Security deposits should be held by the municipality. Should the landlord wish to claim it, they can prove their case in court.
Fuck the status quo forever. Unforgivable.
Security deposits should be held by the municipality. Should the landlord wish to claim it, they can prove their case in court.
Fuck the status quo forever. Unforgivable.
This is literally how it works in other parts of the world - do you guys just have to trust that your landlord isn’t going to decide that they’d rather just keep your money at the end of the lease?
In NZ, the landlord is required to lodge the bond with a government agency, and in cases where there is a dispute a special court will adjudicate and issue binding orders as to how the money is to be divided.
Depends on the city and state. Plenty of places require deposits placed into escrow exactly for these purposes.
In the US, landlords can basically do whatever they want, and the legal system is designed to keep peasants out.
It’s called
FeudalismFreedom.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/security_deposit
Basically yes.
This is an area of law governed at the state level. Some states are much better than others. Personally, I have not lived in a state that has a 3rd party hold the money (and I’m not sure if any do that). I did rent in a state where any charges that the landlord claims that they shouldn’t is met with triple damages. So if they keep $200 instead of the $100 of actual cost to repair something you broke, they owe you $300. It really incentivizes landlords to only charge accurately (e.g., not for standard wear and tear), and generally deposits were much lower there than in other states I’ve rented.
Lots of states also charge interest on any deposit money not immediately given back to the renter.