CIV § 1954

California Civil Code § 1954 - When a landlord may enter, and how much notice is required

Civil Code § 1954 lists the only reasons a California landlord may enter a rented dwelling, requires written notice, and presumes 24 hours is reasonable.

Official text CIV § 1954 — California
  • (a) A landlord may enter the dwelling unit only in the following cases:
  • (1) In case of emergency.
  • (2) To make necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations or improvements, supply necessary or agreed services, or exhibit the dwelling unit to prospective or actual purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, workers, or contractors or to make an inspection pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 1950.5.
  • (3) When the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the premises.
  • (4) Pursuant to court order.
  • (5) For the purposes set forth in Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 1954.201).
  • (6) To comply with the provisions of Article 2.2 (commencing with Section 17973) of Chapter 5 of Part 1.5 of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code.
  • (b) Except in cases of emergency or when the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the premises, entry may not be made during other than normal business hours unless the tenant consents to an entry during other than normal business hours at the time of entry.
  • (c) The landlord may not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant.
  • (d) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (e), or as provided in paragraph (2) or (3), the landlord shall give the tenant reasonable notice in writing of his or her intent to enter and enter only during normal business hours. The notice shall include the date, approximate time, and purpose of the entry. The notice may be personally delivered to the tenant, left with someone of a suitable age and discretion at the premises, or, left on, near, or under the usual entry door of the premises in a manner in which a reasonable person would discover the notice. Twenty-four hours shall be presumed to be reasonable notice in absence of evidence to the contrary. The notice may be mailed to the tenant. Mailing of the notice at least six days prior to an intended entry is presumed reasonable notice in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
  • (2) If the purpose of the entry is to exhibit the dwelling unit to prospective or actual purchasers, the notice may be given orally, in person or by telephone, if the landlord or his or her agent has notified the tenant in writing within 120 days of the oral notice that the property is for sale and that the landlord or agent may contact the tenant orally for the purpose described above. Twenty-four hours is presumed reasonable notice in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The notice shall include the date, approximate time, and purpose of the entry. At the time of entry, the landlord or agent shall leave written evidence of the entry inside the unit.
  • (3) The tenant and the landlord may agree orally to an entry to make agreed repairs or supply agreed services. The agreement shall include the date and approximate time of the entry, which shall be within one week of the agreement. In this case, the landlord is not required to provide the tenant a written notice.
  • (e) No notice of entry is required under this section:
  • (1) To respond to an emergency.
  • (2) If the tenant is present and consents to the entry at the time of entry.
  • (3) After the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the unit.

Text as published in the 2026 snapshot of the code.

Source: Vaquill Open US Law, compiled from official state publishers (huggingface.co), reproduced under license CC BY 4.0.

Read this provision at the official source →

What it actually says

Section 1954 works as a closed list. Subdivision (a) says a landlord may enter "only" in the enumerated cases: an emergency, to make necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations or improvements or supply agreed services, to show the unit to prospective or actual purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, workers or contractors, to make the pre-move-out inspection under § 1950.5(f), where the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the premises, under court order, and for two specific statutory schemes. Anything outside that list is not authorised by the section, however routine the landlord considers it.

Subdivision (d) supplies the procedure. The landlord must give reasonable written notice stating the date, approximate time and purpose, and enter only during normal business hours. Twenty-four hours is presumed reasonable in the absence of evidence to the contrary, and mailing at least six days ahead is presumed reasonable. There are two carve-outs: showings to prospective or actual purchasers may be noticed orally, in person or by telephone, but only where the landlord has told the tenant in writing within the last 120 days that the property is for sale and that oral contact may follow, and written evidence of the entry must be left inside the unit; and the tenant and landlord may agree orally to an entry for agreed repairs or services within one week.

Subdivision (e) removes the notice requirement for an emergency, where the tenant is present and consents at the time, and after abandonment or surrender. And subdivision (c) is the sentence that catches the pattern rather than the single visit: the landlord "may not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant". Two other sections lean on this one — § 1953 makes a lease clause waiving § 1954 rights void, and § 1940.2 treats a significant and intentional violation of § 1954 as unlawful conduct when done to make a tenant leave. Whether a given entry was an emergency, or whether repeated lawful-looking entries amount to abuse, is a factual question worth taking to a lawyer or a tenant service.

When it applies

  • The landlord lets himself in while you are at work with no notice at all
  • An agent shows the flat to buyers twice a day during a sale
  • A written 24-hour notice that does not say why the landlord is coming
  • Entries at 8pm or on a Sunday described as normal business hours
  • A lease clause saying the landlord may enter at any time on any notice
  • The landlord enters, finds nothing to repair, and does it again the following week

What this section does not say

  • It does not require the tenant's consent. Where a listed purpose applies and proper notice is given, the section permits entry — the tenant's agreement is one route in, not the only one.
  • 24 hours is a presumption, not a rule. Subdivision (d) presumes 24 hours reasonable "in absence of evidence to the contrary", so both a shorter and a longer period can be argued on the facts.
  • It does not cover the common areas or the outside of the building. The section is about entry into the dwelling unit, not about the landlord being on the property.
  • It does not give a remedy of its own. The consequences come from elsewhere — § 1940.2 where entries are used to force a tenant out, § 1953 where the lease tried to waive the right, and general law for damages.
  • A lease clause cannot rewrite it. Under § 1953(a)(1) any provision by which the tenant agrees to modify or waive rights under § 1954 is void as contrary to public policy.

Worked examples

Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.

Illustrative example

A tenant comes home twice in one week to signs that the landlord has been in, once with a contractor, with no notice on either occasion.

How the wording applies

Section 1954 lists the purposes for which a landlord may enter and requires reasonable written notice, with 24 hours presumed reasonable. It turns on whether a listed purpose applied and whether notice was given: entering to make an agreed repair on proper notice is lawful, and entering to look around is not a listed purpose at all.

How the parties settled it

The landlord gives written notice at least 24 hours ahead stating the purpose and a two-hour window, and the tenant gives access on those terms without needing to be present.

Illustrative example

A flat is on the market and the agent brings buyers round twice a day, often at short notice, for several weeks.

How the wording applies

Showing the unit to prospective purchasers is a listed purpose, so the argument is about frequency and notice rather than entitlement, and the section separately prohibits abusing the right of access to harass the tenant. What decides it is the pattern: a viewing schedule that leaves the tenant no undisturbed use of their home crosses from access into harassment.

How the parties settled it

Viewings are limited to agreed blocks on two days a week with 24 hours of notice, and the landlord credits an agreed rent reduction for the marketing period.

How courts have read it

Decisions construing this provision. The question and the summary are ours; the quoted sentence is the court's own words, taken from the published opinion. These are the decisions in our corpus, not every decision there is, and nothing here predicts any other case. Reported 1991 to 2017.

Dromy v. Lukovsky, 219 Cal. App. 4th 278 (2013)

Court of Appeal

What the court had to decide

What is the meaning and scope of the phrase 'normal business hours' in Civil Code section 1954, subdivision (b), as it applies to a landlord's entry to exhibit a dwelling unit to prospective purchasers?

What it held

The term 'normal business hours' in section 1954 means objectively reasonable hours under the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind the right of tenants to quiet enjoyment and the right of landlords to sell their property, and thus weekend open houses may be permitted if reasonable.

In the court's words
we hold that the term “normal business hours” in section 1954 means objectively reasonable hours under the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind the right of tenants to quiet enjoyment and the right of landlords to sell their property.

Griffith v. City of Santa Cruz, 207 Cal. App. 4th 982 (2012)

Court of Appeal

What the court had to decide

whether the city ordinance requiring annual inspections of rental properties conflicts with Civil Code section 1954, which restricts a landlord's right to enter rented premises only upon consent of the tenant

What it held

The ordinance does not conflict with Civil Code section 1954 because it does not require a landlord to enter rented premises absent the tenant's consent.

In the court's words
The Ordinance does not require a landlord to enter rented premises absent the tenant’s consent and, therefore, does not alter or conflict with Civil Code section 1954.

Rental Housing Owners Ass'n v. City of Hayward, 200 Cal. App. 4th 81 (2011)

Court of Appeal

What the court had to decide

Whether the amended ordinance's good faith requirement is preempted by Civil Code section 1954, which limits the circumstances under which a landlord may enter a tenant's dwelling.

What it held

The amended ordinance is not preempted by Civil Code section 1954 because section 1954 addresses landlord entry, while the ordinance governs entry by City officials for inspections.

In the court's words
We also reject RHOA’s contention that the amended ordinance is preempted by Civil Code section 1954.

Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood Apartments, 171 Cal. App. 4th 1004 (2009)

Court of Appeal

What the court had to decide

Whether there are triable issues of fact regarding the landlord's violation of Civil Code section 1954 by changing the locks without proper notice or court order, thereby disturbing plaintiff's peaceful possession.

What it held

The court held that summary judgment was precluded because there were triable issues of fact as to whether defendants improperly disturbed plaintiff's peaceful possession by resorting to impermissible self-help, which would violate Civil Code section 1954.

In the court's words
Summary judgment on the remaining claims is precluded, because of triable issues on the question of whether defendants improperly disturbed plaintiff’s peaceful possession through resort to impermissible self-help.

Source: Caselaw Access Project, CC0 1.0 Universal (public domain dedication).

Related sections

CIV § 1953 Certain tenant waivers in leases are void: CIV § 1953 CIV § 1940.2 Up to $2,000 penalty for landlord harassment – CIV §1940.2 CIV § 1950.5 Security deposit capped at one month's rent - CIV § 1950.5 CIV § 1927 California Civil Code § 1927 - Quiet possession: what a landlord guarantees by letting

That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.

Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the California Codes.

This is with

Or open a session directly and invite the other party.

We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.

This page reproduces the text of CIV § 1954 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in California.

← All California law pages