|
|
 |
Page Options |
 |
|
| CASE CLOSED |
FORCE REQUIRED |
May 5, 2014 |
Upload File
Upload Image
Contact Agent
| RENTAL DETAILS |
Address :
City, State - Zip : , - . |
| COMPLAINT DETAILS (from renter) |
|
Dear Marco,
It has come to our attention that there were some major deductions from our security deposit. One being $400 for painting, the other being $120 for cleaning. I believe there has been a mistake, as these deductions are not legal.
California Civil Code Section 1950.5 only permits a landlord to use a tenant's security deposit to pay for the costs of: (1) unpaid rent; (2) cleaning the rental unit after you vacate (but only to what it was before you moved in); (3) repairing damage caused by the tenant that goes beyond normal wear and tear; and (4) if provided in the lease, replacing keys, laundry cards, garage openers, etc.
"If a tenant returns the rental in substantially the same condition in which it was rented (less reasonable wear and tear), the landlord must return the entire security deposit. A landlord cannot deduct for painting, or steam cleaning, or replacing the carpets, unless there was serious damage. The landlord is allowed to deduct the cost of cleaning if necessary, but only if necessary to put the rental unit back to the same level of cleanliness it was in at the time the property was leased." California Civil Code Section 1950.5
It is my belief that we should receive the deposit back in full. First, there is no serious damage to the walls beyond normal wear and tear. Therefore, we should not be charged for painting. I also believe we should not be charged for cleaning. First, we do not have carpet so there is no need to charge us for carpet cleaning. Second, the law states that we can only be charged for cleaning if the apartment was dirtier when we moved out than when we moved in. On our move in date, the apartment was nowhere near ready to move into. We were paying rent and the walls were still being painted, several of our appliances were not in working order, the showers were not ready for use, there were items left on the balcony from previous tenants, the refrigerator shelves were broken and the inside was filthy, the floors were filthy as the hardwood floors had just been put in. We had to clean the apartment ourselves when we moved in, and also cleaned when we moved out. The apartment was actually cleaner when we moved out than when we moved in. Therefore, we should receive the security deposit back in its entirety.
|
| INVESTIGATING AGENT - REMARKS (15) |
| Agent |
Date |
Response |
| SYSTEM |
May 5, 2014 |
FORCE REQUIRED! After repeated attempts to resolve this complaint; management has FAILED to comply and requires force. The RPA has taken all reasonable efforts to contact the Landlord / Manager. They have REFUSED all request and will require FORCE. This case is closed with a negative disposition. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 20, 2013 |
LANDLORD RESPONSE PAST DUE: The Landlord has failed to respond to the complaint by: October 19, 2013 .The Landlord will be provided a grace period of 3 additional days to respond. CASE IS PENDING LANDLORD RESPONSE. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 20, 2013 |
PAST DUE RESPONSE: The Landlord or Manger has FAILED to respond by the deadline set within the complaint notice. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 19, 2013 |
EMAIL TO LANDLORD: The RPA has sent an email reminder to Marko Gaspar in request for an immediate response to the complaint. Pending Landlord/ Manager Response. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 19, 2013 |
PENDING LANDLORD RESPONSE: The complaint case is still pending a response from the Landlord or Manager. The landlord has been requested to respond by end of the day. Case pending update from the landlord or manager. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 12, 2013 |
Delivery Estimate: The complaint notice sent to Marko Gaspar 23-3121 Los Angeles, California should have arrived or will arrive within 24 hours. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 12, 2013 |
PENDING LANDLORD RESPONSE: The landlord or manager have been provided with the following response deadline: October 18, 2013
This deadline provides a reasonable time frame of 3 days for delivery of written notice and 3 days to respond to case # 23-3121 as outlined in the mailed notice. THIS CASE IS PENDING RESPONSE FROM LANDLORD OR MANAGER.
|
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 12, 2013 |
LANDLORD / MANAGER MAILING: Complaint Notice is being delivered to:
Marko Gaspar
403 Landfair Ave. (Managers Office) Los Angeles, California 90024
USPS Mail center has confirmed acceptance of the complaint notice parcel and provided confirmation ID: 42074580 |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 12, 2013 |
MAIL CONFIRMATION: The complaint notice has been processed and is currently in route for 23-3121. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 12, 2013 |
COMPLAINT NOTICE PRINTED: The complaint notice has been successfully transferred to the nearest mailing center and is pending mailing confirmation. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 12, 2013 |
Complaint Accepted by RPA and is pending further processing. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 11, 2013 |
The RPA server has sent an initial email complaint notice to Marko Gaspar Sierra Apartments concerning the Complaint filed by the tenant: Security Deposit Refund -- Illegal Deductions. The email address was provided by the tenant at the time of filing. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 11, 2013 |
An email confirmation was sent to the tenant at 10-11-2013 21:34:10. The email included a confirmation of the complaint filing, case number, and pin. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 11, 2013 |
CONFIRMATION OF COMPLAINT: A complaint about Security Deposit Refund -- Illegal Deductions has been filed pertaining to 23-3121 or Marko Gaspar located in Los Angeles, California 90024. Case is pending mailing confirmation. |
|
| SYSTEM |
Oct 11, 2013 |
Complaint 23-3121 has been filed and is in queue for further processing. Pending further updates and confirmation of mailing. |
|
|
|