AB 628 expands California’s statutory habitability rules by explicitly adding a working stove and refrigerator to the list of “affirmative standard characteristics” that make a dwelling tenantable under Civil Code §1941. The stove and refrigerator requirements apply to leases entered into, amended, or extended on or after January 1, 2026, while certain housing types (permanent supportive housing, single‑room occupancy units, residential hotels, and units that offer shared communal kitchens) are exempt.
The bill also creates a short, concrete compliance regime: landlords must repair or replace any stove or refrigerator subject to a manufacturer or public‑entity recall within 30 days after receiving notice, and the statute preserves tenants’ existing remedies under §1942. For refrigerators only, the bill permits a tenant to choose to bring and maintain their own unit at lease start via a prescribed written acknowledgement, with a 30‑day revocation right requiring landlord installation thereafter.
These changes tighten appliance responsibilities for landlords and add operational and cost considerations for owners and property managers, while aiming to protect tenant health and food safety.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends Civil Code §1941 to treat a working stove and refrigerator as required habitability features for most rental units, effective for leases entered, amended, or extended on or after January 1, 2026. It allows tenants to opt to supply their own refrigerator at lease start via a written checkbox and requires landlords to replace recalled stoves or refrigerators within 30 days of notice.
Who It Affects
The law directly affects landlords, property managers, and owners of residential rental units across California who enter into or modify leases on or after the effective date, as well as tenants who gain explicit statutory protections for cooking and refrigeration. Exemptions specifically carve out permanent supportive housing, single‑room occupancy units, residential hotels, and units offering communal kitchens (including some assisted living facilities).
Why It Matters
The bill puts appliance provision and quick recall response into the statutory habitability framework rather than leaving them to case law or informal practice, creating clear affirmative duties for landlords and a short statutory timeline for recalls. That clarity matters to compliance officers, property owners budgeting for maintenance and replacements, tenant advocates focused on food safety, and counsel handling habitability litigation.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 628 inserts two modern, health‑centric items — a functional stove and a working refrigerator — into the statutory list of habitability standards in Civil Code §1941. Rather than leaving appliance obligations to court interpretations of “fit for habitation,” the bill specifies that landlords must provide a stove and refrigerator that are maintained in good working order and “capable of safely” performing their basic functions (cooking heat and food storage).
Those appliance obligations apply only to leases entered into, amended, or extended on or after January 1, 2026, which means the rule governs new contracts and modified terms rather than automatically rewriting all existing tenancies.
The statute builds two operational features into the refrigerator rule. First, a tenant may elect at lease signing to bring and maintain their own refrigerator; that election must appear as a clear checkbox statement in the lease and cannot be a condition of tenancy.
Second, if the tenant later revokes that election with 30 days’ written notice, the landlord must install a refrigerator in good working order at the end of the notice period. The landlord remains responsible to provide and keep a refrigerator working when the lease requires it, but is explicitly not responsible for maintaining a tenant‑supplied unit.AB 628 also addresses safety recalls: when a stove or refrigerator is “subject to recall by the manufacturer or a public entity,” the landlord must repair or replace the recalled appliance within 30 days of receiving notice.
The bill preserves the tenant’s ability to pursue remedies under existing habitability law (Civil Code §1942) and clarifies that nothing in the new language prevents tenants or owners from pursuing energy‑savings or utility assistance programs for heating or hot water systems. Finally, the bill lists specific exemptions — permanent supportive housing, single‑room occupancy units, residential hotels, and dwellings in facilities with shared kitchens — so the stove and refrigerator mandate does not apply uniformly across every residential setting.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The appliance requirements (stove and refrigerator) apply only to leases entered into, amended, or extended on or after January 1, 2026.
A tenant may opt to provide their own refrigerator at lease signing via a required checkbox statement; the tenant can revoke that choice with 30 days’ written notice and require the landlord to install a refrigerator at the end of that period.
Landlords must repair or replace any stove or refrigerator that is subject to a manufacturer or public‑entity recall within 30 days of receiving notice of the recall.
The statute exempts permanent supportive housing, single‑room occupancy units (including shared food‑prep SROs), residential hotels, and units within facilities that offer shared/communal kitchens (including some assisted living).
The bill preserves tenants’ remedies under Civil Code §1942 and clarifies landlords are not responsible for maintaining refrigerators provided by tenants, and landlords may not condition tenancy on a tenant supplying their own refrigerator.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Adds stove as an affirmative habitability characteristic
This subsection makes a stove part of the statutory list of things a dwelling must have to be tenantable, but limits the rule to leases entered, amended, or extended on or after January 1, 2026. The stove must be maintained in good working order and be “capable of safely generating heat for cooking purposes”; the provision also disqualifies appliances that are subject to an active recall. Practically, owners must ensure rental units they license or relicense after the effective date include a safe, functioning stove or face habitability claims.
Adds refrigerator, with an explicit tenant opt‑in option
This subsection requires landlords to provide a refrigerator that safely stores food for leases covered by the effective date rule, but it gives tenants the explicit ability to choose to bring their own unit at lease signing. The landlord must include a prescribed statement in the lease and cannot make tenant provision of the refrigerator a condition of tenancy. The lease must also allow the tenant to rescind that choice with 30 days’ written notice, after which the landlord must install a refrigerator. The provision clarifies maintenance responsibility for tenant‑provided refrigerators stays with the tenant.
Narrow exemptions for certain housing types
The bill excludes several categories from the stove and refrigerator rules: permanent supportive housing as defined in Government Code §8698.4(c)(2), single‑room occupancy units (including units that share food preparation), residential hotels per Health and Safety Code §50519(b)(1), and dwellings in facilities offering shared or communal kitchens (e.g., some assisted living facilities). Those carve‑outs reflect programmatic and physical realities where private full‑size appliances are not standard, but they also mean some low‑income or congregate settings receive different statutory protection.
Recall response timeline and preservation of tenant remedies
This subsection imposes a 30‑day deadline for landlords to repair or replace any stove or refrigerator that becomes subject to a manufacturer or public‑entity recall after the landlord receives notice. It also states the recall rule does not limit the tenant’s ability to use Civil Code §1942 remedies. The practical effect: landlords must develop an internal recall‑response process or face potential habitability litigation and statutory remedies if they miss the 30‑day window.
Interaction with energy‑savings and assistance programs
This brief subsection clarifies that the new appliance rules do not prevent tenants or rental property owners from participating in utility energy savings assistance programs for heating or hot water repairs or replacements. The clause prevents an unintended bar on energy upgrade subsidies or program assistance that could facilitate compliance with heating or hot‑water related habitability obligations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Housing across all five countries.
Explore Housing in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Renters who enter new or modified leases after January 1, 2026 — they gain statutory protections for cooking and food storage that reduce health risks from spoiled food and lack of cooking facilities.
- Low‑income tenants and tenant advocates — clearer habitability standards give advocates stronger grounds to demand prompt appliance repairs or replacements and faster recall responses.
- Public health and sanitation regulators — explicit refrigerator and stove rules align housing law more closely with food safety and injury‑prevention objectives, making enforcement priorities clearer and narrower.
Who Bears the Cost
- Private landlords and property managers — they must budget for providing, maintaining, and replacing stoves and refrigerators in covered leases, and they face a 30‑day replacement obligation for recalled appliances.
- Small building owners with thin margins — the upfront capital and logistics to source compliant appliances and meet short recall timelines will hit smaller operators hardest and may drive administrative burdens or pass‑through costs.
- Housing operators converting units or updating leases — owners who amend leases to adjust rent or terms will trigger the appliance obligation and may face unplanned retrofit costs; insurance and warranty claims handling may also rise.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is straightforward: the statute advances tenant health and safety by making stoves and refrigerators explicit habitability items and by forcing quick action on recalls, but it does so by imposing immediate, concrete costs and operational demands on landlords that could be passed to renters, depress investment in low‑margin housing, or leave vulnerable populations (in exempt congregate settings) with fewer protections. The law chooses health and clarity for many tenants at the cost of new compliance burdens and uneven coverage.
AB 628 is tightly targeted but creates implementation questions that matter in practice. First, the effective‑date framing (leases entered, amended, or extended on or after Jan 1, 2026) avoids retroactively rewriting all tenancies, but it also means many existing tenants without working appliances remain outside the new statutory protection until their lease changes.
That staggered coverage limits immediate public‑health benefits and may encourage strategic timing of lease amendments.
Second, the recall‑response duty is crisp on timing but vague on notice and logistics. The statute triggers the 30‑day requirement “within 30 days of receiving notice” that an appliance is subject to recall — but it does not specify who must provide that notice, what documentation suffices, or whether landlords may rely on manufacturer, distributor, or government recall lists.
Sourcing safe replacements quickly can be difficult given supply and warranty constraints, and landlords will need procedures to document compliance to defend against §1942 claims.
Third, the exemptions — especially permanent supportive housing and facilities with communal kitchens — reflect operational realities but raise equity questions. Residents in congregate or supportive settings are often among the most vulnerable; exempting those settings shifts the policy tradeoff away from universal protection toward context‑sensitive rules.
Finally, the tenant opt‑in for refrigerators reduces coercion risk but introduces potential informational and enforcement gaps: landlords must ensure the checkbox language is present and clear, and tenants must understand their 30‑day revocation right and the maintenance consequences of supplying their own appliance.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.