyout system dates to a 2014 ordinance passed by the Board of Supervisors specifically to stop property speculators from using buyouts to sidestep local restrictions on condominium conversions, according to the San Francisco Tenants Union. Buildings where senior or disabled tenants accept buyouts face a 10-year prohibition on condo conversions under that law.
Rent Board buyout data goes back to 2015, giving tenants a historical reference as they weigh whether to negotiate or sign.
Hoodline has previously covered how ownership disputes and rent control tensions play out in San Francisco buildings, including a mega-landlord facing court receivership over hundreds of units. For now, Mullaney's decision remains unresolved as she weighs a lump sum against the reality of finding a new home in a market where that $35,000 could vanish in a matter of months.
