# need to have an unpleasant phone conversation with my former landlord **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 29, 2009, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981 "2009-09-29T15:32:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/21 "2009-09-29T17:02:30Z")
> [@purplehorseshoe](#): > > The specific claims I’m disputing are: > > 1. a $200 charge for extermination following pet occupancy > OK, when we signed the lease, we agreed to this charge (we have two cats) with the reasonable expectation that the same service would be performed for us, since the previous tenant had a dog. The service was NOT performed before we moved in - in fact, the prev. tenant left the house a filthy mess - and so I am being asked to pay for a service I have never received. That does not sit right with me. > > 2. a $125 charge for a photocell automatic light in front of the house > It NEVER worked. It didn’t go on the damage report because we filled out that form during the daytime, and there’s no switch for the light, so it’s not like there was a way to check if it worked. (There is a fully functioning porch light out front.) > > 3. a $55 charge for a line item that reads “unclogged bathtub, nothing found” > The smallest charge, true. However, that bathtub drained just fine - I know, I showered our last morning there - plus the water got shut off \*while \*we were still moving out, so I know the water’s not on in that house. So I’m paying a plumber to fix a drain that was never clogged, not to mention this whole “nothing found” crap. (Of course there was nothing to find! The drain wasn’t clogged!) > So, give it to me straight. On the one hand, a phone call is free, and any money I get back is more money than I had before, and $ is tight now. On the other hand .. um … ?? Sorry to be more pessimistic, but none of these are items which you have any realistic chance of recovering. The extermination item is completely legit. You agreed to it in your lease. It’s part of the deal for owning a pet. You’re stuck. It’s legally immaterial that the service was not performed after the tenant who preceded you. You still took possession and never complained. You don’t have a leg to stand on there. Unless you can prove the outside light didn’t work when you moved in, you have no traction there either. Unless you can prove the bathtub was not clogged you have no traction there. I’m not trying to be a dick, but I’ve had a lot of landlords, and I’ve been screwed on deposits for a lot less reason than this. Go ahead and make the phone call, but realize you’re going to be appealing to nothing but his own good nature. Legally, I think you’re totally boned. That’s a normal part of being a renter. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/22 "2009-09-29T17:14:31Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Sorry to be more pessimistic, but none of these are items which you have any realistic chance of recovering. The extermination item is completely legit. You agreed to it in your lease. It’s part of the deal for owning a pet. You’re stuck. It’s legally immaterial that the service was not performed after the tenant who preceded you. You still took possession and never complained. You don’t have a leg to stand on there. Yup. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Unless you can prove the outside light didn’t work when you moved in, you have no traction there either. This one might have a shot. The light could have gone out at any time before or after move in. Normally, a landlord can only charge for damages _caused by the tenant_. What does the landlord have to say about how this light was damaged and whether the tenant caused that damage? Ask and find out. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Unless you can prove the bathtub was not clogged you have no traction there. You have your own testimony and maybe a witness? The “nothing found” part of it makes this deduction worth exploring. In any event, for future reference, always do a thorough walk through upon moving in and moving out. Take pictures. Test all plumbing and electrical. The drain issue should have been easily detected on a walk-thru. ---
**Author:** ![gurujulp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ba9def/32.png) [@gurujulp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gurujulp)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/23 "2009-09-29T17:31:17Z")
> [@purplehorseshoe](#): > > I kinda figured I’d get such a pessimistic response. > > To be honest, it might make the conversation with him easier - so much simpler to keep one’s voice smooth and calm when the outcome seems futile anyway. If I was fighting for money I was really owed, I’d probably wind up getting pissed. > > And yes, I know Texas has almost no legal resources for tenants. My last landlord declared bankruptcy during the 30-day window when he’s supposed to return my deposit, thus screwing me out of every last penny. Bastard. It doesn’t matter whether or not the landlord is bankrupt- the security deposit was never his. He was just the custodian, so he is required to keep that in an account that would not be affected by going bankrupt. That should be easy to take to small claims. You can actually win damages in most locations if he failed to safeguard your deposit! IANAL, though, and Texas can be tough, so follow those links folks have provided. I would forget about this most recent stuff, and go to court on that! ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/24 "2009-09-29T17:35:38Z")
Yeah, the $55 for the bathtub is probably the OP’s strongest case (given the admission that nothing was found), but it would probably cost at least that much (if not more) to file a claim in small claims court. I don’t know what the filing fees are in Texas, but I think a range of $50-$100 is a pretty normal across the country. As for the light, I’ve found that judges tend to take landlords at their word. If the landlord says it worked when you moved in (even if he’s lying), the judge will probably take his word for it unless she can present some good evidence that it didn’t work. I’ve argued, and fought and even gone to court with my share of landlords and it’s never been worth it. At best you get back some chump change, at worst you come out even more in the hole. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/25 "2009-09-29T17:42:54Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > As for the light, I’ve found that judges tend to take landlords at their word. If the landlord says it worked when you moved in (even if he’s lying), the judge will probably take his word for it unless she can present some good evidence that it didn’t work. Even if the light worked upon move-in and did not work later, the landlord should have to show the tenant caused the damage before charging the tenant for it. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/26 "2009-09-29T18:01:53Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Sorry to be more pessimistic, but none of these are items which you have any realistic chance of recovering. The extermination item is completely legit. You agreed to it in your lease. It’s part of the deal for owning a pet. You’re stuck. It’s legally immaterial that the service was not performed after the tenant who preceded you. You still took possession and never complained. You don’t have a leg to stand on there. > [@Bearflag70](#): > > Yup. My “yup” is speaking to the extermination item… unless you can show you were damaged by the landlord’s failure to perform the service when you moved in. ---
**Author:** ![KSO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@KSO](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KSO)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/27 "2009-09-29T19:46:01Z")
> [@purplehorseshoe](#): > > The specific claims I’m disputing are: > > 1. a $200 charge for extermination following pet occupancy > OK, when we signed the lease, we agreed to this charge (we have two cats) with the reasonable expectation that the same service would be performed for us, since the previous tenant had a dog. The service was NOT performed before we moved in - in fact, the prev. tenant left the house a filthy mess - and so I am being asked to pay for a service I have never received. That does not sit right with me. > > 2. a $125 charge for a photocell automatic light in front of the house > It NEVER worked. It didn’t go on the damage report because we filled out that form during the daytime, and there’s no switch for the light, so it’s not like there was a way to check if it worked. (There is a fully functioning porch light out front.) > > 3. a $55 charge for a line item that reads “unclogged bathtub, nothing found” > The smallest charge, true. However, that bathtub drained just fine - I know, I showered our last morning there - plus the water got shut off \*while \*we were still moving out, so I know the water’s not on in that house. So I’m paying a plumber to fix a drain that was never clogged, not to mention this whole “nothing found” crap. (Of course there was nothing to find! The drain wasn’t clogged!) > So, give it to me straight. On the one hand, a phone call is free, and any money I get back is more money than I had before, and $ is tight now. On the other hand .. um … ?? 1. This is a loser claim. You agreed to pay for extermination at the end of your lease. Your “reasonable expectation” that extermination would be performed at the beginning of your occupancy is irrelevant, especially since it doesn’t sound like you ever actually requested that service. 2. This is a loser claim. You should have reported the broken light as soon as you noticed it. By submitting the damage report and then never amending it, you essentially conceded that everything was in proper working order at the beginning of your lease. Do you know what was wrong with the light? You shouldn’t have to pay for normal wear and tear on external fixtures, I don’t think. But if the light was physically broken, and you never reported it, then I think you are SOL. 3. I guess you have a leg to stand on with this one. Landlords don’t like to spend money they don’t have to spend so something must have caused the landlord to call in a plumber. The fact that nothing was found certainly helps you. It’s probably worth a call to ask why they called in a plumber since you hadn’t had any problems. But if you did have problems, then, again, you are SOL because you should have reported them when they happened. Good luck, whatever you decide to do. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/28 "2009-09-29T20:54:05Z")
> [@KSO](#): > > 1. This is a loser claim. You should have reported the broken light as soon as you noticed it. By submitting the damage report and then never amending it, you essentially conceded that everything was in proper working order at the beginning of your lease. Do you know what was wrong with the light? You shouldn’t have to pay for normal wear and tear on external fixtures, I don’t think. But if the light was physically broken, and you never reported it, then I think you are SOL. There’s still the problem of the landlord’s showing the tenant caused the damage even if we assume the light was in perfect working condition on the date of possession. Since we don’t know the nature of the damage done, I think this one is up in the air. An external light is problematic in this regard, unlike a bathtub drain. If it was an internal electrical problem, I doubt you could charge a tenant for that. 1. What is the nature of the damage? 2. How is that damage attributable to the tenant? ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/29 "2009-09-29T21:03:02Z")
A call at this stage is useless, 'cause even if he was cooperative, he still has to know the facts, hang up and you have to call him back. Send him a nicely worded letter. Stick to facts. List them out: A, B C, D Send this letter certified / return receipt/ his signature required. (Registered is more expensive so you don’t need that.) This will show he got the letter, HE signed for it, and you will get a notice back saying he got it. Then allow a day or two then call him as a follow up and follow the advice of the other posters. I don’t know what state you’re in but check laws as there are time limits on things. California has some pretty good laws in favour of former tenents ---
**Author:** ![SmellMyWort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SmellMyWort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmellMyWort)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/30 "2009-09-29T21:12:42Z")
I would at least call him and try to negotiate. Like you said, any money back is more than you have now. He might be willing to return more of your deposit if he believes doing so gets you out of his hair. I’d call and go with a “disappointed” act (but be ready for bitch mode). Keep going on about how you can’t believe he’d try to screw you after you’d been so patient with the roof constantly leaking, the place being a mess when you moved in, and anything else you can think of. Bring up that you thought you were doing him a favor by not forcing him to do the extermination before you moved in, thinking that an honorable, non-greedy guy would at least reduce the fee by half. Same with the light, tell him you didn’t notice it on the check in because it was light out and you never complained about it because the additional outside light was sufficient and you didn’t want to bother him. If you need to, strike at his ego since he thinks he’s such a great landlord and tell him he really isn’t, and list off the reasons (cause it sounds like he does kind of suck). Call him on the drain thing and demand to know how he tested it with the water turned off in the house. Do everything you can to make him a) feel like a jerk, and b) doubt that his deductions are legit. Finally, maybe this can be a wakeup call for you to notch up the responsibility level a bit unless you like getting hosed. It’s a perfect example of how being lax about things (the light and the exterminator) can come back to bite you in the ass. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/31 "2009-09-29T21:14:58Z")
> [@Markxxx](#): > > This will show he got the letter, HE signed for it, and you will get a notice back saying he got it. I know what you mean, but does _anybody_ sign for mail? In my 4+ decades, I’ve gotten 3 or 4 items that needed my signature for receipt. I’ve politely declined, figuring that if the publisher’s clearinghouse really needs to contact me, they’ll find a way.😉 ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/32 "2009-09-29T21:39:49Z")
> [@purplehorseshoe](#): > > The specific claims I’m disputing are: > > 1. a $200 charge for extermination following pet occupancy > OK, when we signed the lease, we agreed to this charge Then you will have to pay for it, as you agreed to it. > [@](#): > > (we have two cats) with the reasonable expectation that the same service would be performed for us, since the previous tenant had a dog. The service was NOT performed before we moved in - in fact, the prev. tenant left the house a filthy mess - and so I am being asked to pay for a service I have never received. That does not sit right with me. It wouldn’t sit right with me, either, but unless you had that _in writing_ - “You will perform this service for us, otherwise we will not pay for this service to occur after we leave” or the equivalent - you’re stuck. I’m sorry about that, but I don’t see where you have a legal leg to stand on here. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/33 "2009-09-29T22:06:43Z")
Depending on how bad the roof was, you might consider a habitability claim against him as leverage. ---
**Author:** ![Carol\_the\_Impaler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Carol\_the\_Impaler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carol_the_Impaler)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/34 "2009-09-29T23:49:36Z")
Next time, do a walk through with your landlord when you leave. Take pictures of everything as you do the walk through. I lived in Texas for years and I always got my deposit back. ---
**Author:** ![Blisters](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@Blisters](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blisters)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/35 "2009-09-30T02:05:30Z")
I think your third complaint is certainly valid. Send a SHORT letter to the landlord saying you haven’t yet cashed the check because you know the tub drained fine the morning you moved out, because you checked it. Do not go into detail…really, anything you tell him (like the TV cops say) can/will be used against you if it goes to court \*. Would he like you to come pick up a new check for the extra $55 and return this one? etc. I would avoid, at all costs doing this over the phone. A letter means (between the lines) “I would like to have documentation of this” \*My landlord that I successfully sued for return of deposit wrote this nice chatty letter including the words “I know this isn’t really fair to the two housemates who have been the most responsible” You can believe I highlighted THAT little tidbit and pointed it out to the judge. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/36 "2009-09-30T02:09:00Z")
What State are you in?😕 ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/37 "2009-09-30T04:02:03Z")
> [@Blisters](#): > > I think your third complaint is certainly valid. > > Send a SHORT letter to the landlord saying you haven’t yet cashed the check because you know the tub drained fine the morning you moved out, because you checked it. Do not go into detail…really, anything you tell him (like the TV cops say) can/will be used against you if it goes to court \*. Would he like you to come pick up a new check for the extra $55 and return this one? etc. > > I would avoid, at all costs doing this over the phone. A letter means (between the lines) “I would like to have documentation of this” > \*My landlord that I successfully sued for return of deposit wrote this nice chatty letter including the words “I know this isn’t really fair to the two housemates who have been the most responsible” You can believe I highlighted THAT little tidbit and pointed it out to the judge. And the landlord can throw the letter in the garbage. He really has no incentive to respond to it. What’s she going to do, pay a $100 filing fee to sue for $50? Really, this is not a situation where she has any leverage to get tough about anything. He can ignore her with virtual impunity. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/38 "2009-09-30T04:19:32Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > And the landlord can throw the letter in the garbage. He really has no incentive to respond to it. What’s she going to do, pay a $100 filing fee to sue for $50? If he throws her letter in the garbage, she doesn’t sign the paper and he doesn’t get any of the deposit. Based on a google search, I think the filing fee in Texas small claims court is all of $27. (Even if that’s wrong I doubt it would be much more.) The landlord can throw her letter in the garbage, it’s true, but if she gets no resolution on the issue, she can sue, and if he ignores that he’s likely to lose a few hundred dollars. **purplehorseshoe** , I think you know you don’t have the strongest case in the world. The extermination thing should have been dealt with when you moved in, and I’m not totally clear on the light issue, but again, you’d be in a better position if you’d discussed it or tried to get it fixed sooner. For that matter the same goes with the other issues. It would be easier to prove he was a bad landlord if you’d tried to get the place fixed up at the time. But if you feel these charges are frivolous and you think you can prove it, you do have the small claims court option. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/39 "2009-09-30T04:33:35Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > If he throws her letter in the garbage, she doesn’t sign the paper and he doesn’t get any of the deposit. Huh? She doesn’t sign _what_ paper? He’s already got the deposit. She’s already moved out and he’s already sent her a check for the remainder. She thinks he kept too much out of it, but there’s nothing for her to sign. Whether she cashes the check or not is no skin off his nose. He didn’t send her a bill, he sent her back a check for the deposit she already paid, minus what he deducted for repairs. He already _has_ her money. She’s trying to get more out of him, he isn’t trying get any out of her. There’s very little chance she would recover very much in small claims court either. maybe the 50 bucks for the tub. By the way, even if she wins a judgement, that still doesn’t mean he’ll pay her anything. Small claims court won’t collect the debt. I know this for a fact. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981/40 "2009-09-30T04:52:49Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Huh? She doesn’t sign _what_ paper? He’s already got the deposit. She’s already moved out and he’s already sent her a check for the remainder. She thinks he kept too much out of it, but there’s nothing for her to sign. Whether she cashes the check or not is no skin off his nose. You’re right, skip that part. (Figures: I added it to my post at the last second.) > [@](#): > > There’s very little chance she would recover very much in small claims court either. maybe the 50 bucks for the tub. I don’t think she’d do very well either because this stuff should have been worked out already. (Maybe they discussed it and she hasn’t mentioned it, but based on what’s been posted…) I’m not saying she’d win in court. But she does have the option. > [@](#): > > By the way, even if she wins a judgement, that still doesn’t mean he’ll pay her anything. Small claims court won’t collect the debt. I know this for a fact. True, and I know that firsthand. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-to-have-an-unpleasant-phone-conversation-with-my-former-landlord/511981.md?page=3)