Better check your state law. Try under Offsets to Security Deposit.

For example, CA law says Landlord may (only) deduct

"The repair of damages to the premises, exclusive of ordinary wear and tear, caused by the tenant or by a guest or licensee of the tenant."

In CA, you would have to PROVE that the damage was caused "by the tenant or by a guest or licensee of the tenant".

My lease says the tenant is responsible for all broken glass, no matter if caused by tenant, tenant's guest, or 3rd part on the premises without tenant's permission.

"Someone broke the window" is usually code for, "I / my buddy got locked out and decided to break in rather than pay for a locksmith." Or occasionally "My ex-fiance came back for drugs and/or money while I was gone."

People don't just randomly smash windows. They're after something.

Just for kicks, find out was the glass shattered inward or outward? If shattered outward, you know the tenant did it from the inside. If shattered inward, there should have been a rock, a stick, a baseball, a brick or something else, which would be on the police report. If police found nothing... I guess it just magically broke or someone who threw the item into the window jumped inside, avoiding cutting themselves on the glass, removed the item, took nothing else from the tenant, and left. (*wink)

Selections from my rental agreement:

Tenant will be responsible for all damages caused by him and/or other people, invited or uninvited. All glass breakage is the responsibility of Tenant. (Example: the neighbor’s baseball breaks your window. Tenant is responsible to pay for the repair then settle up with the baseball player.) Landlord is not responsible to determine who or what caused any damage.

and

If state law requires proof of tenant complicity (and maybe even if its not explicit in the code) then the contract would not apply and might even be dismissed as unenforceable in its entirety.

A judge is likely to look to the requirements for SD to resolve this matter, since both circumstances require that tenant pay, the differ only in whether tenant pays now or he declines to pay in favor of later collection by deduction from deposit. It would not be good law to have two different interpretations of requirements of tenant liability for damage.

If it is extremely obvious the tenant did it, then tenant responsibility. If it’s not Positively determinable it’s the landlord responsibility.

"If it is extremely obvious the tenant did it, then tenant responsibility. If it’s not Positively determinable it’s the landlord responsibility.

Since they filed a PD report, I would believe it was caused by others."

Obvious appearance and Tenant reports have nothing to do with this.

If you take money from the tenant and he takes the matter to court saying, "I" didn't do it", then it all depends on if the Judge asks you, "What makes you think that the tenant did it?"

Yes, but if the law says that tenant is responsible for damage DONE BY HIM, then it doesn't matter what the lease says.

I had a front apartment (with bars on the outside) facing the street get broken. My building is up on a raised hill from the sidewalk and setback. There is almost no way that a ball made it's way and broke the window from the exterior. On the other hand, this tenant has three kids ages 3 to 10 who play ball inside, against my wishes and as stated in the lease.

So I told the parents that if they provide me with $25, I will purchase a sheet of glass and install it at no additional expense. They refused to pay the $20, not even at $5 per month for 5 months.

SO I called a glass company and they came and fixed the window, replacing the broken glass. Cost $140. I paid by check.

Then I sent my tenants a demand letter for the $140. They responded they thought I was only going to charge them $25 for the glass. I wrote back, yes, had they "Paid" they $25, but refused.

"as the owner, I can not charge for my labor, only the part!"

Robert, thats nonsense.

In CA at least, you have NO DIFFICULTY AT ALL for landlord to charge for his labor.

In fact, California Civil Code 1950.5 specifically says:

"The landlord may claim of the security only those amounts as are reasonably necessary for the purposes specified in subdivision (b)."

and subdivision (b) includes

"The repair of damages to the premises, exclusive of ordinary wear and tear, caused by the tenant or by a guest or licensee of the tenant."

So, landlord is authorized by CCC 1950.5 to claim repair of damages caused by the tenant without any further restriction.

CCC 1950.5 further says that the landlord must furnish an itemized statement indicating the basis for, and the amount of, any security received and the disposition of the security, and that

"Along with the itemized statement, the landlord shall also include copies of documents showing charges incurred and deducted by the landlord to repair or clean the premises, as follows:

(A) If the landlord or landlord’s employee did the work, the itemized statement shall reasonably describe the work performed. The itemized statement shall include the time spent and the reasonable hourly rate charged."

So CCC 1950.5 SPECIFICALLY authorizes landlord to charge for LANDLORD's OR LANDLORD's EMPLOYEE's labor in addition to parts.

I disbelieve that any CA judge told you that you cannot charge for your labor in repair of damage.

Do you require your tenant to have renters insurance?