Marvin rents an apartment from Gloria on a year lease. He pays $650 a month in rent, and gave her the $650 deposit she requested. At the end of the lease, Marvin vacates the apartment and Gloria withholds $300 of the deposit for repairs for damage that occurred while Marvin lived there. When Marvin asks what repair work was necessary, Gloria tells him that the place needed some cleaning, and some work on the walls and floors, but she doesn’t go into detail, despite Marvin’s repeated questions. After a month and a half, Marvin brings suit against Gloria for the $300, saying he was never given any specific information about the repair work. In court, Gloria produces receipts for $300 for repairs done in Marvin’s former apartment.
How should the judge rule?
- A. For Marvin, because Gloria did not properly notify him of why she withheld the deposit.
- A is the correct answer. Under the Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act, Gloria was required, within 30 days of the end of the lease or Marvin’s departure, to provide Marvin with a written itemized statement of the deductions from the deposit and the balance of the deposit. Because Gloria failed to do so, she forfeited her right to withhold the deposit or to assert any claim against Marvin for the repair work even if repair may have been necessary. Furthermore, Gloria will now have to pay Marvin’s attorney’s fees and court costs.
- B. For Gloria, because she properly withheld the $300 for repair work that was done.
- Sorry, but that's not the correct answer. Please select another.