tenant demand pet deposit to be refund
I have a unit that has three tenants lived in there. 2 tenants vacanted and the third one decided to stayed. One of the girl, who vacated made a pet deposit of $300. On the pet deposit agreement stated that pet deposit is non-refundable. She moved out and now she demand refund on the pet deposit. I told her pet deposit are not refundable but she said in the pet agreement stated it is. But one of pet agreement section stated:
NON-REFUNDABLE PET DEPOSIT: Tenant will pay a one-time refundable pet deposit of $300.00 if there is no damage in order to have the pet in the unit. ( This section is confusing. But I think where "Tenant will pay a one-time refundable pet deposit of $300.00" used to be non-fundable but somehow the "non" word got taken out or there's a typo)
3. NO LIMIT ON LIABILITY: The additional security deposit, non-refundable pet deposit in the amount of $300.00 under this Agreement is not a limit on Tenant’s liability for property damages, cleaning, deodorization, ridding unit of fleas, replacements, and/or personal injuries set forth below.
Both contract and the tenant are inherited from previous owner. The seller didn't pass on the non-refundable pet deposit. Also I can't do a throughly inspection bc one of the tenant is still there. How should I approach this dilemma?
#1 Tenant Screening Contributor
- Property Manager
- Honolulu, HI
Aloha,
Several issues here...It sounds like the Tenants are all on one Agreement. If it is contradictory on the pet deposit, first stating Non-Refundable, then stating one time refundable deposit, you have a serious problem. A typical Judge will look at that and rule in favor of the Tenant. The typo should have been corrected at signing, and/or you should have caught it when you reviewed copies of the Agreement shortly after having your offer accepted. Verbal conversations about terms are generally impossible to prove...which is why everything should be in writing and clearly legible. Also, you should have required a signed estoppel letter detailing the major terms and status of deposits referenced early in your due diligence.
Another problem you have is that since you did not have the pet deposit transferred to you at closing, YOU need to pony up. This is something that should have been negotiated in your purchase offer. Since it was supposedly NON refundable, there is no reason the Seller could not keep it, but it still should have been split with you in some fashion if the unit was not turned over vacant. Too late now.
Whether or not you can inspect the unit is irrelevant at the moment, since you are talking about pet deposit, not the Security Deposit, which hopefully you DID get transferred to you. Assuming all three Tenants are on one Agreement, there are a couple of issues with the SD. Unless the Agreement specifically states some kind of three way split for the SD, it would not be addressed until ALL Tenants vacate and keys have been returned. Also, just because two of the Tenants moved out, this should not release them from responsibility for the terms of the Agreement. YOU decide if someone can be released, and you have all parties sign an addendum to spell that out. Can the remaining person even afford to pay the rent? Did you ever have a new application completed so you could determine if this person meets your screening criteria? What happens when the last remaining Tenant doesn't pay the full rent next due date?
You do not state how long ago you closed this sale, but you should have expected, and been planning for these issues.
Quote from @Kathy Nguyen:
Unfortunately, the language is confusing. It says non-refundable in one place and refundable in the other.
Were all the Tenants on the same lease? Or did they have separate leases? If they were on the same lease, the deposit stays in place until all tenants are out. I recommend you tell them the deposit will not be refunded until all three tenants are out so you can determine any damages and whether the deposit will be applied to cleaning/repairs or refunded.
Refund the money and be done with it, and put better language in your future contracts. Whether it was a typo or not makes no difference if you have to go to court, and for a lot of tenants $300 is worth finding a tenant advocate lawyer and suing for 3x the deposit. You should have had an estoppel letter when you bought the property ascertaining what was paid, and you should have collected that deposit escrow from the seller.
Are you getting screwed here? Probably but it's a learning opportunity. $300 shouldn't make or break you either way and it will teach you to compose good leases.
Quote from @Nathan Gesner:
Quote from @Kathy Nguyen:
Lucky I made them signed a lease amendment stating that Tenant A and Tenant B releases all claims to the Security Deposit and any other monies held Landlord. Tenant A and Tenant B are the one who moved out. Tenant C remained. Now I just need Tenant C to signed addendum stating that "The pet deposit may be used by management/manager for any damage related to the pet(s) and for ANY other monies owed by resident under the terms of the lease and for physical premises damages, whether pet related or not”. Any recommendations for that legal term.
Unfortunately, the language is confusing. It says non-refundable in one place and refundable in the other.
Were all the Tenants on the same lease? Or did they have separate leases? If they were on the same lease, the deposit stays in place until all tenants are out. I recommend you tell them the deposit will not be refunded until all three tenants are out so you can determine any damages and whether the deposit will be applied to cleaning/repairs or refunded.
Quote from @JD Martin:
Refund the money and be done with it, and put better language in your future contracts. Whether it was a typo or not makes no difference if you have to go to court, and for a lot of tenants $300 is worth finding a tenant advocate lawyer and suing for 3x the deposit. You should have had an estoppel letter when you bought the property ascertaining what was paid, and you should have collected that deposit escrow from the seller.
Are you getting screwed here? Probably but it's a learning opportunity. $300 shouldn't make or break you either way and it will teach you to compose good leases.
Lucky I made them signed a lease amendment stating that Tenant A and Tenant B releases all claims to the Security Deposit and any other monies held Landlord. Tenant A and Tenant B are the one who moved out. Tenant C remained. Now I just need Tenant C to signed addendum stating that "The pet deposit may be used by management/manager for any damage related to the pet(s) and for ANY other monies owed by resident under the terms of the lease and for physical premises damages, whether pet related or not”. Any recommendations for that legal term.. Thank you
thank you everyone
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
The others are right-if they are all on one lease, the lease is in place until all three move out. If the one who is staying is on a new lease by themselves, then go through and do an inspection to look for pet damage. Because the wording is contradictory in different sections, if there is no visible pet damage, then refund her the money.
Quote from @Kathy Nguyen:
I'm not an attorney, but your clause sounds clear enough to me. I have something similar in my contract.