Login with your favorite social network:

[shadrach]

Hi:I'm suing my former landlord in small-claims court for return of deposit. I've the next reasons:1. The job completed wasn't necessary2. The landlord didn't precisely record the job, even if such certification was particularly requested3. The landlord didn't do a preliminary examination, although I required oneI am also attempting to demonstrate the landlord has acted in bad-faith by withholding area of the deposit.Right today, I'm assembling my proof and determining just how to provide the situation. Our first thought would be to merely clarify things chronologically, but I wonder when there is a much better method to submit my reasons. Personally I think that my best debate may be the insufficient a preliminary examination, but chronologically, it'd come first.I would appreciate any assistance. If extra specifics are essential, I would like to know.Thanks

[Finin]

Cheers for that link, Jack.Perhaps I was not obvious, but my issue wasn't whether I've an incident or not. I'm very assured that a minumum of one, if not all three, of my reasons is legitimate and would get the case.I would prefer to understand how I must present the problem towards the court.As I stated before, my first interest is always to merely proceed chronologically, but I'm not certain if that's a great way, or, if there can be greater ways.Thank you

[Ludo]

As I read the Code of Civil Procedure, the defendant gets one "free" postponement:http://law.onecle.com/california/civil-procedure/116.570.html

[Mateo]

Thanks for the help.My recent thought would be to present my reasons as bullet-points at the start, and so as of presumed weakest to strongest; and then continue to inform the chronological tale to skin them out.Iam unsure that itis worth my energy to attempt to do this completely, easily can easily do it well.

[Hurste]

"I did so get images at transfer-out, however."Good."the landlord billed for artwork, impaired alternative, and rug cleaning."The major issue is excatly why the costs. He would not be eligible to something for regular use and tear.He could obtain the rug cleaning if there were spots or dog smells but not for routine cleaning in preperation for the following tenant.He could get perhaps a handful of pieces of blinds if they were damaged during tenancy, but if he substitute all the blinds in the home he'd have lots of trying to explain to do.He usually would not get color since that is preservation. He'd need certainly to demonstrate harm to the surfaces or crayon markings or cooking oil spots, anything due to the tenant."A duplicate of the bill for a rug solution was supplied, but only copies of uncanceled inspections for others. Among the inspections was really written out to "Company," dated your day following the disposition notice. The work points within the letter were a bit more than "color," impaired alternative," and "rug cleaning." I described this insufficient depth within my desire letter, along side seeking suitable receipts."I believe there was anything within the law permitting the LL to complete their own work, spend money for job, etc, so long as there was some sensible reason for the work completed and the price. I'm-not certain that the informality of his paperwork will harm him in court."I'll notice that the home was shown as readily available for book five times after the rental finished -- and your day after the landlord obtained the secrets within the mail."I do not notice that working against him. If he'd additional secrets he might have gotten the job completed in 5 times. And if he did not he could easily get it-done as the home was up for rent."(He didn't provide us any published transfer-out directions, so I shipped the secrets certified.)"I do not observe that being an issue. While you re-locate you abandon the area the way in which it had been when you moved in, excluding normal wear and tear, and you submit the secrets. Thatis a fundamental idea that courts take everywhere. If there is nobody at hand the secrets to, you send them. And you did that."The disposition letter was dated significantly more than a couple of weeks after rent end."The law provides him 21 days from transfer-out so he must certanly be Okay there.You described delivering a need for bills after obtaining the disposition letter without any reaction. Based on the law he is necessary to react to that within 2 weeks. Their protection to that might be that what he sent you was adequate even when you did not believe so. And if he convinces the judge that it had been adequate, he skates on that.I have another thought on the bad-faith factor. You imply the LL is quite unsophisticated in his administrative details. Failing woefully to adhere to the law and/or making errors in managing the safety deposit does not always increase to the amount of bad-faith. Bad-Faith usually takes a willful and malicious intention to deny you of what is truly yours. To date, I do not observe that. And I'd to deal with bad-faith accusations like a state repetition. Whenever a state got screwed up so bad it ended up in court, we mainly had to pay what we did not pay and there was no bad faith prize if the clutter was simply because of errors or actually incompetence.I could not start to anticipate how a CA judge could rule on the original examination breach so I can not state whether you strike that first or the problems first.You might observe if there are any landlord organizations around that might have activities on how thatis handled.I did discover one-source that seems to be created for landlords and provides them guidance on their privileges and obligations.What I found fascinating is that the guide cautions landlords that the effects of missing the initial inspection might be worse than just obtaining personal charges altered or disallowed.See:http://books.google.com/publications?id=yYviqGIoOBgC&pg=PA373&lpg=PA373&dq=landlord+tenant+initial+inspection+case+law+california&source=web&ots=B3K6xWm-3b&sig=htQI1KoN4CalEpxAZm5ti3-IpBs&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result#PPA377,M1Look at the end of Site 376 and top of Site 377.Given that section I believe that I'd move for the initial inspection first and attempt to get all the charges banned based on just that.But I can not tell you things to do, you'll need certainly to choose for yourself.There also appears to be plenty of great info inside about safety deposit law.