ISSUE:

I (renter) am being sued tomorrow by my previous landlord for $4000 in property damages, the majority pf which being a $2000 charge for "updating the paint".

BACKGROUND:

We originally signed a lease with Management company A and after renewal for the second year they transferred management to Company B. Company B is the one now suing us for the damages.

We responded within the required 7 days in writing letting company B know we do not believe they used our inventory checklist as most of the damages were listed on the checklist and the rest such as "updating entire unit with paint," were expected wear/tear after a two year residency. This move in checklist was submitted to company A upon lease commencement.

Company B then responded stating they never got our checklist from Company A when the property was transferred to them and it is not their responsibility to make sure it is on file.

We eventually acquired the checklist for them from company and after presenting it they offered to $1,000 off the bill but would not give us a breakdown of which damages it applied to.

QUESTIONS:

Company B did notify us in writing within 30 days about the damages, however did not commence an action in a court of competent jurisdiction for a money judgment until 90 days after termination of the occupancy. They also have not returned our security deposit

554.613 Sec. 13.

within 45 days after termination of the occupancy and not thereafter the landlord may

commence an action in a court of competent jurisdiction for a money judgment for damages which he has

claimed or in lieu thereof return the balance of the security deposit held by him to the tenant or any amount

mutually agreed upon in writing by the parties. A landlord shall not be entitled to retain any portion of a

security deposit for damages claimed unless he has first obtained a money judgment for the disputed amount

or filed with the court satisfactory proof of an inability to obtain service on the tenant.

Would this be worth mentioning in court?

Additionally LANDLORD AND TENANT RELATIONSHIPS (EXCERPT)

Act 348 of 1972 further states we are entitled to to request and receive a copy

of the last termination inventory checklist which shows what claims were chargeable to the last prior

Guess you will be finding out.

I would be a great deal more concerned about how this is going to impact your future as a tenant over the money. As it stands today, I would absolutely not rent to you ever.

If you come off half cocked in front of the judge, you may never get another apartment. You are betting against the future of databases.

I use a life span of five years for paint and not the two that you are suggesting. Are you willing to bet that the judge you have paints his house every two years? Perhaps he doubles his robe as painters coveralls?

And, what is the other $2K for?

It sounds like you must have really beat the place up for two years.

Hopefully this experience will teach you to

1) return a rental property in the same condition it was in when you took possession.

2) Keep YOUR copy of all documentation.

Ray is right about this making it difficult to rent another home. Be thankful they did not file on you before you were approved for wherever you now live. Take really good care of that place, be a good neighbor, cooperate with management, and of course always pay your rent on time - so you can stay there as long as possible.

Most landlords with "Nice" homes do thorough screening - and won't take you.

There are some who will take you with an eviction filing on your record, but probably not the nicest place.

Not a judge or an attorney, but guessing from what you stated and quoted.

First off, thank you for sharing your side of this type of experience as we can all learn from it.

Second, thank you for the detailed description.

This is certainly representative of how things can get messed up when things change hands.

It sounds as if you have a move-in checklist from company A now, have shown it to company B, and company be acknowledged that part of the damages was pre-existing. They figured a $1,000 credit for that.

How long has it been from that time until now?

Most likely the company B did not commence an action in court for a money judgement as they were giving you an opportunity to make payment first. Since you failed to make any payment, as I presume you don't think you owe anything, then they filled in court.

If I am not mistaken, given the credit, due to your evidence of pre-existing damage, the bill is now down to $3000.

As far as the paint goes, a unit should not have to be repainted after only 2 years, however, it seems that you acknowledged that it needs painted. This leads us to believe that your family has been a little rough on the place. With that being the case, you would owe the $2000 stated for repainting the unit.

As far as the other $1000 goes, it again appears, from what you stated, that there are damages beyond the move-in checklist. That would make this your bill. IMO

The checklist thing should have been brought up at move-out.

So, at this point we can be fairly sure that you will owe the $3000. However, it appears that a court date is already in place for tomorrow. This would mean that you already will have this much on your rental record. Given this is the fact, this leaves you with 2 choices, as far as I can see. You can talk with company B's attorney tomorrow before meeting the judge, and come to an agreement as to what you owe and what payment options, they will give you, or you can stand in front of the judge, present your evidence, and see what the judge says.

Regardless of which option you chose, be sure to pay anything that you owe, which may now include court cost and attorney fees. If you don't, things will only get worse. If you do, even though you may have a judgment on your rental history, it will at least look a little better that you acknowledged the debt and have paid it.

Hopefully this helps you think through it and learn from the experience. This will be better in your future for both you and landlords.

Hey guys appreciate the responses butI feel as if some of you may be misunderstanding my circumstances. Perhaps I did not adequately explain. Ray-N-PA, I did not paint the house without the landlords permission. The land lord is charging us $2,000 for him to update the paint, additionally we did not get evicted from the residence we moved out with a perfectly paid ledger.

As far as updating the paint — no I do not believe the paint should be updated after 2 years, however when we moved In the house did not have a fresh coat of paint and the landlord does not have any information as to when the last paint job was done so for all we know it could’ve been painted 5 years or more ago.

Essentially, my main issue is that the company B does not know what the condition of the house was before we moved in as they have no documentation from previous tenants inventory checklist and company A seems to be a bit mismanaged as they are not able to provide any documentation for when the house was last painted. Essentially company B is trying to get us to pay for updating the entire house without knowing the condition prior.

Additionally our inventory checklist list smudges / nail holes as well as bad paint job / quality in the home during our move in.

My screening would prevent you from living in any of our units if you owe a previous landlord ANY money - EVER. It doesn't matter how much. If you elect to fight it, win or lose, you will make yourself even less desirable for even more future landlords.

I would encourage you to get this matter settled before you see the judge. Someone has owed someone money, but has paid it is viewed as trainable. I am retired military and trainability is a positive item. Most would view this matter as you trying to avoid responsibility and accountability. Avoiding responsibility doesn't make me want to do business with you.

A great question to ask yourself before your hearing, what do you think you owe the management company. A long with trainability, honesty and a deep self reflection will take you far not only with this matter but in life. Make no doubt about it though, today will be shaping your future for years to come. And you are finding yourself asking strangers for assistance. Please think and act with your brain and not your emotions - especially if you are backed into a corner.

"no I do not believe the paint should be updated after 2 years, however when we moved In the house did not have a fresh coat of paint and the landlord does not have any information as to when the last paint job was done so for all we know it could’ve been painted 5 years or more ago."

Most paint, even the low-grade Wal-Mart stuff, carries a 10 year warranty and should last up to 15 years if you're taking care of it properly. Scuffs, dings, scratched, marks, holes, etc are not "normal wear and tear."

EXAMPLE:

Wear and tear: walking on a carpet. That cannot be avoided because carpet covers the floor and you must walk over it.

Damage: Nailing picture hangers into a wall damages the surface. It is not necessary to nail pictures on a wall. Pictures can be placed on shelving. Likewise, having the bed up against the wall will leave that tell-tale scuff / grime mark where dirty pillows cases rest against the painted surface instead of a headboard.... again, that is damage because a headboard would prevent the scuff. And yes, pillow cases get dirty. All that oil from our hair gets on it, and smudges the wall if pressed up against it.

Tenants often have a misguided sense of what "normal wear and tear is." Here's my lease language that all tenants agree to:

"Wear and Tear: TENANT agrees that DIRT, DUST, FILTH, GREASE, GRIME, SMUDGES, ANIMAL HAIR, HUMAN HAIR, DINGS, HOLES, STAINS, SCRATCHES, TEARS, CRACKS, CHIPS, BURNS, AND BREAKAGE are not normal usage and will be billed as cleaning and/or damages."

Applying that thinking to your unit move-out condition may help reveal why the charges are what they are.

OP, after your further explanation I think you may have a case. I don't know, I'm not a lawyer and my natural inclination is to believe the landlord because I deal so much with lying tenants (sad but true.)

However my own son had the same thing happen to him: Big Company A owns complex. There was an issue with the upstairs apartment's water heater, it not only ruined that apartment but ruined the ceiling in my son's, the floor beneath and their furniture too. No renter's insurance so they were out that but damage to ceiling was repaired. Carpet and floor was not.

Complex is sold, Company B has no records of the leak, the repairs, nothing, and charged my son with the replacement of the carpet in the entire unit when he moved out. To fight it would have required more money than he would have saved (he no longer lived in that state, etc.)

To my fellow investors on this Board: realize that the Big Guys are different from you and me. They are a conglomerate somewhere who rely on their minimum wage flunkies to run the office and keep the records. Knowing what we do about the quality of help these days, do we always believe those people?

Even I have listened to court cases where a new management company never got the info from the old one.

You left out an important piece of information. Did you provide a forwarding address within 4 days of move out? If not, you might lose some of those legal advantages you are counting on.

UPDATE:

Yes we did provide the forwarding address during move out.

We had the hearing today and I would like to inform everyone we actually won! The management companies argument was they did not use the inventory checklist, even after we provided it because they believed we “fabricated it”.

After providing proof that we did send the checklist to company A on lease commencement the case was dismissed with prejudice as company B did not know the condition of the property and company A failed to provide them sufficient information to that regard.

Joseph, thank you very much for your time to give us more information and for the update. This is very helpful for all of us, as I suspected it would be.

Given the further information you gave, we should all see that you indeed did have proof of things being different. Doesn't mean that anyone isn't at fault for some damage, but we can now tell that you rented the place in not the best of conditions.

What has this taught you for your future renting endeavors?

Congratulations on your success, as I believe you may have well been in the right here to dispute the charges.

To everyone, I believe this tenant was smart in asking LL's and not tenants for advice. Although, this is a LL forum, and there will be some bias, this was a good resource for more accurate information. This was a good learning tool for all of us. I think WMH is right. Given the bias that there would be, some tend to jump to conclusions a little too quick. We all know that not all LL's are perfect either. It is likely that Company A was not a good LL. There is a place near my rental, that is listed for rent. I looked through the windows and it was a disaster. Even the outside was a wreck, and yet it was listed for more than mine.

This is where I see some flaws in the process. A person should have a right to defend their position if they are being done wrong. Shouldn't this apply to both sides?

Put your bias and quick judgements aside right now and think about this. If you were a tenant, rented a property with a few character flaws, then later the property changed hands, when you moved-out, you were charged for things that were not your fault, let's use WMH's examples, and this was thousands of dollars, do you think that you have a right to defend yourself, or should you just take it?

You are LL's for a reason, you would defend yourself. So, in defending yourself, should you have a bad reference?

If the shoe was on the other foot, how would you have handled this situation?

Exactly 6x6.

This highlights he importance of having a signed estoppel sheet when ever an occupied rental sells. Deposits, appliance ownership, rents paid and damages are all time bombs for the buyer, seller and especially the tenant.

The signatures should be by all three parties.

Absolutely glad you got the outcome that you did, as things can last a life time. It is my hope, that after tempers calm - you can ask the new management company if perhaps they left you out of the estoppel paperwork. I am inclined to believe that there wasn't such a letter as that would have clearly showed the list of damages that you acknowledged, what your deposit is, who owns that frig in your place and to what day rent is paid up to. All important things that the customer should acknowledge.