A Richmond District couple say they were blindsided when their new landlord told them their rent would nearly double, jumping from $3,695 to $7,000 a month. The 90 percent hike is set to kick in on Sept. 1 and would almost certainly push them out of San Francisco. The shock came shortly after the 10-unit condominium building at 6838 Geary Boulevard was sold to a new owner.
According to The San Francisco Standard, the letters announcing the increases came from the building’s new owner, Eagle Peak Holdings LLC, which is registered to Hans Geiszler. One of those letters told tenants their monthly rent was going up to $7,000. The Waldmans, who say they moved into the top-floor unit in 2021, told the outlet the spike feels like a de facto eviction and that they are consulting a lawyer. The paper reports the landlord did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
Why this building may be exempt
Online listings show the condominium complex at 6838 Geary was built in 1996 and changed hands in May 2026, which places it outside San Francisco’s rent-control cutoff for properties built before 1979. Redfin lists the property as a 10-unit building constructed in 1996 and notes a May sale. That timing means the city’s local rent caps do not automatically apply, giving a new owner much more room to reset rents to what the market will bear.
How state law creates a loophole
California’s Tenant Protection Act, known as AB 1482, limits annual rent increases for many apartments across the state. But the law carves out exemptions for certain condominiums and single-family properties, a carve-out the new owner of 6838 Geary appears to be relying on. Under the statute, the exemption hinges in part on how the property is owned, for example that the owner is not a corporation or an LLC with corporate members, and on whether the landlord gave tenants a very specific written notice about the exemption. Those ownership and notice requirements, spelled out in the bill text, are likely to sit at the center of any legal fight over the rent hikes. The full law is available from the Legislature in the text of AB 1482.
Tenants say there’s room to fight
Tenant attorneys told The San Francisco Standard that some landlords try to trigger so-called self-evictions by cranking rents so high that tenants feel they have no choice but to leave. Renters who were never warned about an exemption when they moved in may have at least some legal leverage, they said. Ora Prochovnick, director of litigation and policy at the Eviction Defense Collaborative, told the outlet, “What’s fair and what’s legal don’t necessarily overlap,” and suggested tenants could argue that a landlord cannot retroactively “unring that bell” after giving the impression that protections applied. For the Waldmans, the stakes are especially personal: they say the increase would force them out of the neighborhood where their 19-month-old son depends on nearby city-subsidized daycare.
What tenants can do now
For renters hit with sudden, steep increases, tenant advocates say the first move is to gather every scrap of paperwork from move-in: leases, emails, and any mention of rent stabilization or protections. Under the text of AB 1482, a landlord who claims an exemption must have given the tenant a specific written notice, so asking the owner to produce that disclosure is an immediate test of their legal footing.
Groups such as the Eviction Defense Collaborative list hotlines and legal clinics that connect renters with free advice and, in some cases, full representation. Given the timelines on big rent jumps, advocates say waiting to seek help is a luxury most tenants simply cannot afford.
Why landlords are pushing rents
For investors, one way to justify a hefty purchase price is to raise rents to current market levels, especially when the building is not locked into local rent control. That pressure only grows when citywide rents are rising. San Francisco Chronicle data show strong year-over-year rent gains in parts of the city, and property listings indicate the 6838 Geary building sold in May for roughly $6.15 million. Numbers like that go a long way toward explaining the financial incentive to push rents higher…