Here's a fun exercise: try getting $1,096 back from a company that won't answer your emails, won't pick up the phone, and apparently operates most of its staff out of Delhi, India. That's the situation facing at least one international student in San Francisco — and reportedly many others — who rented from a company called Vybe Living.

The basics: A foreign student rented a room at 653 Minna St. in SoMa starting last August and moved out in early February. Under California law — specifically Civil Code Section 1950.5 — a landlord has exactly 21 days to return a security deposit after move-out or provide an itemized statement of deductions. That deadline came and went. Months later? Not a single penny. Not a single communication. Total radio silence.

This isn't an isolated incident. Google Maps reviews for Vybe Living are littered with similar complaints from former tenants describing the same pattern: move in, move out, get ghosted when you ask for your money back. One former Vybe Living renter described being told they couldn't view an apartment before signing — supposedly because of COVID — only to discover a shoebox-sized room in a unit "trashed and overrun with ants." The company apparently knew what it was selling and didn't want anyone seeing the product first.

Let's be clear about what's happening here. California's deposit return laws aren't suggestions. They exist specifically to protect tenants — including international students who may not know the system — from exactly this kind of behavior. When a company systematically ignores its legal obligations and bets that tenants won't have the resources or knowledge to fight back, that's not a business model. That's a grift.

As one SF resident pointed out, anyone dealing with this should file complaints with the California Attorney General, contact their city council representative, and reach out to local consumer advocacy programs. Small claims court is also an option — California law allows tenants to recover up to twice the deposit amount in bad-faith cases.

The bigger question: how is a company with this many public complaints still operating rental units in San Francisco? The city has an entire bureaucratic apparatus supposedly dedicated to tenant protections. Maybe it's time someone in that apparatus started paying attention.