Revised Final Bill - Is this allowed?

[kcbarnhart]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

I moved out of my apartment on October 31. On November 12, I received the final bill showing repair cost of $49 to repair stained carpet throughout apartment along with a check for the balance of my security deposit. The standard disclaimer stating I had seven days to respond if I disagreed was at the bottom of the notice. I know there was a stain in the living room so I felt this was reasonable did not respond and cashed the check. On November 26, I received a "revised final" bill showing $49 attempt to salvage carpet throughout apartment, $494 for replace stained carpet (prorated for age), and $45 for removal of old carpet. Attached to this bill is a letter from their "collection department" stating I must pay them by today or will face additional fines, damage to my credit report, etc. Is this legal? I feel like this is a bait and switch type scheme. I would have disagreed with the carpet damages if it were going to be for anything more than the $49.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

I moved out of my apartment on October 31. On November 12, I received the final bill showing repair cost of $49 to repair stained carpet throughout apartment along with a check for the balance of my security deposit. The standard disclaimer stating I had seven days to respond if I disagreed was at the bottom of the notice. I know there was a stain in the living room so I felt this was reasonable did not respond and cashed the check. On November 26, I received a "revised final" bill showing $49 attempt to salvage carpet throughout apartment, $494 for replace stained carpet (prorated for age), and $45 for removal of old carpet. Attached to this bill is a letter from their "collection department" stating I must pay them by today or will face additional fines, damage to my credit report, etc. Is this legal? I feel like this is a bait and switch type scheme. I would have disagreed with the carpet damages if it were going to be for anything more than the $49.

Do you have any idea how old the carpet was? In any case, its very questionable.

 

[quincy]

It does not sound legal.

Here is a link to "A Guide to Security Deposits" from Michigan Legal Aid:

http://www.michiganlegalaid.org/library_client/resource.2006-01-10.0288515769/html_view

You might want to make use of the resources provided at the end of the guide for advice and direction.

 

[os478]

I believe you should send a dispute letter back to them via certified mail. In it, make sure to note that the 'Final' list of damages did not include the clause to respond within 7 days.

Quincy, if the landlord fails to file a suit within 45 days, would the landlord be unable to prove that this is a valid debt?

 

[quincy]

I believe you should send a dispute letter back to them via certified mail. In it, make sure to note that the 'Final' list of damages did not include the clause to respond within 7 days.

Quincy, if the landlord fails to file a suit within 45 days, would the landlord be unable to prove that this is a valid debt?

I do not see where kcbarnhart says the revised bill does not have the "7 day" notice, although the demand to "pay today or else" would violate that required notice and time allowed to respond.

The landlord had 30 days from kcbarnhart's move-out date to send an itemized list of damages and a refund of security amounts not used to cover the costs of these damages. The landlord did this by sending the bill and the refund by November 12. Because kcbarnhart did not dispute the list of itemized damages or the amount of refund received, kc had no reason to respond to the landlord's notice within 7 days. kcbarnhart also had no reason to believe the communication from the landlord was anything but the final assessment. kc legitimately cashed the refund check.

The landlord sent a revised itemized bill within the 30 days allowed as well (on November 26). kcbarnhart should have responded to the landlord's revised bill by December 3, disputing the revised charges. The fact that s/he didn't could be used by the landlord to show the revised charges were not in dispute. Whether a letter of dispute sent late as it would be will do any good is a question mark, but I don't see how it could hurt. It should be sent to the landlord certified, return receipt requested.

The landlord has a couple of ways to handle this. The landlord can attempt to negotiate with kcbarnhart and come to an agreement over the security deposit - and I suppose the threat to report kcbarnhart to debt collectors could be argued by the landlord as his attempt to negotiate (although it is a legally questionable attempt). The other way the landlord can try to collect damages is by filing suit against kcbarnhart within the 45 days of move-out (or by December 16). Whether the landlord takes this step or not will be learned in a few days.

I think the landlord has a weak case for collection of damages if he takes this to court, after he sent the first itemized bill and a refund, and the revised bill sent later included a demand letter and threat of debt collection action. The revised bill puts the landlord in an unenviable position. That said, a weak case does not always mean an unwinnable one.

For that reason, if kcbarnhart is sued by the landlord (or if the landlord takes debt collection action or reports kc to the credit agencies), I recommend that kc consult with a local attorney. kcbarnhart can make use of the resources from the link provided earlier or look to the resources available at the end of this Michigan State University Law School file (information on security deposit refunds can be found starting on page 12): http://www.law.msu.edu/clinics/rhc/LLTGUIDE.pdf