Why Don't You Move?

[fairlight]

I lived for eight miserable months on a year's lease at a California one-bedroom in a 28 unit building. The building maintenance man told me that I complained more than any other tenant on the floor and hinted that he and the landlord were going to "take action" against me. He asked me why I didn't move, and I told him about the lease. The next day, a note obviously worded by the landlord and handwritten by him was left in front of my door. It was in an envelope addressed "Occupant" with my apartment number and opened "F.Y.I." The maintenance man wrote that he had been authorized by the landlord to tell me that I could break the lease (it had four months to go) "with our blessings" and no penalities. The maintenance man is only identified in the lease as that. He is not identified as the assistant landlord, assistant manager or co-manager. There is no other legal document conferring the status of assistant landlord, assistant manager or co-manager on him.

The landlord keeps the manager - "I've told him a million times to be nicer to tenants, even the ones who are paying $300 for their studios" - because she claims he and his family will be on the street due to their alleged financial difficulties if she terminates him. The maintenance man is called a friend of the family by the landlord.

I requested a formal notice permitting me to break the lease, which I got. It cited my "unhappiness" as the reason. I was unhappy because the manager showed me storage space that he said went with the apartment but that I never got. I was unhappy because I was trapped in the elevator for 50 minutes with a broken alarm button. I was unhappy because no heat was supplied on cold days between the hours required by law, yet the heat poured in when the weather was between 70 and 80 degrees. I was unhappy because I couldn't get repairs done, which couldn't be said about the other tenants. It could be considered hearsay, but I was told that at least one other tenant had been told by the maintenance man not to speak to me.

The notice said that I had to leave the apartment in the same condition as it was when I moved in (eight months ago) to avoid penalties, a definite change from leaving without penalty "with our blessings."

Well over 21 days have passed, and there's no sign of my security deposit or any receipts/invoices accounting for any deductions. If I take the landlord to small claims court, how much will the permission to break the lease figure in the proceedings? I know security deposits are never non-refundable, but how valid would the landlord's claim be if she took the stance that she was owed the money anyway because she allowed me to break the lease? There's a constant turnover in the building, but they seem to fill vacancies rather quickly. Will the proceedings be valid if she sends the maintenance man in her stead?

 

[ENASNI]

hmm

Weird situation.

You say you have this in writing... how long after the 21 days. Please do not tell me you wrote on the 22nd day.
You have read this right...

Sounds like it.
http://www.dca.ca.gov/legal/landlordbook/
You have a weird one.. If that thingy magig is legalish ( might want a second opinion) hint--- lawyer. Then go for it if it is NOT day 22.

 

[fairlight]

I turned over the keys to the apartment on Sunday, May 1st. Today, Saturday, June 11th, I sent the landlord a letter via certified mail telling her that I'd see her in court if the matter of the security deposit hadn't been resolved by Tuesday, June 21st. My plan is to go through small claims court and ask for not only the deposit but court costs. I don't know if I can ask for damages since she did let me out of the lease early, but that was her idea, not mine, and there's no such thing as a non-refundable security deposit in California.

 

[Devedander]

Don't take that non refundable clause out of context. It only means they cannot say "You must pay $80 for carpet cleaning", it does not mean they cannot keep some or all of it if they have a reason.

In this case I would put good money on any court ruling that the without penalty and with blessing refers to penalties from braking the lease and not absolutely no penalties under any circumstances.

I would worry about what may happen, especially since you are now definitely on the LLs worst side after he allowed you to brake lease (who cares if he is a slumlord) and then you give him crap about the security even before the 21 days is up and before he has had a reasonable chance to determine how much if any of the security he will keep.

 

[fairlight]

As stated in my June 11th post, I turned over the keys to the apartment on May 1st, and I wrote the landlord about the security deposit on June 11th. That's a month and 10 days between turning in the key and sending the letter about the deposit. As stated in the same post, I've given her until June 21th resolve the matter. Therefore, she has been treated more than fairly regarding the timeframe since California law only allows a landlord 21 days to deal with the deposit.

Her condition for breaking the lease without penalty, which is on an official form signed by her legal representative the building manager (not the maintenance man), and as I stated in my original post of June 9th, is that the apartment be in the same condition when I left as it was when I moved in. She could have simply said that I could break the lease, which I hadn't ask to do, but that I would have to pay for the remaining months if she couldn't find another tenant.

If the judge in small claims court rules that she's entitled to keep the money and that I should consider myself lucky she didn't demand the rent for the rest of the year (assuming she hasn't already found a tenant), so be it. I'm not ready to write off that amount of money if there's a chance I could get any of it back. And I don't think a lot of people could. Or would.

 

[Devedander]

Sorry I misstook it as you were writing to demand response within the legal 21 days on day 11.

I think there is a missunderstanding... I am only saying she is still allowed to keep any part of your security deposit he would keep had you finished your lease normally.

 

[fairlight]

I've lived in more than one apartment in California and am aware that the landlord is entitled to keep some of the security deposit for damage done to the apartment that's beyond normal wear and tear.

I suspect this landlord thinks she can just keep the deposit and not back up the condition she set for my breaking the lease, e.g., proving that the apartment was not in the same condition as it was when I moved in, therefore entitling her to keep the entire deposit.

 

[CA girl]

I believe that in Ca., if the LL doesn't return your deposit along with a list of the deductions within the 21 day period, you are entitled to your full deposit back plus court costs.

Good luck.

 

[fairlight]

Thank you, CA girl. It's my understanding that the law penalizes the landlord for not obeying the 21 day rule regarding deposits by not allowing him or her to deduct any amount from the deposit. It's my further understanding that I can ask for not only the entire deposit back but a penalty equivalent to twice the deposit, plus court and postage costs.

It appears as if there is someone living in the apartment now (vacancy sign is down, shades closed). I feel sorry for the new tenant because I suspect nothing has been done to the damage caused to the roof by a recent rainstorm (leaks in two places).

I wonder if the tenant across the hall has "greeted" the new tenant by telling them that a previous tenant was murdered in that apartment as she did me shortly after I moved into it.