Improperly Held Escrow Funds (Sec Dep)

[HomeGuru]

Well, I had my hearing today... yay!

We are extremely lucky in that the landlord did not deny the fact that we gave him the security deposit. We did not need to show a receipt (the one we lost). That's one point for us!

The landlord said they did not send us a list of damages because they had already recieved the court subpoena (lie #1). We told the DJ that he tried to give us the list over the phone (and did give us several but not all) but we told him we needed it in writing.

The landlord's list of damages (brought to court on a piece of tablet paper written in ink with bad hand writing) had only estimates. They had only one receipt of the carpet costs from before we moved in to prove the worth of the carpet that had minor stains (according to him they were major stains). They also had an estimate from a lumber yard for maple wood to replace the existing wood floor(which was not maple and was unfinished). They never actually fixed the floor (it didn't need replaced). That's points two and three for us... and perhaps one for them.

We were very truthful and told the DJ that some (two out of the ten damages he listed) of the damages caused were in fact valid. I then gave my defense that they never gave us a written list.

The DJ said she had 5 days to make a decision. She also said that she needs to dig into the books to see if telling us by phone would be considered a 'written' list.

**A: this is a no brainer.
***********


She said I was looking at the law in 'black-and-white' and that it's not that easy. I thought it was, but hey, she's the DJ.

**A: may be you can print out the law in color.
*******

Does anyone have any insight on what is considered a 'written' list of damages? It's not going to change anything now, but it would just be nice to know others' experiences with this type of issue.

I can't wait to get the verdict... and I'm just glad the hard part is over. Then if I have to, I will appeal. Would it be wise to get an attorney if I have to appeal?

**A: read the law.

 

[robert.knepp]

Hahahaha... you are a funny guy (assuming you are a guy, appologies if you're not). You have a good way of taking the tension off a touchy situation. I will look into the laws regarding the appeal if one is needed.

I appreciate all the help everyone here has offered. Your words and advice have helped me more than any one could imagine. As such, I plan on frequenting the forums and helping out, at least by giving the experiences that I went through.

Thanks and cheerio!

 

[HomeGuru]

Hahahaha... you are a funny guy (assuming you are a guy, appologies if you're not). You have a good way of taking the tension off a touchy situation. I will look into the laws regarding the appeal if one is needed.

I appreciate all the help everyone here has offered. Your words and advice have helped me more than any one could imagine. As such, I plan on frequenting the forums and helping out, at least by giving the experiences that I went through.

Thanks and cheerio!

**A: my apologies for the mixup. I meant to read the PA L/T law and not the law with respect to filing an appeal. The law is clear as to what is required of a landlord concerning the rentention of all or part of a tenant's security deposit.

 

[robert.knepp]

Well, I got the judgement papers today.

Point #1: Tenant vs. Landlord - Suing for double security deposit - We lost, no double security deposit for us. Amount of judgement = $0

Point #2: Landlord vs. Tenant - Counter-suing for damages done to premises - We lost again, however only some of damages were accepted. Amount of judgement = $420



I am going to call the DJ office to see what it means. By that I mean is $420 *after* the $400 security deposit was deducted. Or do we deduct $400 from the security deposit and owe the landlord $20.

Now, attached to the judgement papers was an excerpt from what appears to be another PA state statute. I thought it might be nice to post it here for reference (note I'm only posting the highlighted sections):

**********************************
statute 4.26 Return of Security Deposit

...
...
...

... ... ... However, if the tenant has done damage to the leased premises, the fact that the landlord has not accounted within 30 days shoud not bar a claim by the landlord for any damages that exceed the "penalty" amount of the security deposit forfeited. It is not a logical interpretation of the statute to infer that the landlord cannot collect *any* damages from a tenant who has trashed the leased premises. The purpose of the statute is to protect tenants who have not done damage, not to shield those who do damage. In a claim for double damages brought by the tenant against the landlord, to the extent that the damages exceed the amount of the security deposit, the tenant's double recovery is defeated.

This interpretation of all subsections for statute 512 supports the legislative intent of requireing landlords to account to tenants by providing the a sanction, namely forfeiture of the right to retain the amount of the security deposit. Also, if the tenant has not done damage and the landlord has failed to account to the tenant, then there is a "double" penalty assessed in the form of double damages. However, if the tenant has done damage, the "double damage" provision is reduced accordingly. And, in cases where the damages exceed double the amount of the security deposit, the landlord would be entitled to a judgment for those damages, less the amount of the security deposit forfeited be failure to account.

...
...
...

-----------------------------------------------------

78. Stutzman v. Kline, 25 Leb. Leg. J. 61 (1987)
Page 320

**********************************

After typing that in, I believe I have answered my own question. I may be wrong though. Feel free to comment.

$420 is the judgement against me and was calculated by:

$1220
-$ 800
---------
$420

Heh. Perhaps the judge was right by saying that the law isn't "black-and-white". In this case it not, and definately not red-white-and-blue.

Comments?

 

[HomeGuru]

The judgement is what you owe L. So that amount should be deducted from your deposit.

 

[robert.knepp]

START RANT

I finally got in contact with the district justice's office to discuss what the 'judgement' means. I only got to talk with the clerk, not the actual district justice. The first thing she said is that the DJ does not need to explain the details of the judgement, only that the judgement is of a certain amount.

She then went on to say that she thinks (the clerk that is) since the issue of a security deposit was brought up in the case, chances are the DJ already deducted the sec. dep. from amount owed. Meaning that what the DJ really wanted to say was:

Amount of damages owed to LL: $820
Deduct the security deposit: $400
Gives the final amount due to LL: $420

It makes sense if that's the way it was handled. BUT I would have expected a more logical approach such as my case against the landlord (for security dep) would have been placed in my favor for the amount of $400 and the case against me to be entered in the LL's favor for $820. That is what the DJ clerk is telling me... so why wasn't it entered that way?

This is really starting to upset me, not the fact that we owe money, but the fact that the courts don't appear to know what the heck is going on. Perhaps it's just the way things are done here (small country town in a PA county with a total of three stop lights). To me, it should never be up to someone how this type of thing is done, rather a set of rules and procedures that must be followed... or maybe I'm preaching to the choir..

I'm seriously thinking about getting a lawyer and appeling the judgement. Then again, I really don't want to go back to court. A few of my acquaintences at work told me to send $20 explaining that it was for the judgement minus the security deposit. I'm doubt I'll do that....

Off to do some more research. Later All!

END RANT

 

[HomeGuru]

Cvillecpm is a licensed real estate property manager who left this website back in January due to providing incorrect advice.

 

[robert.knepp]

Huh?

 

[HomeGuru]

Don't worry. That post was directed to Cville.