Carmen Efferson demands repairs after 38 years living rent-free in Stevie Wonder's LA home
The former girlfriend filed a court response Tuesday, citing leaking ceilings and defective plumbing in the property where she has resided since 1988.
By Paula Delgado ·
Carmen Efferson stood firm in her court filings Tuesday, denying Stevie Wonder’s request to evict her from a Los Angeles residence. She has occupied the home without paying rent since July 1988, a span of nearly four decades. The arrangement was based on a verbal agreement rather than a written lease. Efferson told the court that Wonder promised her the house, a claim that now anchors her defense against his eviction suit.
Efferson’s response to the lawsuit goes beyond a simple bid to stay. She asked the judge to order Wonder to repair the property, which she describes as severely neglected. Her list of complaints includes damp or leaking ceilings and walls, holes in the floors and carpet, and falling plaster. She also cited defective and leaking plumbing. In her filing, she requested that these fixes be made as soon as possible.
Wonder’s original filing argued that the verbal agreement has ended. He stated it is time for his former girlfriend to move out. The singer noted that he has attempted to send inspectors to the home, including a representative from an insurance company. Efferson, according to his claims, refused to allow these individuals inside the property.
A source close to Efferson told TMZ that she was blindsided by the lawsuit. The source added that Efferson has told friends that Wonder promised the home to her during their relationship. The two were once engaged, and Wonder reportedly considered marrying her. Now, the dispute has shifted from a personal matter to a legal battle over property rights and maintenance.
The core of the conflict lies in the undefined nature of the original deal. Both parties seem to interpret the verbal promise differently. Wonder views the arrangement as a temporary stay that has run its course. Efferson views it as a permanent transfer of ownership that came with maintenance responsibilities. The judge must now decide whether the promise was a gift of the house or merely a license to live there.
Efferson’s filing puts the physical state of the home front and center. She lists specific damages that have accumulated over the years. Her legal team argues that if Wonder is to be considered the landlord of record, he must address the structural issues. The case now hinges on whether a verbal promise made in the late 1980s holds up under modern contract law.
