What demonstrates "bad faith" when it comes to security deposits?

Question

We live in California. We paid a $1,400 deposit on a house. When we left, there were *some* issues, but it wasn't horrible.

We got a letter from the property management company stating we would not get any of our deposit back, because the whole house needed reflooring, which totaled over $2,500. There was a rip in one small section of the carpet, and a stain on one part of the linoleum - not enough to justify replacing all flooring throughout the entire house. They didn't ask for us to pay the difference, only that they would keep the entire deposit to help pay for the costs.
Attached to the letter was an invoice from the Home Depot for the $2,500 in flooring. However, it was for stone flooring (before it was cheap carpeting and cheaper linoleum), quoted and paid for two and a half weeks before we moved out. The maximum amount of time allowed to do a pre-move out walkthrough is two weeks before move out.

Does this clearly enough demonstrate "bad faith", and could we win a case in small claims court?

Also, they claim we left the house "filthy" and the yard "damaged", but didn't include any invoices or receipts detailing those costs.

Answer 1

The standard is "like kind and quality" when it comes to replacing something that's been damaged.

When it comes to flooring you need to keep in mind that these materials often fade over time. Not enough to warrant replacement BUT if there is damage it may be necessary to repalce the whole system to make it match properly. For this reason it may well be necessary to repalce an entire room of carpeting or replace the lino in a kitchen or bathroom completely even though the damaged area is small.

Replacing lino with stone or carpet with wood flooring doesn't cut it. The landlord is only entitled to reimbursement for the replacement cost of like kind and quality of the materials that were damaged by the tenant. If they wish to upgrade the materials that's fine, they just have to pay the additional cost themselves.

I was a landlord for a number of years and often would upgrade when a tenant damaged carpeting or lino but always got quotes on repairs for the damage that they were responsible for and paid the excess myself. That's as it should be.

The best way to protect yourself from claims of excess wear and tear is to perform a joint inspection on move-in and move-out. I insisted upon it, and would not hand over the keys without it. If a tenant refused to do a joint move-out inspection, my lease had a clause that stipulated that they gave up any right to contest my inspection or any charges for damages. Only one or two ever failed to show for the inspection, and they left the place spotless so it was a moot point.

As a tenant, you should INSIST upon a joint inspection at move out or DEMAND that the landlord waive any and all damage claims before handing over the keys. I have done that a couple of times as a tenant with great success. If a dodgy landlord knows that you mean business, they won't try and give you the short shrift.

Since the damage was to carpet and lino and they're trying to upgrade it (DUMB of them to give you evidence for your side!) then you should do OK in Small Claims Court either when you sue for the balance of your deposit or defend yourself against excess charges for an upgrade.

Answer 2

It does sound like the PM is trying to pull a fast one.


I agree with the answer regarding like kind and quality but also want to point out another very important issue here, depreciated value.

Your landlord can only charge your for the depreciated value of the damaged linoleum or carpeting.

As an example:
If the linoleum has a 10 year life expectancy and it is 5 years old, you can only be charged for 50% of the cost of new linoleum.
If it's 1 year old = 90% of the cost, 9 years old = 10% of the cost.

It's the same with carpeting.

Dispute the charges and demand a full return. If the landlord does not reply or issue your refund, sue him in Small Claims court and let the judge decide.

Answer 3

Not enough info., so I guess, no. "Some issues" as defined by a tenant usually means "damage beyond ordinary wear and tear" to a landlord or property owner. You can fight it out in small claims court if you want, but how do you propose they should have repaired the carpet (rips and stains are not wear and tear)? usually most of or the whole thing has to be replaced, and they obviously wanted to upgrade at the same time.

that said, they may (or may not have) cut some corners or missed a step or two they should have taken - e.g., did they notify you of and do the walk through; need to attach receipts for clean-up (seems they may not have bothered because they didn't want to bother suing you and believed the carpet issue already covered your sec deposit).

You say the estimates for the floor were before the walk out, but did they already know the condition of the carpet? Perhaps they were thinking of upgrading anyway, before they knew of the damage (in which case it would have been all on their dime)?

Answer 4

Take them to small claims court. Bring with you the contract you signed showing the last day you rented. Bring your pictures. If you are lucky they will not show up. Then you get a default judgment!