my son and his wife moved this weekend. They spend 14 hours scrubbing everything in their 2 bedroom apt because they were sure their landlord was coming through with a finetooth comb.
Of course he did. He told him that they had to return the apt back to like new condition because he had someone waiting to move in as soon as they moved out. My understanding was that your were to return it to the same condition that you rented in BUT normal wear and tear was expected. The landlord said he was too busy to clean and paint and that was their responcibility to have it ready for the next tenents to move right in. Is this realy the way it works? They have lived their for 3 and half years and he has been a pain in butt the whole time and realy they have been great tenents,always paid rent on time and took care of the place.
2007-06-05 09:27:46 · 14 answers · asked by grizleygal 2 in Business & Finance ➔ Renting & Real Estate
Out of my 15 years of experience I have never said that to any of my residents. The only time I had to say the resident had to paint was when they painted it special colors (forest green) At our company, we have a permission to decorate form which states the resident can paint it any color they desire, but they are responsible for painting back to the original color when they move out or pay our painter to do so.
It's up to the company or owner to get the new apartment ready for the next new resident. It is not your responsibility to paint if it is already the color it was before they moved in.
Normal wear and tear, most states require a full paint to the apartment if the residents had lived there for at least one year, painting is not up to the residents who are moving out, unless it is stated somewhere on the lease.
I would have your son first, read over the lease, and then I would contact your local attorney generals office to make sure this is correct. Then your son should call the manager and explain the details and expect full deposit back.
One more thing, always, take pictures of the place you move in to and out of so there is no disputes when you get the bill or refund.
I hope this helps.
Stacey
2007-06-05 09:41:45 · answer #1 · answered by Stacey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The tenants are required to leave the unit in reasonably clean condition... but it is the landlord's responsibility to make sure it is ready for the new tenants to move in, and that includes paint and repairs.
The tenants should make sure the unit is in the same condition they found it, less any normal wear and tear; if they can't or don't clean it to this level themselves, the landlord may use their deposit to have the place cleaned. Normal wear and tear, and new paint or carpets, however, should come out of the landlord's pocket, not their deposit.
You can try calling your city's housing department; there is usually a hotline for landlord-tenant disputes, but unless they're really upset by the landlord's unfairness it's probably not worth the effort to try and regain the deposit.
2007-06-05 09:37:37 · answer #2 · answered by teresathegreat 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Um sorry but your son's landlord is totally in the wrong to put that responsibility on them. Normal wear and tear is expected when people move in or or out. For them to put a new coat of paint on is NOT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY> they should leave the apartment in "broom swept" condition. If I were you I would have the landlord fdo a walk through inspection. Tenants are not responsbile for new paint (unless they changed the colors from the original coat) or a thorough cleaning, all the need to do is dispose of all items and trash. If the landlord wants them to have it in pristine condition tell him to hire a cleaning lady to scrub it down. It would be impossible for someone living there for 3 1/2 yrs to return it to "like new" condition esp since being there for that time period would ad normal wear and tear. seems like the landlord is being a scumbag by refusing to do an official inspection before they move out so he can make arrangements for the super to come in an fix an y repairs. have ur son take pictures upon the date that they move out in case he tries to keep any portion of the security this way he can sue and get the money back, good luck!
2007-06-05 09:46:54 · answer #3 · answered by spadezgurl22 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A tenant is responsible for turning the place back to the landlord in the same condition it was when rented, normal wear and tear excepted. If it was spotlessly clean, they would generally need to leave it that way. It the deterioration in the paint, carpets, flooring, etc. is just from normal wear and tear, that is the landlord's responsibility. 3 1/2 years in a unit makes for some pretty wide latitude on what is fair wear and tear.
The landlord should have pointed out anything that was not up to par at the final inspection. If your son didn't agree with the landlord's view, he should have annotated his objections on the final inspection form.
If the landlord is "too busy" to take care of normal wear and tear issues, that's his problem, not your son's. But from the sound of things, he may need to go to Small Claims Court to get his deposit back.
2007-06-05 09:37:59 · answer #4 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They should get their security deposit returned. If there are scuff marks on the walls from moving out, use some 409 or Fantastic, and they will disappear. The rest is normal wear and tear. They should contact the courts, maybe this landlord has a record of scamming tenants, and trying to get away with it. People want to move on, and he hopes they won't bother to keep looking back for the hundreds of dollars he wants to keep. Get the courts involved in mediation, so it doesn't cost money to get your security deposit returned. Legal aid has a housing department.
2007-06-05 09:58:35 · answer #5 · answered by Marissa Di 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Your assumptions are correct. However, the landlord is the one who determines if the place is left "in as good or better condition than when it was rented."
The landlord is not allowed to demand improvements in the premises. Only that it be returned in the same shape in which it was rented, less normal wear and tear. If your son expects to challenge this successfully, he would probably need pictures of the premises at move in time, as well as pictures of same at move out time.
2007-06-05 09:34:02 · answer #6 · answered by acermill 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Unless they damaged something they should get the whole deposit back. There would be very little wear in 3 years, not enough to be detected. The landlord has 21 days to return the deposit, this gives time to make sure they also piad the power, etc up to date when they left.
2007-06-05 09:34:16 · answer #7 · answered by Landlord 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
As a CPM (certified property manager) I can tell you that your son and daughter and law got hosed! Unless a resident has lived in the apartment less than 6 months it is mandatory that the apartment be painted at the expense of management. It is also the responsibility of management to clean the apartment after each and every resident has left ,again at management expense. If he is the owner than all you can do is complain to tenant services in your area. If he is just management i would contact the owners.
2007-06-05 09:49:24 · answer #8 · answered by GI 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Pit falls of renting. I think if the landlord they talked to was just a manager I'd try going over his head and making a case with the actual owners. Sorry to hear this but its just part of the game.
2007-06-05 09:38:11 · answer #9 · answered by Scott 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is the landlord's duty to paint in preparation for the next tenants. If he is a problem, go see your lawyer. We call them solicitors here in England but when a person is having problem with an individual or a company, a solicitor's letter is usually enough to resolve the dispute
2007-06-05 09:37:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋