Landlord Deposit Help. (lease, tenants, law)

[bayarea-girl]

BennyPhoenix, if a tenant has followed the lease and paid as agreed up until the notice to terminate and or vacate premises. There is no where in any lease nor is it state law to withhold a tenant's deposit for any reason other than to collect on unpaid rent or damages. That is the law.

What would happen if you as the landlord would take a person to court for not paying the last month? Nothing, because you wouldn't do it because it is a waste of time and your money and because you know the judge will ask: what is the rent, how much deposit was put down, was the place damaged? If your answer is I have their deposit and the place was not damaged. Well guess what the deposit will be used in lieu of non-payment. You know this.

It is legal for the tenant to request and put in writing that they would like to use the deposit for the last month of rent. Otherwise, you as the landlord will have to pay that back then take the tenant to court which does not make sense.

Like I said, you sound like a greedy landlord. Different cities have their own laws too. So it also depends on ones jurisdiction. But there is something called logic as well. People check with your local renter's board for more information. But landlords are just NOT entitled to keep deposits and are often the case when tenants pay the last month of rent.

[BennyPhoenix]

Maybe I am not clear.
A normal landlord with a normal tenant and everything is OK when the tenant moves out and everybody is satisfied with any or all of the deposit being refunded, Then nothing happens.

But, if your lease does not state that the security deposit is to be used for last month's rent, and if you do not explicitly pay last month's rent, and the security deposit is not sufficient to pay the rent and compensate the landlord for any damage, then the tenant must pay. If the tenant does not pay then he can have a mark on his credit report for nonpayment of rent. This is the law, whether you like it or not.
There are plenty of myths that tenants believe. The second biggest one is that the security deposit pays for the last month rent. Unless the lease explicitly says so, you are responsible to pay last months rent and get the security deposit refunded as appropriate. This is not greed. This is an agreement that is clearly stated in a lease.
The biggest myth is that if rent is due on the 1st that the tenant has until the 3rd to pay without penalty.

[JustJulia]

I doubt the carpet shampoo charge is legit, unless you noticeably stained it. He can't charge for ordinary cleaning or ordinary wear and tear on the place. What I'd do is look through California Tenant Rights, write your landlord a letter that very clearly disputes all the charges you feel are incorrect, and tell him how much of your deposit you expect back. It sounds like he had a point about raising the rent for your girlfriend, but if he was supposed to notify you and didn't, that's his fault, not yours. Give him a clear, concise itemization of what you honestly believe is right, and tell him he has 30 days to give it to you under California law. (I don't know if the 30 days is from the date of your dispute or the date you left, though.)

[bayarea-girl]

If rent is due on the 1st then yes rent is due on the 1st. If there is a grace period stated in lease where a tenant can pay rent by the 3rd or the 5th of the month without penalty then no late fees should accrue. No myth.

You didn't answer my question. If you have a deposit and the tenant didn't pay the last month of rent what will you do?

Not to give you a hard time I have been a renter and I have worked for a property management company that is funded by the city of San Francisco and I had to deal with a lot of tenant boards. So I know the deal.

[BennyPhoenix]

If the deposit squares the tenant with me, I am satisfied.
But The reason I stated that nonpayment of last months rent explicitly, not through your security deposit, gives the landlord the ability to put a mark on your credit report is so people will be aware of this. The tenant might think he is square with the landlord but the landlord finds some issues and deducts it from the deposit and the tenant doesn't find out till a few weeks later.
If you were in property management then you are well aware that too many tenants do not treat their rentals like a business deal. They think they can play games, fudge this and fudge that. They dont approach things as they would with a credit card contract(for example). Few tenants know that nonpayment of rent is grounds for a negative credit report. I even include that in my lease agreements so that they are aware of it. I dont want secrets with my tenants, I dont want surprises with them either. I even welcome prospective tenants to talk to my current tenants. The best way to prevent problems is by being up front from the outset.

[BennyPhoenix]

A shampoo charge and repainting charge is legitimate in all cases where the tenancy is less than 1 year. Over 1 year the charges are prorated by different amounts depending on the City and length of tenancy.

[JustJulia]

I went back to the original post to see how long the OP had rented the room, because it sounded like at least a year to me, and I noticed he posted back in September 2007. I think the advice is moot now.

[bayarea-girl]

BennyPhoenix, the only way in which a landlord can put anything on a credit report is if the landlord filed a judgement against the tenant. Even if the tenant didn't pay the last month of rent and you had the deposit, you would still have to take the tenant to court for it to appear on their credit profile. If you belong to an state or national organization where you fill out information about a tenant, then that is where most of the information will appear. I doubt that you take people to court for the last month rent.

Painting or shampooing is not a legitmate charge unless walls or carpet were severly damaged and a repair or replacement was needed, the period of time being less than or over 1 year of occupancy doesn't matter.

[BennyPhoenix]

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

Painting or shampooing is not a legitmate charge unless walls or carpet were severly damaged and a repair or replacement was needed, the period of time being less than or over 1 year of occupancy doesn't matter.

Even the anti-landlord Los Angeles housing dept allows Landlords to charge this for tenancies under 1 year. This is also something I clearly state in the lease for tenants that choose to cut the lease short.
I dont know about SF.

[bayarea-girl]

If you have a cleaning fee and such items listed as possible charges in your lease no problem. LA & SF are very similar (not the same but similar).