Skip to content
Fontana, California eviction risk overview
Ranked #728 of 1,861 nationally

Fontana, CA Eviction Risk: ELEVATED

San Bernardino County · Population 214,169

In 2026
Risk score
5.7
ELEVATED

62th percentile, California.

50-yr Eviction Risk Score history

1976 — 2026 · climbing fast since 2010

Min1.5 Average3.6 Now5.7
10 5 1976 · score 1.5 1977 · score 1.6 1978 · score 1.6 1979 · score 1.7 1980 · score 1.7 1981 · score 1.8 1982 · score 1.9 1983 · score 1.8 1984 · score 1.8 1985 · score 1.8 1986 · score 1.8 1987 · score 1.8 1988 · score 2.0 1989 · score 2.0 1990 · score 2.1 1991 · score 2.2 1992 · score 2.8 1993 · score 2.8 1994 · score 2.9 1995 · score 2.8 1996 · score 2.8 1997 · score 2.9 1998 · score 3.0 1999 · score 3.1 2000 · score 2.9 2001 · score 3.1 2002 · score 3.2 2003 · score 3.2 2004 · score 3.2 2005 · score 3.3 2006 · score 3.4 2007 · score 3.5 2008 · score 4.2 2009 · score 4.4 2010 · score 4.5 2011 · score 4.6 2012 · score 4.5 2013 · score 4.6 2014 · score 4.7 2015 · score 4.8 2016 · score 5.4 2017 · score 5.6 2018 · score 5.9 2019 · score 6.2 2020 · score 7.1 2021 · score 7.1 2022 · score 7.1 2023 · score 7.1 2024 · score 6.9 2025 · score 5.7 2026 · score 5.7

Key metrics

Time machine

Scrub 50 years

2026
● LIVE · today ◀ REPLAY · historical

Nine-axis profile

9-axis profile · today

Shape of the risk surface

1 landlord · 10 tenant
Local 5.9 Regional 5.9 State 6.8 Economic 6.5 Supply 7.9 Rent Control 7.0 Eviction 6.2 Tenant 7.0 Housing 6.1 5.7 ELEVATED
Sub-scores · with sparkline

Where the score comes from

1 → 10 scale
  1. Local political climate
    GOP margin +2.1% (2024)
    5.9
  2. Regional political climate
    County-weighted neighbor mix
    5.9
  3. State political climate
    California legislature & governorship
    6.8
  4. Economic stress
    10.3% poverty · 6.8% unemp.
    6.5
  5. Supply constraint
    $1,839 average · 33.2% renters
    7.9
  6. Rent Control risk
    32.1% of income on rent
    7.0
  7. Eviction process difficulty
    257 days filing → judgment
    6.2
  8. Tenant organizing strength
    33.2% renters
    7.0
  9. Housing court bias
    County bench composition
    6.1
Geographic context

Risk heat across Fontana and the region

Click any city to see its score

How Fontana compares

Risk score vs. peers, county, state, and the U.S.
Rank in San Bernardino County
Low
#37 of 53 cities
Rank in county — 31th percentileBottomTop
#37 of 53 cities in San Bernardino County for landlord eviction risk.
Rank in California
Elevated
#647 of 1,594 cities
Rank in state — 59th percentileBottomTop
#647 of 1,594 cities in California for landlord eviction risk.
vs. county · state · U.S.
Fontana risk score vs. county / state / U.S.Fontana: 5.75.7FontanaThis cityCounty: 6.06.0Countyavg in countyState: 6.66.6Stateavg in stateU.S.: 5.35.3U.S.national avg
Score story

Six-stop tour of the risk profile

  1. 5.7
    / 10 · ELEVATED
    The verdict

    A Elevated-tier market.

    Composite 5.7/10. Mid-range market; standard documentation usually wins. The 50-year curve shows a sharp climb.

    50-yr trend+4.2 over 50 yr
    197620012026

    Steepening since 2010 · COVID inflection visible

  2. 257d
    Typical timeline
    The money

    What renting (and evicting) looks like.

    Rent published at $1,839/mo. A contested eviction takes 257 days and costs $14,521–$38,904 per case.

    50-yr trendCalendar drag rising since '15
    197620012026

    Court-clerk data lands in the next release.

  3. 33.2%
    Renters
    The renters

    Who you'll be renting to.

    Out of 214,169 residents, 33.2% rent. 32% are spending 30%+ income on rent, 10.3% below the poverty line.

    50-yr trendRenter share rising
    197620012026

    ACS 1970-present · once the migration overlay is in.

  4. 5.9
    Local + regional
    The politics

    Mid-range climate. Not a coastal market.

    Local & regional political climate score 5.9 and 5.9 (GOP margin +2.1% (2024)). State climate at 6.8 — mid-range statehouse.

    50-yr trendTracks county vote margin
    197620012026

    Built on 50-yr presidential margins back to 1976.

  5. 6.8
    State politics
    The process

    Long calendar, heavy friction.

    State political climate 6.8/10 sets the legislative ceiling for landlord remedies — and shows up in process. Eviction process difficulty reads 6.2, housing court bias 6.1, rent-control risk 7.0. The slow part is the calendar, not the motion practice.

    50-yr trendProcess difficulty +1.2 since '00
    197620012026

    Court-clerk data lands in the next release.

  6. 6.5
    Economic stress
    The stress

    Economic pressure is the background risk.

    Economic stress: 6.5. Supply constraint: 7.9. The numbers behind those: 10.3% poverty, 6.8% unemployment, 32% of income on rent.

    50-yr trendTwo visible dips · '08 + COVID
    197620012026

    Mirrors BLS unemployment series.

US eviction landscape · timeline × all-in cost

Fontana sits in the slow & expensive quadrant

Bubble size = population · color = risk score
QUICK BUT COSTLY fast docket · high all-in loss SLOW & EXPENSIVE long calendar · high all-in loss QUICK & CHEAP fast docket · low all-in loss SLOW BUT CHEAP long calendar · low all-in loss 30d 50d 75d 100d 150d 200d 300d 450d $2.0k $3.0k $5.0k $7.5k $10k $15k $20k $30k EVICTION TIMELINE (DAYS) → ↑ ALL-IN COST (LOG SCALE) Los Angeles, CA · 273d · ~$22.4k all-in ($82/day) · score 9.1 Los Angeles Long Beach, CA · 291d · ~$26.4k all-in ($91/day) · score 8.4 Long Beach Anaheim, CA · 258d · ~$23.3k all-in ($90/day) · score 7.0 Anaheim Riverside, CA · 245d · ~$21.8k all-in ($89/day) · score 6.6 Riverside Santa Ana, CA · 282d · ~$25.2k all-in ($90/day) · score 8.0 Santa Ana Irvine, CA · 274d · ~$24.7k all-in ($90/day) · score 5.9 Irvine San Bernardino, CA · 294d · ~$24.6k all-in ($84/day) · score 6.3 San Bernardino Moreno Valley, CA · 257d · ~$24.3k all-in ($95/day) · score 6.0 Moreno Valley Huntington Beach, CA · 291d · ~$23.0k all-in ($79/day) · score 5.7 Huntington Beach Glendale, CA · 255d · ~$26.3k all-in ($103/day) · score 6.6 Glendale Houston, TX · 24d · ~$2.5k all-in ($103/day) · score 3.4 Houston Phoenix, AZ · 38d · ~$3.3k all-in ($86/day) · score 3.7 Phoenix Memphis, TN · 31d · ~$2.0k all-in ($66/day) · score 4.2 Memphis Atlanta, GA · 40d · ~$2.8k all-in ($69/day) · score 4.9 Atlanta Boston, MA · 187d · ~$20.3k all-in ($109/day) · score 8.1 Boston Chicago, IL · 109d · ~$9.0k all-in ($82/day) · score 6.8 Chicago New York, NY · 417d · ~$29.5k all-in ($71/day) · score 7.8 New York Seattle, WA · 162d · ~$12.7k all-in ($79/day) · score 8.2 Seattle Fontana
Fontana · 257d · ~$26.7k all-in ($104/day) · score 5.7 National average: 58d · $4.6k all-in Hover any bubble for stats · click to open Color: 0–4   4–7   7–10
00Overview

About eviction risk in Fontana, CA

Landlording in Fontana, California, presents an elevated-friction market where documented notices and proactive screening matter. The Eviction Risk Score is 5.7/10 (ELEVATED tier), drawn from the nine sub-axes shown above — covering rent-control exposure, eviction-process difficulty, housing-court bias, tenant-organizing strength, supply constraint, economic stress, and local, regional, and state political climate. This is not a quick-fix market: it's a Elevated-friction market where lease drafting, screening discipline, and well-documented notices materially change outcomes.

Fontana is a city of 214,169 residents where 33.2% of occupied units are renter-occupied, and the typical renter spends 32.1% of income on rent. At an average rent of $1,839/month, the typical renter household here spends more than the federal 30% threshold on housing — a leading indicator of payment volatility and a precondition for the kinds of tenant defenses that show up most often in housing court.

01Process

How Fontana eviction process actually works

Eviction process difficulty here reads 6.2/10 — a number that combines statutory complexity (notice categories, just-cause rules, mandatory pre-filing disclosures) with operational realities (court calendar length and clerk responsiveness). The typical contested filing in Fontana closes 257 days after the initial notice. For non-payment of rent the first step is a properly-formatted, properly-served pay-or-quit notice; for material lease breaches it's a cure-or-quit; for tenancies under just-cause protection an at-fault grounds notice (or a no-fault notice with statutory relocation assistance) is required.

The slow part of Fontana's timeline is usually the calendar, not the motion practice. Housing court bias scores 6.1/10 here, meaning judges read borderline procedural defects in the tenant's favor more often than the national norm. The practical implication: every notice and every proof of service needs to be airtight before it gets filed.

02Cost

What it costs (and how long it takes)

An all-in eviction in Fontana runs $14,521 to $38,904 per case once you account for filing fees, attorney time, lost rent during pendency, sheriff lockout, and unit turnover. That range is wide because the upper bound assumes a tenant answer plus motion practice — common when housing court bias is high. The lower bound assumes a default judgment after proper service.

For landlords running the numbers on holding costs vs. cash-for-keys: if your projected timeline times your monthly rent already exceeds the high-end cost number, cash-for-keys at 1–2 months' rent is typically the economically rational choice. With 257 days of typical timeline and $1,839/month in lost rent, that crossover happens fast here.

03Operations

Security deposits, screening, and lease terms

Tenant organizing strength scores 7.0/10 in Fontana, and the city carries meaningful rent control exposure (7.0/10). Operations practice that survives audit in this environment looks like:

  • Screening discipline. Document income (verified at 2.5–3x rent), credit (with a clear minimum), and prior-tenancy reference checks — but do not screen on protected categories or source-of-income where banned. Keep a written, consistent screening criteria document for every applicant.
  • Lease specificity. Use a state-specific lease that names every term clearly: rent due date, late fees within statutory caps, deposit handling, smoke and CO disclosure, lead paint disclosure (pre-1978 stock), and a clean attorney's-fees clause.
  • Security deposit handling. Itemize deductions within the statutory window. Photograph move-in/move-out condition. In California, deposit cap and refund window are statute — exceed at your own risk.
  • Mid-tenancy documentation. Keep date-stamped records of every rent receipt, every habitability request, every notice served. The day you need them in court is too late to start.
04Strategy

What an everyday landlord should actually do here

If you own one to four units in Fontana: hire a property manager who knows the local court. The pricing differential between self-managing and hiring out is small relative to the cost of one botched eviction in a ELEVATED tier market. If you own five or more: build relationships with a local landlord-side attorney before you need one — retainer fees are negligible compared to emergency-rate billing when an eviction is already moving.

The avoidable mistakes here are all upstream of the filing: weak screening, an informal lease, sloppy rent receipts, and notice templates pulled off the internet that don't match California's statutory language. Fix those four, and most cases settle or default. Skip them, and a $38,904 all-in fight is the realistic worst case.

04bPractical traps

Local traps to avoid in Fontana

Trap · PRACTICAL TRAP
The Inland Empire warehouse employment cycle drives much of Fontana's eviction-filing volume. Amazon, FedEx, UPS, and the broader e-commerce distribution corridor produce income volatility (peak-season hiring, post-holiday layoffs, contract-conversion uncertainty) that maps onto eviction-filing patterns with a clear seasonal signature.
Trap · AB 1482
State context: AB 1482 applies. Costa-Hawkins exempts pre-1995 condos and SFRs. Fontana has not enacted any municipal layer. Inland Counties Legal Services staffs San Bernardino County defense.
05FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Q1

What is the biggest risk for landlords in Fontana?

The biggest risk is the extremely long eviction timeline (257 days) and high costs ($14,521-$38,904). This means months of lost rent and significant legal fees if an eviction becomes necessary. California's just-cause requirements and strong tenant protections make it difficult to remove a non-paying tenant quickly.

Q2

Can I raise the rent whenever I want in Fontana?

No. Fontana is subject to statewide rent control under California eviction risk overview. Rent increases are capped annually at 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living (CPI), or 10%, whichever is lower. There are also specific rules about how often and with how much notice you can raise the rent.

Q3

What should I do if my tenant stops paying rent?

Immediately serve a 3-day pay-or-quit notice. If they don't pay or move out within those three days, contact an attorney experienced in California landlord-tenant law to initiate an unlawful detainer lawsuit. Do not accept partial payments without a clear written agreement, as this can restart the notice period.

Q4

How much notice do I need to give a tenant to move out if I want to sell the property?

If the tenant has lived there for more than 12 months, selling the property is generally not a "just cause" for eviction under statewide law unless the buyer intends to occupy the unit as their primary residence. Even then, you'll need to give a 60-day notice and potentially pay relocation assistance. Consult an attorney for specific situations.

Q5

Is it worth offering "cash for keys" in Fontana?

Absolutely. Given the average eviction cost and timeline, offering a tenant a few thousand dollars to vacate voluntarily and quickly can save you tens of thousands in legal fees and lost rent, plus months of stress. Always get a written agreement for "cash for keys."

06Score

What this score means for landlords2

A 5.7/10 places Fontana in the 62th percentile of California cities on the Eviction Risk Score index. The score is the average of the nine sub-axes, all calibrated on a national 1–10 scale where 1 is most landlord-friendly and 10 is most tenant-protective. The 50-year reconstruction shows this score has risen sharply since 1976 — a structural drift driven by court-calendar growth, rent-control adoption, and the rise of tenant-side legal aid. The trajectory matters more than the snapshot: the score is the climate, not the weather.