My Small Claim Experience - Suing Landlord (Nice: 2013, apartment complex)

[too2sweet]

I just want to share my experience of the small claim court. I've gained so much from others contributing their stories to website like city-data, and I want to give back.

So, today I just went to a small claim court for the first time. I sued my former landlord for deducting half of my security deposit. The deposit was $850 security deposit + $50 key deposit. No problem with the move out, except I requested a check-out, but never received one. The landlord withheld $401 for cleaning up etc. I thought I had a good case because (1) the refund was returned late over 21 days as required by law, (2) no invoice breaking down labor and materials when I requested the invoice, what is shown on the invoice was more than what was charged and when I asked about the difference, the landlord told me that they were being nice and give me more than 50% discount. There are a few problems with the invoice, the address on the invoice does not exist. I have proof of this. I sued for the return of $401 + 2x the amount for bad faith.

So, the judge looked at my evidence asked only a few questions about how long I've been there, how much was witheld and how much was returned. He did not seem to consider the insonsistency on the invoices. He ignored my claim of bad faith. He did take some of the charges off. So, it seems he wants to give some to both sides so that the case will not come back to the court again. I don't think that he cared whether the invoice was fake. He only want to see whether I caused the damages as the landlord claim. He then try to give some money to both sides so that the case just end and don't come back into the system. So, I got about $230 back. and the landlord get to keep $171.

I am glad to went through it because I want to see how the system work. I have also gained some insight that it's not about justice. The philosophy behind his judgement it seems to stop the case from coming back. So, just so you guys know returning the deposit after 21 days, violation of 21-day rule, will not be considered as a valid reason. Bad faith will not be considered at all. So, if you want to fight I suggest you keep your strategies that you did not cause the damage because if there is no damage, they cannot charge. Take picture or clips comparing different places in the apartment. Remember! No damages, no charges.

[keitiiyeahyeah]

Thanks!

[munchitup]

Nice post, thanks for the info. There is a chance we may go to small claims over our deposit behind withheld (actually the landlord is trying to charge more on top of the deposit, which was very small at just 300 dollars for a 1400 dollar apartment) - but we have an ace in the hole... my wife is an attorney.

Interesting that the judge is more interested in keeping the case from coming back - but not very surprising.

[CALGUY]

The twenty one day rule is there for a reason, and if this particular judge did not consider it, he is most definitely in derelict of his duty to up hold the law.
All you would have to have done was show proof it was not mailed by the 21st.
The law as written states, landlords have twenty one days to return the deposit.
That does not mean you must receive it in twenty one days, just that the landlord must returned it within the time period.
A post mark showing when the deposit was mailed is all one would need to prove the deposit was returned in the time allowed.
California is one of the states that allows a claimant to collect twice the amount of the deposit if it is not returned in a timely manner.
Being a landlord, I make it a point to mail security deposits no later than the eighteenth of the month.
I don't think you should have settled for what you received, but the time to stipulate was before the judge made a decision.
At this point, you are out of gas.
Bob.

[jm1982]

You made the point that it's not about justice. I think that is the sad part of it all.

Also regarding these rules with mailing stuff or postmarking by a certain date and then having to prove stuff, it would be much easier if things were just done electronically it seems.

I heard recently that in Europe they use checks a lot less than we do. Our bank processing is a lot slower too.

[CALGUY]

I may have been a bit premature in my statement about you being out of gas.
You do have recourse in this matter, if you have proof that the security deposit was postmarked after the 21st.
You could file a formal complaint with the state bar association against the judge.
In the complaint, you would have to state the judge willfully ignored the 21 day stipulation by passing judgement before you were allowed to submit rebuttal evidence.
If it is found the judge acted improperly, the judgement may be thrown out, and a new trial ordered.
It all hinges on the postmark date on that envelope that contained the security deposit.
One other point.
If the check in question stipulated that signing and redeeming the amount stated is payment in full, then no other options are available , if you cashed, or deposited it to your bank account, then you have no recourse.
Bob.

[DariusOCR]

Originally Posted by jm1982

I heard recently that in Europe they use checks a lot less than we do. Our bank processing is a lot slower too.

Nobody uses checks in Europe anymore. It's stupid and inconvenient. Just like Fax (which I still see being used a lot in the US). I once asked for a cheque book at the bank just for the kick of it, and got the look (but she did give me one anyway, and I've never used it).

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by DariusOCR

Nobody uses checks in Europe anymore. It's stupid and inconvenient. Just like Fax (which I still see being used a lot in the US). I once asked for a cheque book at the bank just for the kick of it, and got the look (but she did give me one anyway, and I've never used it).

Yeah I think most people would be surprised to know this. I heard a whole thing about it on NPR Planet Money, our banking technology is out of date compared to Europe. Link below .

Episode 489: The Invisible Plumbing Of Our Economy : Planet Money : NPR

[Dunbar42]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Yeah I think most people would be surprised to know this.

My old apartment complex starting accepting electronic rent payments. But the fees were ridiculous, something $30-40 to pay your rent that way. I can understand fees for payment by credit card but it shouldn't cost that much just for an electronic bank transfer.

[jm1982]

wow $30-$40 is ridiculous. I've heard of people using Chase Quickpay to pay rent too.

Just one person has to have a Chase bank account I believe. It can be either the sender or receiver.

https://www.chase.com/online-banking/quickpay

And it's Free...