[California] Oakland landlord privately signed a lease with my subtenants before their sublease ended—does my original lease still control?

Location: California

I’m looking for guidance from anyone familiar with Oakland, California landlord-tenant law, especially disputes involving a master tenant, subtenants, and a landlord.

I am the original leaseholder of an Oakland apartment. I temporarily relocated for urgent medical treatment and received written permission from my landlord to sublet the furnished apartment. The landlord’s written approval stated that I remained the leaseholder and continued to be responsible for the unit and timely rent.

I entered into a signed, fixed-term sublease with two people. The agreement identifies me as the sublessor, identifies them as sublessees, and states that their tenancy ends August 1, 2026. The apartment still contains most of my furniture, books, artwork, equipment, printer, clothing, and other personal belongings.

Two days before the sublease was scheduled to end, one of the subtenants contacted me and asked when I planned to return. During our conversation, I learned that she had been privately communicating with my landlord since June about staying beyond the end of the sublease. She later claimed that she and the other occupant had signed a new lease directly with the landlord.

Neither the landlord nor the subtenants told me that these negotiations were happening. I never surrendered, terminated, assigned, or abandoned my lease. I also never consented to the landlord replacing me with the subtenants. I have requested a complete copy of the alleged new lease, but I have not yet received it.

The subtenants now claim that:

Paying rent directly to the landlord made them direct tenants rather than subtenants.

Their new lease eliminates my right to return.

The expiration of their written sublease does not require them to leave because of Oakland’s Just Cause rules.

I cannot enter or return to the apartment without a court order.

The original sublease instructed them to pay rent directly to the landlord, so direct payment was part of the arrangement from the beginning. The receipts were sent directly to me. The landlord also previously confirmed in writing that I remained the leaseholder.

I offered to consider a written extension allowing them to remain until September 1, provided everyone signed an agreement confirming the final move-out date and protecting my tenancy and belongings. They have not accepted it.

I understand that I should not change the locks, remove their belongings, shut off utilities, or attempt a self-help eviction. I am not asking how to force entry. I am trying to understand my legal position and what steps I should take immediately.

My questions are:

Can an Oakland landlord sign a new lease with subtenants while the original tenant’s lease is still active and has not been surrendered or terminated?

Does paying rent directly to the landlord automatically convert approved subtenants into direct tenants when the written sublease specifically required direct payment?

Can the landlord legally eliminate my tenancy without giving me notice or obtaining my written agreement?

Does Oakland Just Cause protection prevent the subtenants from being required to leave at the end of their fixed-term sublease?

Could the landlord’s actions constitute a wrongful eviction, breach of lease, or interference with my tenancy?

How can I protect and retrieve my personal property without violating the occupants’ rights?

Should I file something with Oakland’s Rent Adjustment Program, send a formal demand letter, or seek emergency court relief?

What type of attorney should I contact: tenant-side, landlord-side, wrongful eviction, or general real estate litigation?

I have preserved the master lease, landlord’s written subletting approval, signed sublease, emails, texts, and the occupants’ written notice denying me entry.

I would appreciate practical guidance, attorney recommendations in Oakland or Alameda County, and information from anyone who has dealt with a similar master-tenant dispute.