Who Should Cover Cost for Mailbox Inspection – Tenant, PM, or Owner?

Question

Hi everyone,

Looking for some advice regarding a mailbox issue and an unexpected charge.

A new tenant just moved into my rental property. Shortly after moving in, the property manager informed me that the tenant was unable to access their mailbox due to a broken key lodged in the keyhole. Based on that, I assumed it was a maintenance issue—possibly wear and tear or tenant-related.

Later, I received another email from the property manager's maintenance team saying a vendor was sent to inspect the issue. They now believe the tenant may have been targeting the wrong mailbox, which could have caused the confusion. Despite this, a $75 service fee was charged for the inspection.

Now, the property manager has sent me an email asking me, as the owner, to pay the $75 bill.

Since the tenant is new and may have been given incorrect mailbox information, I’m unsure who should be responsible for the charge—the tenant, the property manager (if they gave the wrong info), or me.

Has anyone dealt with a similar situation? Who typically covers this kind of cost?

Thanks in advance for any advice!

Lauren Robins · Answer

This type of situation is a common gray area in rental property management, where it's unclear whether the cost should fall on the tenant, the property manager, or the owner. Since the tenant is new and was unable to access the mailbox due to a broken key in the lock, it initially appeared to be a maintenance issue—possibly due to wear and tear or misuse. However, after the vendor's inspection, it was suggested that the tenant may have simply been trying to open the wrong mailbox, which complicates who should bear responsibility for the $75 service fee.

If the issue was caused by the tenant using the wrong mailbox—especially if they were given the correct key and number—then the tenant should reasonably be responsible for the service charge. On the other hand, if the property manager gave the tenant incorrect mailbox information (e.g., the wrong box number or key), then the manager arguably caused the confusion and should absorb the cost. If no one is clearly at fault and the issue resulted from a simple misunderstanding, it's often the case that the landlord ends up footing the bill, unless they push back or have a policy in place.

In your case, the fair and prudent course would be to ask the property manager for clarification: Was the tenant provided with the correct mailbox number and key at move-in? Was there any actual damage to the mailbox or was the key simply inserted into the wrong lock? And who made the decision to dispatch a vendor before confirming those basic details? These questions can help determine where the fault lies and, consequently, who should pay.

If the answers point to tenant error, it would be appropriate to ask that the tenant be charged. If the property manager provided inaccurate information, you can request that they cover the cost or at least share in it. If no conclusive evidence exists and this seems like a one-time, honest mistake, you might choose to pay it as a goodwill gesture—but make it clear that tenant-caused service calls in the future should be billed directly to the tenant.

Ultimately, you may also want to use this opportunity to establish clearer procedures with your property manager for how similar situations should be handled in the future. Setting expectations now will help you avoid unnecessary expenses and confusion going forward.

Note: This information is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, financial, or investment advice. No attorney-client, fiduciary, or professional relationship is established through this communication.

Peter Sik · Answer

Thank you so much for taking the time to provide such a well-thought-out and balanced response. I truly appreciate the depth of your insight—it’s clear that you understand the real-world nuances of property management, especially when it comes to these “gray area” situations.

You helped me see the issue from all sides—tenant, property manager, and owner—which is incredibly valuable. What stood out most was your suggestion to focus on key questions: whether the tenant was given the correct mailbox information, whether there was any actual damage, and who authorized the vendor visit without confirming the details first. These are exactly the questions I need to bring up, and your structured approach gave me a confident and fair way to follow up.

You also made a great point about using this incident as an opportunity to set clearer expectations with my property manager moving forward. It’s easy to overlook the importance of proactive communication and defined protocols until something like this happens. I now see this as more than just a $75 bill—it’s a chance to improve how things are handled in the future.

Thanks again for sharing your experience and taking the time to help a fellow landlord navigate a tricky situation. Your response made a big difference, and I’ll definitely be applying your advice in my communication with the PM.