Complaint Investigation Report

According to administrative assistant, R1 called the police case # SR 260007540.0 who came and arrested them due to R1 being intoxicated. LPA explained to administrative assistant that the facility could issue a 30 day eviction instead of a 3 day eviction due to R1 was not present at the facility at this time, so they don't represent an immediate risk to the health and safety of staff and residents in care. On 7/27/26, LPA received and returned unlawful 30 day eviction notice issued to R1 due to the letter missing the unlawful detainer statement which is required per regulation. During today’s visit at the facility to conduct 10 day to open the complaint, LPA was provided with updated 30 day eviction notice including the unlawful detainer statement dated 7/27/26. Also, LPA learned through interviews with administrative assistant that the facility refused to receive R1 back to the facility after R1 was discharged from the hospital due to R1 refused to return to the facility due to R1 violated rule #4 of their house rules by exhibiting behavior which is a threat to the mental health and safety of them and others, as well as rule #11 of facility house rules about not allowing residents to return to the facility intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol and/or illegal drugs. However, the facility was unable to provide supportive evidence that R1 was intoxicated when they struck S1. Per administrative assistant, R1 was relocated to another facility, and they are unable to locate R1 to serve them with updated 30 day eviction notice. Based on records review and interviews conducted with staff, the facility failed to accept R1 to return to facility after R1 was discharged from the hospital by conducting a wrongful eviction. The preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), is cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Appeal Rights Given.