141 Hampshire
According to the Mercury News, San Francisco Giants pitcher Tim Lincecum is being sued by his former landlord, “who accuses him of stealing and destroying $200,000 worth of household items earlier this year in his furnished San Francisco apartment.”

Among the items damaged or taken were “bedding, doors, carpet, pillows, kitchenware, linens, furniture, household appliances, art work, decorations, patio furniture, lights, lamps, and mirrors, among other things,” according to the compliant.

The complaint, which seeks $350,000 in damages, also states that Lincecum failed to pay rent on time and stole and destroyed his landlord’s personal property and papers. “Things were missing,” [the landloard’s attorney] said. However the attorney added that he didn’t know if Lincecum took the items or somebody else.

According to the complaint, Lincecum signed a lease in May 2010 to rent the apartment in San Francisco’s Mission District. Shortly after the lease expired on Feb. 28, Lincecum re-entered the unit without his landlord’s permission and stayed through May 13…

The rental in question is at 141 Hampshire, a two-unit building.
UPDATE: Lincecum’s unit was 141 Hampshire B which was purchased as new for $999,000 in 2001. 141 Hampshire Unit A traded for $1,265,000 in 2004 having sold for $899,000 in 2001. And while the report doesn’t mention a fire, perhaps a bit of “smoke” damage is in play as well.
Lawsuit claims Giants’ Lincecum trashed San Francisco apartment []

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

    Squatting. It’s the game every non-owner can play!
    You’d think that a pro baseball player wouldn’t need three months of rent-free housing. Clearly someone isn’t in control of their personal finances.

  2. Posted by J Mochaoes
  3. Posted by 94123 Native

    I’ve never seen so much white and beige rugs and furniture before. Talk about completely unpractical for renting an apartment – I wouldn’t even let a child or pet get near them unsupervised, let alone a bachelor, publicly admitted pot-smoking, just-hit-rich professional ball player. The insurance company probably laughed her out of the room. Didn’t she use any common sense, get a large enough deposit to cover what she left, or even conduct regular inspections?

  4. Posted by mikey woodz

    wow talk about a walkscore to the grocery store……a safeway in your front yard…literally

  5. Posted by [anon.ed]

    They tried to sell one of these for close to 3M a few years back. Man, perfect location for a ballplayer who plies his trade at AT & T. Talk about an easy drive.

  6. Posted by Stucco-sux

    A story his wife will repeat in divorce court once he’s been a decade into a marriage.

  7. Posted by [anon.ed]

    ^^ huh?

  8. Posted by Zig

    odd location to live for Timmy
    Why not South Beach or Mission Bay like many of the other players?
    He lives in the Marina now

  9. Posted by wrath

    one look at that mug should have told the landlord that this man belongs at the Occupy Wall Street rally not renting anything

  10. Posted by nnona

    Timmy is a bit of a freak, so who knows why he wanted to mix freeway exhaust with his pot smoke.
    And judging from the characterizations of its denizens on this site, the Marina seems like an odd fit as well.
    Years ago, when I had more inside knowledge of these things, it was true that almost all the players who made their off season homes elsewhere (usually AZ or FL for tax and winter training reasons) rented condos next to the ballpark during the season.
    Now, it seems like a greater number than before rent places in the Marina for “lifestyle” reasons. I suspect that a couple of those players would rent in the Castro for “lifestyle” reasons if they could.
    “that mug” made $14,000,000 dollars (not counting endorsements, etc..) this season. In a couple years, that mug will hit the open market and command a multi-year contract north of $100,000,000.00. Regardless of appearance, I somehow don’t think he’s going to march against the rich.

  11. Posted by cheech & chong

    Reefer madness!!!

  12. Posted by wrath

    and yet, it appears, that the level of culture exhibited is about the same;

  13. Posted by Zig

    When I was a kid I think it would have been rather odd for Joe Montana or other 49ers to live in the city (as he does now incidentally) or Baron Davis who lived on Minna or Mike Dunleavy who lived at the St. Regis
    There is a cultural change now and there is also more choice with these new neighborhoods and new construction.
    I think it’s good to capture more of the rich people in the City. Why not?
    And if these new high rises capture more of the young banker types or new monied folks, good. Maybe less of them will live in the established areas. win win

  14. Posted by nnona

    The Niners’ headquarters and practice facilities have been in Santa Clara for 20+ years, and before that they were in Redwood City, I think. In the Montana era, players lived mid-Peninsula, these days I’d imagine they live a bit further south.
    NFL teams practice/meet/watch film/rehab etc.. probably 9 times at their facilities for every 1 home game. That is a huge reason why 49er players virtually never live in the city. Still, it is strange that there hasn’t been an exception or two to the rule. I can’t recall anyone in a long time off the top of my head.
    There were a couple of Warriors who lived SOMA a few years back, are there any now? That probably isn’t a bad commute for morning practices and shootarounds, but I’m guessing they would have to go extremely early or battle terrible traffic on game nights.
    In any case, baseball players tend to rent more than other pro team athletes for a variety of reasons. Mentioned above are players having a primary residence in AZ or FL for tax and climate reasons. And there are players with school-aged kids who have a family home established in another city. Also there are a good number of players from Latin America or Asia who go home for the winter.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles