[RPPTL LandTen] Security Deposit Disputes

[Dennis Chen]

Who owns the security deposit?  My understanding is that a security deposit
is the property of the tenant and is being held in escrow by the property
manager.  If the tenant timely challenges the claim on the sec dep, then
who owns the sec dep?  Is the landlord entitled to the claimed amount
without a judicial determination?

I have a sec dep case where the Prop Mgr turned the sec dep over to the
LL.  Tenant sued LL and Prop Mgr.  Prop Mgr raised that statutory provision
and county court dismissed the claim against the Prop Mgr.  I represent the
LL.

Dennis A. Chen, Esq.
Chen Law Firm, PA
PO Box 784419
Winter Garden FL 34778
Tel:   (407) 392-1872
dennis at chenlaw.net

Civil Litigation * Landlord/Tenant * Personal Injury * Real Estate
Litigation

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachment, contains
legally privileged and confidential information and is intended solely for
the recipient. Should the intended recipient forward this message to any
person or entity, that action could constitute a waiver of the
attorney-client privilege. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is prohibited. If this
communication was sent or received in error, please notify us by reply
e-mail and delete the original message.


On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:22 PM Harry Heist <harry at evict.com> wrote:

> A few years ago I sent this question but back again.
>
>
>
> It is a REAL problem, a very common issue, and the answer is unclear.
>
>
>
> If a tenant disputes a full or partial claim on a security deposit, does
> the property manager have to hold or can they just disburse the disputed
> amount to the property owner and see if anyone sues?
>
>
>
> I personally know a few FREC Commissioners and they refuse to give an
> answer.  I have seen a judge say that they cannot disburse, I have seen a
> case where the judge said they had to disburse.  (an owner sued the PM
> company for the funds they were holding because they were scared to
> disburse)
>
>
>
> The whole purpose of the law change about 20 years ago was to remove the
> requirement of interpleader or  litigation of EDO and FREC will NOT give an
> EDO if the matter is sent to FREC on a security deposit claim.
>
>
>
> What is your opinion on this?
>
>
>
> This was added around 20 years ago to STOP the necessity of interpleader,
> litigation or an EDO (Escrow disbursement order) but the question still is
> up in the air.
>
>
>
> (d)  Compliance with this section by an individual or business entity
> authorized to conduct business in this state, including Florida-licensed
> real estate brokers and sales associates, constitutes compliance with all
> other relevant Florida Statutes pertaining to security deposits held
> pursuant to a rental agreement or other landlord-tenant relationship.
> Enforcement personnel shall look solely to this section to determine
> compliance. This section prevails over any conflicting provisions in
> chapter 475 and in other sections of the Florida Statutes, and shall
> operate to permit licensed real estate brokers to disburse security
> deposits and deposit money without having to comply with the notice and
> settlement procedures contained in s. 475.25(1)(d).
>
>
>
> *When the law was changed, the ambiguity began.  While it is CLEAR that
> FREC does not care now what the property manager (licensee) does, does the
> 15 day dispute have any meaning now?  Is the property manager at risk if
> they disburse? *
>
>
>
> Opinions?   The way we advise our clients is simply that “we are not sure”
>
>
>
> The bottom line question is this: *“If the tenant disputes within 15
> days, NOW WHAT?*
>
>
>
> Harry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *LAW OFFICES OF HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.PH: 1 800 253 8428FAX: 1 800 367
> 9038"Serving the Property Management Professional"Website:  *
> *www.evict.com* <http://www.evict.com/>
> * Email: **harry at evict.com* <harry at evict.com>
>
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870>
>
>
> *Visit us on Facebook*
>
>
>
>
>
> THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
> INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY.  ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
> DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> landten mailing list
> landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/landten/attachments/20190702/8bcf0b8e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1153 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/landten/attachments/20190702/8bcf0b8e/image003.png>