Penalties may be imposed against a landlord who retains a security deposit for damages to the leasehold if the landlord fails to provide a written list of the damages within 30 days after the tenant vacates, according to the Landlord and Tenant Act. However, the penalties are waived if the tenant fails to provide the landlord in writing with his or her new mailing address.
In a recent Allegheny County case, four college students rented an apartment from a landlord. In keeping with the terms of the written lease, the college students’ fathers all guaranteed their financial obligations under the lease. At the end of the lease term, the tenants moved out and the keys were delivered to the landlord’s business office. None of the tenants provided a new address to the landlord. Upon inspection of the premises, the landlord discovered substantial damage to the apartment beyond the amount covered by the security deposit and the landlord sent a written demand of $2,858 to each of the addresses of the parents. The mailing date on the envelope was 31 days after the keys were dropped off and 30 days after the lease expired. The tenants’ parents refused to pay and demanded payment of double the amount of the original security deposit arguing that they had not received the written list of damages within 30 days of the vacating of the apartment. The landlord filed an action seeking the $2,858.
The Trial Court found that at no time did the tenants provide their new address in writing to the landlord. The tenants’ failure to affirmatively provide their new address in writing to the Landlord resulted in a waiver of any of the potential penalties against the landlord even if the court were to find that the written list was delivered beyond the 30 day period. The tenants argued that the term “new address” under the Landlord and Tenant Act should apply to any pre-lease addresses where they could still be reached. The court held that the term “new address” has only one logical and reasoning meaning: the address where a tenant will reside after leaving the premises leased from the landlord.
As a side note, the court awarded over $15,000 to the landlord for attorney fees accumulated as a result of the trial and appeal process. It turned out that one of the parents/guarantors was also an attorney who led the litigation against the landlord. As noted by the court, “dad” had chosen an overzealous “nuclear option” in defending the landlord’s claim by countersuing the landlord under the Consumer Protection Law, Federal RICO charges, and instituting a class action. Dad’s hard work resulted in a judgment of over $21,406 against all the guarantors when the landlord’s original claim was only $2,848. Sometimes, the father does not always know best.
Topics
Member Discussion
Recent Articles
-
7 Tips to Protect Your Home From Snow
- December 26, 2024
- 3 min. read
Whether Pennsylvania sees a snowy winter or a mild one, here are seven tips for protecting your home from snow according to property and construction expert Natalie Mitchell.
-
Pennsylvania: Home to Hallmark-Worthy Holiday Towns
- December 25, 2024
- 3 min. read
What do Hallmark Christmas movies and Pennsylvania have in common? The answer is cozy, picturesque towns that offer plenty of fun festivities, seasonal décor and holiday cheer.
-
How Americans Deck the Halls
- December 24, 2024
- 2 min. read
Come the holiday season, Americans love to deck the halls to embrace the spirit. In fact, according to a Lawnstarter survey, 1 in 5 say it’s never too early to start!
Daily Emails
You’ll be the first to know about real estate trends and various legal happenings. Stay up-to-date by subscribing to JustListed.