My landlord tried to charge me $2,000 for normal wear and tear

Moved out of my apartment in San Diego last month after 3 years there. Landlord kept my full security deposit of $2,000 and sent me a list of charges that included repainting the whole place and replacing the carpet. Said the walls had scuff marks and the carpet was faded from sunlight. I was skeptical about going to small claims court because I figured it would be a hassle. Turns out California Civil Code 1950.5 is pretty clear that normal wear and tear isn't on you. Judge ruled in my favor in about 15 minutes and I got triple damages because the landlord didn't provide receipts for the work. Has anyone else had luck fighting security deposit deductions here?

3 comments

3 Comments

shanem3711d ago

That bit about triple damages for no receipts is exactly what happened to my buddy in LA. I got my whole deposit back too after the judge saw the landlord's "new carpet" was just shampooed old stuff.

gavin69211d ago

@shanem37 wrong state though - CA has different rules on receipts. Yours went well.

jackson.matthew11d ago

Triple damages for no receipts?! Man that is wild. I had no idea California law was that clear cut about it. I just assumed small claims would be a huge waste of time and money. Reading that the judge took 15 minutes makes me wish I had done it when my old landlord tried to keep $500 for "cleaning" after I moved out of a place in Austin. Ended up just letting it go because I figured it wasnt worth the headache. But if some states actually punish landlords for not having proof of the work... that changes everything. Might have to look into what Texas law says about this whole thing.