• Go to page :
  • 12 3
  • Text Only
saladdin said:   atikovi said:   FinancialAnalyst said:   In this case, OP hit a building with a truck.

NO, he SCRAPED a building. Pictures were posted earlier but have been removed for some reason.

PS, I have to go in for jury duty tomorrow. If I was deliberating this case, I'd give the landlord no more than a few hundred without a verifiable written invoice from a licensed contractor.


Thanks Matlock.



Now he needs to look up "summary judgement" and see why this would never hit a jury. Courts do not have time to waste on this kind of crap where OP is clearly at fault.

Fault isn't the issue, OP admits he did it. It's the damages that are in question.

atikovi said:   Fault isn't the issue, OP admits he did it. It's the damages that are in question.

and as long as LL has met the letter of the law, damages will be awarded as a part of that summary judgement. There is no debate on that or the deposit's usage for a partial payment of the damages that the OP did.

Mickie3 said:   There is no debate on that or the deposit's usage for a partial payment of the damages that the OP did.

That's debatable. That the deposit can be used toward damage not specifically within OP's apartment. If OP's truck had hit the landlord's car, could the deposit go towards that damage?

atikovi said:   Mickie3 said:   There is no debate on that or the deposit's usage for a partial payment of the damages that the OP did.

That's debatable. That the deposit can be used toward damage not specifically within OP's apartment. If OP's truck had hit the landlord's car, could the deposit go towards that damage?



Read the referenced law, it can go towards damages. Do you really want to argue that you could decimate the exterior of an apartment building and your deposit would not be used for partial payment? That is patently absurd.

OP:

You rented a truck and hit a building with it.
You are neither a professional truck driver nor a building repair expert.
You are not smart enough to purchase liability insurance on the truck you rented.
You are going to get a bill from the truck rental company for physical damage to the truck.

Pay the landlord. You did it, you pay. Your valuation of the damage is meaningless.
The estimate from the landlord didn't look out of line. His business is renting, not repairing.
Prepare to get a bill from the truck rental. These can take weeks or months to show up.

Consider the cost your tuition to the School of Don't Be a Butthead.
You get to pay this because you didn't hire a professional, insured mover,
and failing that, you didn't even buy liability insurance on the vehicle you had no
experience in operating.

Being dumb is expensive. Don't compound the cost by being obstinate.

Yurgis

MorrisBoy, I just looked up California's Security Deposit Law, and you're just plain out of gas here.

Per the California Department of Consumer Affairs (http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtm...California law specifically allows the landlord to use a tenant's security deposit for four purposes:

* For unpaid rent;
* For cleaning the rental unit when the tenant moves out, but only to make the unit as clean as it was when the tenant first moved in;
* For repair of damages, other than normal wear and tear, caused by the tenant or the tenant's guests; and
* If the lease or rental agreement allows it, for the cost of restoring or replacing furniture, furnishings, or other items of personal property (including keys), other than because of normal wear and tear. (emphasis mine)
Furthermore, regarding "itemization", the law is specific, and you're out of gas on that argument, too:The landlord also must send you copies of receipts for the charges that the landlord incurred to repair or clean the rental unit and that the landlord deducted from your security deposit. The landlord must include the receipts with the itemized statement. The landlord must follow these rules:

* If the landlord or the landlord's employees did the work - The itemized statement must describe the work performed, including the time spent and the hourly rate charged. The hourly rate must be reasonable.
* If another person or business did the work - The landlord must provide you copies of the person's or business' invoice or receipt. The landlord must provide the person's or business' name, address, and telephone number on the invoice or receipt, or in the itemized statement.
* If the landlord deducted for materials or supplies - The landlord must provide you a copy of the invoice or receipt. If the item used to repair or clean the unit is something that the landlord purchases regularly or in bulk, the landlord must reasonably document the item's cost (for example, by an invoice, a receipt or a vendor's price list)
* If the landlord made a good faith estimate of charges - The landlord is allowed to make a good faith estimate of charges and include the estimate in the itemized statement in two situations: (1) the repair is being done by the landlord or an employee and cannot reasonably be completed within the 21 days, or (2) services or materials are being supplied by another person or business and the landlord does not have the invoice or receipt within the 21 days. In either situation, the landlord may deduct the estimated amount from your security deposit. In situation (2), the landlord must include the name, address and telephone number of the person or business that is supplying the services or materials. (emphasis mine)
It seems to me that your landlord has complied to the letter (and the spirit) of the law. He is allowed to deduct the damages from your deposit (there's nothing in the law that specifies an interior versus exterior distinction) and he is allowed to include a good-faith estimate of the amount he's going to have to pay to repair it. In fact, that's probably all he could provide, because he MUST send you the letter explaining his reasons for withholding your damage deposit within 21 days of your moving out.

You're not entitled to double your security deposit back in this situation. The landlord has done nothing wrong, morally or legally. Suing him would, without any doubt, expose you to a judgment against you for the remaining $1,300.

Either pay him out of pocket, claim it on your auto insurance, or sit on your hands and hope he doesn't sue you.

[Edit: It's interesting that you provided the exact same link, but cherry-picked the option about if "another person or business did the work", presumably to make it appear that your landlord wronged you, while completely ignoring the "if the landlord made a good faith estimate of charges" clause, when the latter is the actual situation, per the details in your original post. Clearly, you must have seen that clause. Those kinds of shenanigans may work on the internet to rally people to reaffirm your version of reality, but they won't work in a court of law.]

The answer is clear.

Resistance is futile.

atikovi said:   FinancialAnalyst said:   In this case, OP hit a building with a truck.

NO, he SCRAPED a building. Pictures were posted earlier but have been removed for some reason.

PS, I have to go in for jury duty tomorrow. If I was deliberating this case, I'd give the landlord no more than a few hundred without a verifiable written invoice from a licensed contractor.
it was more than a scrape . The large scrape was cosmetic but the corner of the balcony showed some good damage all the way through the stucco and the wood frame was visible .

If that corner wood balcony beam was cracked
At its end , it could mean beam replacement and a substantial repair is needed to Maintain the safety and integrity of that balcony . Of course we will never know, but its certainly possible that more is required than just repairing scraped stucco

RWAnderson72 said:   MorrisBoy, I just looked up California's Security Deposit Law, and you're just plain out of gas here.

Per the California Department of Consumer Affairs ([L=[L=http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtm...]http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtm...]http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtml#legallywithhold):[/L]


You didn't look up the law; you looked up a simplified summary of the law. The law actually allows the security deposit to apply to damages "to the premises," which depends on how that term is defined in the lease.

satchelsofgold said:   RWAnderson72 said:   MorrisBoy, I just looked up California's Security Deposit Law, and you're just plain out of gas here.

Per the California Department of Consumer Affairs ([L=[L=http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtm...]http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtm...]http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/sec-deposit.shtml#legallywithhold):[/L]


You didn't look up the law; you looked up a simplified summary of the law. The law actually allows the security deposit to apply to damages "to the premises," which depends on how that term is defined in the lease.
Yes, yes. Very nice.

RWAnderson72 said:   
Yes, yes. Very nice. Apparently, you didn't look up the law, either, or you would have caught California Civil Code Section 13 (see http://law.onecle.com/california/civil/13.html), which states:
Words and phrases are construed according to the context and the approved usage of the language; but technical words and phrases, and such others as may have acquired a peculiar and appropriate meaning in law, or are defined in the succeeding section, are to be construed according to such peculiar and appropriate meaning or definition. (emphasis mine)


I agree that general usage may apply if the term isn't defined in the lease, but that is very unlikely.

Thanks to FinancialAnalyst, SIS and other sane voices. I plan to make a full payment but have kept the option to file a claim open. I may or may not to do it depending on how the itemized invoice looks.

Morris I think it's very reasonable to request the actual paid repair invoice , and proof of payment , before paying the remaining $1300.

If they refuse and you think they provided you an inflated estimate and really paid less for the repair , by all means sue them, subpoena their repair receipts and resolve it in court



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014