Re: Security Deduction - Landlord Forum thread 345137

Re: Security Deduction by Anonymous on May 23, 2016 @20:18

Gary, the point is that you have no proof they broke it. All you have is proof that it's broken. If your charge is unreasonable and they bring it to court, especially in a landlord friendly state like California, you're going to get a harsh lesson from the judge.

[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: Security Deduction by Anonymous on May 24, 2016 @04:29	[ Reply ]

The landlord may not have to proove that the tenant did the damage. While the unit is in their care, they are responaible for damage that occurs other than act of god or normal wear and tear. What the landlord does need to proove is the condition of the unit prior to move in. If they did a good job running their business, then they have paperwork from move-out inspections along with many good pictures. If they are very lucky, they will have a picture of the toilet where the damage occurred. If they do not, then they would likely have testimony from cleaners or maintenance people stating that the damage was not present during the prior tenants move out...assuming they are honest (and I would hope so). The problem I have with this landlord is the whole 'drove 72 miles each way 8 times' bit. I think they will ahve a challenge justifying why they didn't use somone who was local.