return of security deposit

[monam]

What is the name of your state? Florida
This question concerns a problem my college-age son had with a rental property. I need advice so that this situation does not arise again. My son and three other students signed a one-year lease on a house. Each of the four paid two months rent to the landlord as a security deposit. (His = $1010) The lease was signed at the beginning of May. When the fall semester began, 2 of the students on the lease did not return, and the other (call him Tenant #1) brought 3 of his friends to live in the house. They were not on the lease (a violation), but did pay a portion of the rent. These 3 and Tenant #1 decided to get a puppy (a direct violation of the lease) which destroyed the carpet. These tenants also caused other damage to the property. When my son complained, Tenant #1 verbally agreed that my son would receive all of his security because he was not responsible for the damages. (Some were in Tenant #1's bedroom.) At the conclusion of the lease, the landlord only returned $1300 of the $4200 security and gave all of it to Tenant #1 for disbursement. He gave $1000 to one of the original lease signers and only $300 to my son. My son went to small claims court today and got nothing more. I do not understand this. He did not bring in the people who were not on the lease nor the puppy. At the very least, I think he should have gotten l/4 of the money returned. I would like legal advice!

 

[stephenk]

Your son has no further recourse since he already had the matter heard in small claims court and was not awarded any further money.

 

[monam]

Yeah, I guess I know nothing more can be done, but I was wondering if anyone could explain the rule of law to me that governed the judge's ruling. How was my son supposed to protect himself when other people on the lease (and people not on the lease) caused damages to the property and violated the lease agreement? He tried to get them to sign a statement that he would receive all of his security deposit at the conclusion of the lease, but of course they refused. If he had withheld his portion of the rent, they could have sued him. And why should one of the original people who signed the lease and then did not even live there or pay rent after the first month receive a refund of $1000 of their security deposit? Shouldn't it have been forfeited when they broke the lease? My son is getting ready to enter into another lease agreement and I want to know what should be done to avoid another situation like this!!! We really needed this money for the new apartment.

 

[stephenk]

once the new kids moved in, your son should have notified the landlord so that the new kids would be placed on the lease and they would have to pay toward the security deposit.

 

[JETX]

Though I agree that once the case was heard, your son has exhausted his rights against the fellow roommate, he does have another chance.

Sue the landlord. Simply, the landlord was in error in returning all the funds to only one of the signed leaseholders. The landlord should have either gotten written agreement from all parties as to distribution of the deposits, or made the payment to all four of them and let the leaseholders distribute the funds. Since the landlord accepted deposits from EACH, he should have paid each. This could have been done by deducting the total damages from the full $4200 deposit received and then equal sharing the rest.

Your son very likely has a claim against the landlord for not returning HIS deposit ratio to him.

 

[monam]

Thanks Stephen and JETX for your responses. At the beginning of the lease, the landlord had stated that he only wanted to communicate with and receive payments from one person on the lease, and that was Tenant #1. The rest of the people on the lease wrote their rent checks to Tenant #1 and then he wrote a check for the total to the landlord. That's why the landlord gave the entire security deposit refund to him for disbursement, so I don't know that we could pursue this issue with the landlord.

How can someone protect themselves when entering into a lease with someone else? I thought that small claims court was there to help people resolve problems, but evidently not since my son (and me since I'm the one really paying for everything) was screwed out of $700 plus $59 in court costs.

 

[JETX]

Contradiction:
In your first post, you said, "Each of the four paid two months rent to the landlord as a security deposit."

Now you say, "The rest of the people on the lease wrote their rent checks to Tenant #1 and then he wrote a check for the total to the landlord."

So, which is it??
It really doesn't matter as to the 'payer' of the monthly rent checks. If the deposit was paid by EACH tenant (as noted in your first post), then the argument could be made that the deposit should be returned to EACH tenant. Also, was this ONE lease with all four signing, or did each tenant sign a separate lease??

 

[monam]

It was one lease with four people who signed it. Tenant #1 acted as the "go-between" with the landlord. (The landlord insisted on this -- did not want to receive 4 different checks each month.) All of my checks, including the security deposit, were written to Tenant #1 (a 19 year old kid) and then he paid the landlord. In retrospect, I realize this was ignorant and I should have always made the checks to the landlord for my own protection, but evidently all payments were made by Tenant #1 in a timely fashion.

 

[JETX]

And that, with the small claims judgment, closes any opportunity for recovery of additional funds.
[sound of gavel on bench]