Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
Security deposit
On June 19, 1990, I entered into a ''Standard Rent Agreement'' on a form prepared by the Apartment Association, California Southern Cities, which provides that the owner must furnish the itemized statement required by Civil Code Sec. 1950.5 within 14 days after the tenant vacates. I vacated on November 14, 2001. The owner mailed a statement to me on December 11, 2001, over three weeks after I vacated. Is there any case law stating that under such circumstances the owner has lost any right she might otherwise have had to retain any part of the security deposit?
2 Answers from Attorneys
Re: Security deposit
I read Civil Code section 1950.5 and a couple landlord-tenant law books and did not find any provision terminating a landlord's right to retain a portion of the security deposit if he exceeds the permissible 21 days. What I did find are provisions, at CC 1950.5(k), making the landlord liable for actual damages, plus up to $600 statutory damages for holding a deposit in bad faith. The law means subjective bad faith, i.e. the landlord held the deposit with a bad motive. Therefore, my guess would be that the landlord, if acting in good faith from his perspective, is liable to you only for your actual damages, probably amounting only to legal interest on the refundable portion of your deposit. I could be wrong, but I did open a book and read the statute.
Re: Security deposit
A landlord, by statute, must return the security deposit with an itemized list of deductions within 3 weeks. Failure to do so terminates his right to deduct damages from the deposit, but it does not forfeit his right to collect any damages from the tenant.
So, he technically lost the right to deduct, but still has the right to sue you for damages.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
