Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you wait until they have had a chance to establish themselves and are probably considering or about to buy their first home and then threaten to damage their credit if they don't pay up?
I'm a little confused as to the logic of waiting for years to actually file a lawsuit. When a judgement is rendered it stays on the record until the debt is discharged. It seems to me a little counterproductive to hang on to all the evidence for years when it would seem more logical to get it over and done with while everything is fresh.
I would lawyer up very fast. This is not something to mess around with.
There is no need to go lawyering up yet, though speaking with one would not be a horrible idea.
The first step is to send the debt collector a certified, return receipt requested letter demanding validation of the alleged debt. This is your right under the Fair Debt Collections Practice Act. Doing so within 30 days of your receipt of the letter preserves some important legal rights for you, including the most important one of making the debt collector cease collection activity until they comply with the demand for validation.
Do that first, see what they come back with. Update us and we'll advise you from there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by STT Resident
I'm a little confused as to the logic of waiting for years to actually file a lawsuit. When a judgement is rendered it stays on the record until the debt is discharged. It seems to me a little counterproductive to hang on to all the evidence for years when it would seem more logical to get it over and done with while everything is fresh.
Judgements (generally) stay on credit reports for only 7 years, the same as most other forms of negative entries.
Judgements (generally) stay on credit reports for only 7 years, the same as most other forms of negative entries.
OK, that I understand but even if the credit report drops it after 7 years, surely the judgement itself doesn't disappear? That's what I'm confused about. I've just never heard of anyone waiting 2-3 years to file a suit in this sort of small claims scenario and can't see the rationale.
OK, that I understand but even if the credit report drops it after 7 years, surely the judgement itself doesn't disappear? That's what I'm confused about. I've just never heard of anyone waiting 2-3 years to file a suit in this sort of small claims scenario and can't see the rationale.
It depends, really. The statute of limitations for enforcing a judgement vary by state, some of them are longer and some can be pretty short. There are some situations, like the potential defendant being in a bad financial situation, where waiting to file the lawsuit could be a wise tactical decision.
It depends, really. The statute of limitations for enforcing a judgement vary by state, some of them are longer and some can be pretty short. There are some situations, like the potential defendant being in a bad financial situation, where waiting to file the lawsuit could be a wise tactical decision.
Satman40 is apparently in Indiana where the statute of limitations to obtain a judgement is 10 years. After the initial 10 year period has elapsed and the judgement remains unpaid, the plaintiff can obtain a further judgement of 10 years. I would say that within 10 years of a judgement being issued there's a pretty good chance of obtaining the judgement through wage garnishment and/or seizure of assets. Just curious and it would be interesting to hear from satman40 on the subject.
I don't believe you are correct. The return of the security deposit in full settled any question of damages. A LL cannot reinvent the wheel and sue the tenant for damages once the deposit has been returned. This is precisely why there is a time limit imposed upon the LL (depending on the state, usually 21-30 days) which period gives him the time to document any damages and itemize them accordingly.
I agree with STT and it appears that the Illinois Legal Aid does also.
When do I get my security deposit back? Under Illinois law, for buildings with 5 or more apartments (and under Chicago's Residential Landlord Tenant Ordinance) your landlord must send you a list of damages and the cost to fix the damages within 30 days after you move out to keep the deposit. If your landlord does not claim that you damaged the apartment, he must return your security deposit within 45 days after you move out. If your landlord claims that you damaged the apartment, but fails to give you a written statement of the damages, then he must still return your security deposit in full within 45 days.
Under Illinois law, for buildings with 4 or fewer apartments, your landlord does not have to give you a written statement of damages if he wants to deduct repair costs from your security deposit. Your landlord must only return your security deposit within a reasonable amount of time. Click on the title below for more information about how to get your security deposit back.
To my mind and probably the courts, the landlords return of the security deposit signifies that there were no damages and the landlord is not entitled to receive any damages in the future. I seriously doubt the courts are going to look favorably upon a landlord who does not provide a list of damages in a timely manner, returns the deposit then wastes the courts time in a law suit to recover damages at a later date. If the carpet was damaged so badly that it needed to be replaced, it certainly should not take the landlord more then 30 days to realize that and send the required notice to the tenant.
Plus the landlord is going to have to prove that the carpet was damaged beyond normal wear and tear. I hope the OP took photos of the condition it was in when he moved out. I would certainly not willingly pay the landlord
I don't believe you are correct. The return of the security deposit in full settled any question of damages. A LL cannot reinvent the wheel and sue the tenant for damages once the deposit has been returned. This is precisely why there is a time limit imposed upon the LL (depending on the state, usually 21-30 days) which period gives him the time to document any damages and itemize them accordingly.
I know this is an old post, but I do need to clarify the conversation. Many states do allow a landlord to recoup expenses to fix damages done by a tenant, even after the security deposit has been returned and the statutory time limit for the return of the deposit has past.
The general principals used in those states that do allow it are:
1. The damages had to be concealed and the concealment had to be at the hands of the tenant.
2. The damages could not have been discovered during the course of a normal vacant premise inspection.
3. The damages must constitute a 'must correct'.
4. The landlord must notify tenant within the same period of time, manner and process used for normal security deposit returns.
5. If the tenant refuses, fails to pay, does not respond, or disputes the charges, the landlord is required to obtain a civil court judgment before commencing any collection.
Most states have set time periods from 120 days up to 3 years for discovery.
If a landlord discovers a hidden concealed damage by a tenant, they need to send notice the same as they would within the security deposit period and cannot go to collections or anything else until a court tells them they can. It should be noted that in most cases, the proof is set very high. The landlord must prove that a specific tenant did the damage and that they concealed the damages specifically to defraud the landlord, that the damages as of the type that MUST be repaired, and that the damages were so concealed to be undetectable during an inspection. Once again, if the damages could have been detected during an inspection within the normal security deposit return time frame, the landlord forfeits any chance of collecting.
In this case the OP is talking about carpet. There is no reasonable circumstance where a LL/PM would not discover the carpet needing to be fully replaced before 30 days has passed. This would be the case if the LL/PM is just plain lazy or trying to pull a fast one. You can pretty much look at carpet and tell if it needs to be replaced (with enough experience).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
