My Journey Through California’s Small Claims System
TL;DR
Last year, we moved into a rental unit that quickly became uninhabitable due to a severe flea infestation. Despite the lease stating that a prior flea issue had been treated and there had been no problems in the last 8 months, we were bitten daily within days of moving in. Our cats suffered, and fleas infested not just our unit but the entire property.
Repeated treatments failed to resolve the infestation. We gathered extensive documentation: photos of fleas and bites, a statement from the city, veterinary reports, and communications showing the landlord’s ineffective response. We obtained testimonies from neighboring tenants experiencing the same ongoing infestation. We legally terminated our lease, returned our keys, and vacated the uninhabitable unit.
We pursued this matter in the small claims court and prevailed, entitling us to recover a portion of our financial damages from the landlord. The landlord appealed the decision, triggering a second trial in civil court. We prevailed again. The court found:
- Affirmative misrepresentation by the landlord in the lease regarding the status of a pre-existing flea infestation on the premises (California Civil Code section 1689),
- Failure to maintain premises free from vermin (California Civil Code section 1941.1).
I am writing about this experience to help other tenants understand their rights and to encourage them not to accept uninhabitable living conditions. Knowing what protections exist can make a critical difference.
Chronological Timeline
-
May 18, 2025 - Apartment Tour: The landlord showed me the unit. Everything seemed normal. No fleas were visible, and crucially, the landlord made no mention of any flea issues.
-
May 19, 2025 - Signing the Lease: The landlord sent us the lease. Upon reading it, we discovered a disclosure stating that a prior flea issue had been treated and there had been no issues in the last 8 months. When we asked about it, the landlord assured us he had “already hired a company that does treatments if needed.” Relying on this representation that the problem was resolved, we signed the lease.
After discovering this single sentence about fleas, I should have passed and not signed the lease.
-
July 5, 2025 - The Infestation Becomes Apparent: After entering the unit on June 30, we began experiencing bites on our legs and ankles. Our cats scratched and licked themselves constantly. We observed black droppings on our bed that turned red when placed on a damp paper towel, which is a telltale sign of flea dirt.
We immediately informed the landlord via email. Rather than taking responsibility, he shifted the burden of scheduling treatment to us. We scheduled the earliest available appointment. In the meantime, we ordered flea medicine for our cats, flea spray, flea combs, flea traps, and chemical treatments for the unit. We vacuumed daily and applied chemicals ourselves, trying desperately to make our home livable.
-
July 10, 2025 - First Professional Treatment: The treatment company came and treated the interior of our unit.
-
July 17, 2025 - Second Professional Treatment: The treatment company chose not to treat the interior of the unit again to prevent overcontamination. They treated the exterior of the unit. This did not help.
-
July 22, 2025 - Fleas Throughout the Property: We sent a detailed email to the landlord outlining our extensive efforts and requested immediate resolution, emphasizing that the unit was uninhabitable. Same night, I killed 30+ fleas by hand over 3 hours as everytime we entered or exited the unit, new fleas came into the unit with us.
-
July 23, 2025 - Requested Temporary Housing: The landlord again deflected responsibility. He wanted us to schedule yet another treatment and contact the appropriate departments of the city. He suggested the source might be outside the property. We cooperated, but also asked for temporary housing because the unit was uninhabitable. Fleas continued to jump on us and bite us daily.
-
July 24, 2025 - City Department Visit: The vector control department visited us and took live flea samples from my legs, and dead samples from the mug I have been using to kill fleas. They acknowledged the extensive infestation and suggested they might refer the case to the environmental health department.
-
July 25, 2025 - Vet Visit and Airbnb: We took our cats to the veterinarian, who documented their condition (this was the earliest available appointment). That same day, unable to endure the infestation any longer, we booked an Airbnb and moved out.
-
July 27, 2025 - Other Tenants Confirm Systemic Infestation: As I was moving some of our belongings to a temporary storage, I talked to the other tenants. The infestation was long-standing, systemic, and unresolved.
I should have talked to the neighbors before moving in to get a sense of the landlord and the property.
One of the tenants showed me photos of their flea bites and a tape covered with fleas. They came down to the yard with tape in hand, killing fleas that clung to their bodies. They told us the infestation had been ongoing for their entire tenancy and that previous tenants had to pay out of pocket for treatments.
The tenant in another unit said she wasn’t told about fleas before moving in. Her cats had suffered significantly, and she had reportedly spent 5000 dollars on treatments. She had also been living with a broken shower and mold in the basement for months.
This painted a clear picture: the flea issue was systemic and long-standing, not an isolated incident. It was a pattern of neglect. It also indicated clear misrepresentation, as our lease explicitly stated the issue had been treated and resolved.
We outlined our documented expenses and informed the landlord of our decision to vacate the property entirely by July 31. We reiterated our reimbursement request.
-
July 28, 2025 – Landlord’s Response: The landlord rejected our requests and claimed the unit was in habitable condition.
-
July 29, 2025 – Junk Removal and Move-Out: A junk removal service picked up our contaminated furniture. We completed our move-out and cleaned the unit, leaving it in the same condition we found it.
-
July 30, 2025 – Utilities Shut Down: We shut down the water and electricity services in our name.
-
July 31, 2025 – Lease Termination: We sent the keys and a lease termination letter to the landlord by certified mail and informed him via email. We took final photos documenting the ongoing flea presence. Our termination was based on California Civil Code sections 1941.1 and 1942, which allow tenants to terminate a lease when a landlord fails to provide habitable premises.
-
August 4, 2025 – Landlord Demands August Rent: Despite our notice and surrender of possession, the landlord emailed demanding August rent.
-
August 18, 2025 – Landlord Advertises the Unit: We received an email from Zillow confirming that the landlord had started advertising our former unit for rent.
Understanding Small Claims Court and Tenant Rights in California
Small claims court is designed to resolve disputes involving relatively small amounts of money without requiring attorneys.
California Civil Code Section 1689 - Rescission for Misrepresentation: Civil Code section 1689 allows a party to rescind a contract if the consent was given by mistake or obtained through misrepresentation. In our case, the lease stated that the flea problem had been treated and there had been no issues for 8 months. This turned out to be false. The infestation was systemic, ongoing, and known to the landlord. Under section 1689, we had grounds to rescind the lease and seek restitution of all deposits.
California Civil Code Sections 1941.1 and 1942 - Warranty of Habitability: These sections are the backbone of California tenant rights. Section 1941.1 outlines the landlord’s obligation to maintain rental property in habitable condition. This includes keeping the premises free from vermin and infestations. Section 1942 gives tenants the right to repair serious defects themselves and deduct the cost from rent, or to terminate the lease if the landlord fails to maintain habitability.
A flea infestation that persists despite multiple treatments, affects the entire property, and causes physical harm to tenants and pets clearly violates the warranty of habitability. We had every legal right to terminate our lease on July 31, 2025 and claim reimbursement of our financial damages. Therefore, we sued the landlord.
The First Trial: Small Claims Court
This was my first time being in a courtroom. The courtroom was crowded with many cases scheduled that day.
Before entering, the landlord approached me and asked if I wanted to make a deal. I declined. I knew we had a strong case.
I gave a copy of my exhibit packet to the landlord and one to the judge. When it was our turn, I presented my case first, walking through the timeline and evidence. The landlord then presented his side. I took careful notes during his presentation. In my closing statement, I didn’t respond point-by-point to his rebuttal but instead reiterated my main claims clearly and concisely.
We won, and the court awarded us 4000 dollars in damages plus 125 dollarss in court costs. While this did not cover the full amount of our financial losses, we were still pleased with the outcome.
The landlord had 30 days to appeal, and he did appeal. In California small claims court, when a defendant appeals, the next trial is a trial de novo, meaning it is an entirely new trial, as if the first one never happened. The case moves to civil court, where both parties can bring attorneys, and there is no further right to appeal after this second trial.
The Second Trial: Civil Court
After the Christmas break, I began searching for lawyers. One was prompt and respectful but had no availability. Another said he had too much on his plate. The last one essentially ghosted me. I left multiple voicemails, sent emails, and shared my documents two weeks before the hearing. He only started contacting me frantically the night before the trial, calling repeatedly and leaving many voicemails. It was too late. He even showed up at the courthouse and found me in person.
At that point, I was confident I would win, not only because of the first decision, the facts, and my strong evidence, but also because I could tell the attorney sensed victory (and fees). I proceeded without an attorney.
Meanwhile, a tenant had also sued the landlord. They asked if I would be a witness for them, and I agreed. I also asked them to be a witness for my trial, which they gladly accepted.
In the morning, I met with my witnesses and entered the courtroom. I was expecting to present my case there, but the judge reassigned our case to another courtroom, judge, and time. We went for coffee with the witnesses and returned to the courthouse for the actual trial.
This courtroom was just for us: the judge, a clerk, a security officer, me, my witnesses, and the landlord. I was expecting the landlord to have hired an attorney, but he was alone.
We were sworn in, and the judge explained the process. First, I presented my case. I kept it concise and mentioned I had witnesses. The judge asked the landlord if he had questions for me. The landlord began to say things that didn’t make sense, which seemed to frustrate the judge. He kept trying to argue or explain his case instead of following the process the judge outlined. The judge repeatedly had to redirect him, asking, “Do you have questions for the plaintiff?”
When he did ask questions, I answered clearly and calmly. I only spoke when the judge asked me to, and I maintained eye contact with the judge throughout.
Then it was the landlord’s turn. He had prepared a signed statement, which he gave to the judge. The judge read it and said, “Okay, you don’t need to present your case since this serves as your presentation.” The landlord seemed confused and wanted to present it anyway, but the judge kindly declined.
My witness testified next. When they shared that they had also experienced a flea infestation when they moved in during October 2024, that nothing happened during the winter, but that it started again around summer of 2025, the judge nodded knowingly. Judges see flea situations and how landlords react repeatedly. They recognize the patterns.
The judge asked if I had questions for the landlord. I said no.
In my closing statement, I reiterated the key points: the misrepresentation in the lease, the systemic and unresolved infestation, our repeated good-faith efforts to cooperate, the uninhabitable conditions, and our legal termination of the lease. The landlord stated his claims, and I briefly refuted them with facts from my evidence. His claims included:
- “The treatments were successful.”
- “The tenants were informed that the infestation could recur.”
- “The source of the flea infestation was outside the property, potentially involving raccoons.”
- “Multiple residents in this and neighboring properties continued to live there.”
- “Any financial claims should be directed to the renter’s insurance company rather than to the landlord.”
A few days later, we received the decision mail. We won again. This time, the court awarded us around 5500 dollars plus costs. A few days after this, I attended the hearing for the other tenant as a witness. The landlord didn’t even show up. Their case was even more severe than ours, and they recovered around 12000 dollars plus costs.
Final Thoughts
Throughout this process, I used ChatGPT and Claude interchangeably to prepare for the trials. I treated AI as a sparring partner, sometimes I roleplayed as the landlord trying to find a way out, other times I asked for help structuring my arguments or anticipating counterarguments.
AI helped me understand the relevant sections of California Civil Code. With its help, I organized my evidence into a clear narrative, anticipated the landlord’s defenses and prepared responses. I practiced my presentation until it was concise and compelling. AI also encouraged me multiple times, told me to stay calm and focused during the trials, which is amusing but immensely helpful.
The AI tools didn’t replace legal advice or representation, but they were invaluable for preparation, confidence-building, and refining my strategy. In an age where access to justice can be expensive and intimidating, AI democratizes legal preparation and empowers individuals to stand up for their rights.
On a closing note, winning these cases was not just about recovering money. Tt was about vindicating our rights as tenants and holding a negligent landlord accountable. It was about proving that the law protects tenants who are wronged, and that everyday people can navigate the legal system successfully with preparation, evidence, and determination.
If you’re facing a similar situation:
- Document everything—photos, emails, receipts, and reports
- Know your rights under state and local tenant protection laws
- Don’t be intimidated by the legal process—
- Use available resources, including AI, to prepare and build confidence
- Stand your ground when you know you’re right
Published: Jan 31, 2026.
Last edited: Jan 31, 2026.