[WSBAPT] RCW 59.18.260 - Security Deposit Question

Sat Dec 13 12:42:01 PST 2014

I'm chiming in a little late on this one, but I agree with you Rob, that
the landlord doesn't need to know the exact amount of the cost of the
repairs if there is a valid reason for not having the repairs done in 14
days.  The way I read the statute, the landlord is required to notify the
tenant within 14 days of how the unreturned portion of the deposit is being
used, and to return the remainder. If the estimate to repair the damages is
in excess of the deposit amount, I think all that is required is a
description of the required repairs and a statement that the full deposit
is going to be used toward the repairs.  Then bill the tenant for the
excess repair costs after the repairs are complete.  If the estimated
repair costs are less than the deposit, refund the excess deposit with the
notice stating that a portion is being withheld to pay for the estimated
repair costs.  Then promptly refund any of the withheld deposit that is not
actually needed to pay for repairs.

With regard to the original questions about paragraph 31 - I agree that it
doesn't meet the statute. A separate document is required that actually
describes the condition of specific features of the apartment.  I also
don't read the statute to require a move-out walk-through with the tenant,
or to necessarily use the move-in condition checklist at move-out.  But, I
advise my landlord clients to use the same form for move-out condition that
was used for move-in condition with that tenant.  That way, a single
document shows the state of the unit at both times.  Given the downsides to
not handling the deposit and move-in checklist correctly, it is worth
dealing with the hassle.  I've found that once landlords get a bit of a
standard process in place, they don't find it that difficult to comply.

Spencer A. W. Stromberg
Sullivan Stromberg, PLLC
827 W. 1st Avenue, Suite 425
Spokane, WA 99201-3914
P: 509.413.1004
F: 509.413.1078
E: spencers at sullivanstromberg.com

www.sullivanstromberg.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential and
may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying or distribution, or use of this email
or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this email in error,
please notify me and delete it from your system.

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Rob Rowley <rob at rowleylegal.com> wrote:
>
> Good morning Howard,
>
>
>
> I thought you’d already be in Phoenix snowbirding for the season.  For you
> westside practitioners - Howard Herman is one of those great lawyers who
> have a very low bar number and is always a pleasure to litigate against.
> Always learn something from Howard.  He can prevail in litigation and still
> make you feel good.
>
>
>
> I respectfully disagree with you as to the need to have mathematical
> precision when calculating damages on the security deposit disposition
> form.  One common reason why the landlord would not be able to get
> mathematical precise damages is that 14 days goes awfully quick when a
> tenant moves out on a Friday night and the landlord that has to take
> possession until Monday and then locates contractors to come and give them
> a bid. – try getting 2 or 3 bids and the timeframe increases
> exponentially.  This is especially true with out-of-state landlords who
> don’t know anyone and are having to ask around/do research to locate a
> reputable contractor.
>
>
>
> As I mentioned before, I agree with you that the lease provision that I
> cited below was noncompliant.  I've already advised my landlord client
> accordingly.
>
>
>
> Have a great winter and I will see you in the spring.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Robert R. Rowley* | Attorney at Law
>
> 505 W. Riverside Ave, Suite 500
>
> Spokane, WA  99201
>
> Telephone: (509) 252-5074
>
> Mobile: (509) 994-1143
>
> Facsimile: (509) 928-3084
>
> Email: rob at rowleylegal.com
>
> Web Site: www.rowleylegal.com
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:
> wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] *On Behalf Of *Jane Bitz
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 5:06 PM
>
> *To:* WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBAPT] RCW 59.18.260 - Security Deposit Question
>
>
>
> Thanks, Howard!
>
> My son had a Pullman landlord charge him $6.00 x 12 for each outlet cover
> in his apartment to be replaced by a licensed electrician. He accepted the
> remaining deposit money and signed off on the “damage report” before
> telling me. Bad landlord.
>
> Jane Bitz.
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [
> mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>] *On Behalf Of *hhherman2
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:40 PM
> *To:* 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv'
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBAPT] RCW 59.18.260 - Security Deposit Question
>
>
>
> Hi Rob.
>
>
>
> Your lease para 31 does not comply with the statute by a mile. Maybe two
> miles. You won’t get one of those past me without a fight.
>
>
>
> Your landlord doesn’t even have a check list. The statute requires the
> landlord to produce one at the request of the tenant. “The tenant has the
> right to request one free replacement copy of the written checklist.”
>
>
>
> Para 31 is not even a shadow of what is required by the statute and it is
> buried in the boilerplate of a printed document.
>
> The statute requires “a written checklist or *statement **specifically**
> describing” a number of specific items. *
>
>
>
> As to the appellate case, The landlord’ estimate $X has to be weighed
> against the tenant’s estimate “none”.  I see no reason for the landlord not
> to know precisely the amount of damage if he has any intention of making
> repairs. When I wear the black hat and have to prepare pleadings for the
> landlord, I nearly always have that argument with the landlord. Often the
> landlord has no intention of making repairs. I am glad Neil is taking it up.
>
>
>
> See you in court.
>
>
>
> Howard Herman
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [
> mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>] *On Behalf Of *Rob Rowley
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:00 AM
> *To:* WSBA RPPT; wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
> *Subject:* [WSBAPT] RCW 59.18.260 - Security Deposit Question
>
>
>
> I was wanting to hear from some of the unlawful detainer gurus as to the
> below lease provision as it plays out against RCW 59.18.2 60.
>
>
>
> I've had the situation a couple times previous where there will be a
> dispute with the tenant over the deposit and when I ask the my landlord
> clients to produce a copy of the fully executed property condition
> checklist that the landlord says I don't have one and that what I have is
> set forth in the lease.  Typically, something similar to what you see below
> in that the provision is tucked away inside of the lease as opposed to a
> separate document.
>
>
>
> I'm of the school of thought that any time you have a security deposit
> dispute unless you have a fully executed separate document and you are
> timely on the 14 day letter that you should always return the deposit as
> small claims judges are legendarily tenant friendly.  (At least here in
> Spokane County)
>
>
>
> Any thoughts on enforceability of the provision tucked away inside of the
> lease versus a separate written document?  I’d say the lease provision
> fails as it doesn’t fully comply with what is required in the statute.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: cid:a7d437d5c07f488d869861e33792a1aa]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> RCW 59.18.260Moneys paid as deposit or security for performance by tenant
> — Written rental agreement to specify terms and conditions for retention by
> landlord — Written checklist required.
>
> If any moneys are paid to the landlord by the tenant as a deposit or as
> security for performance of the tenant's obligations in a lease or rental
> agreement, the lease or rental agreement shall be in writing and shall
> include the terms and conditions under which the deposit or portion thereof
> may be withheld by the landlord upon termination of the lease or rental
> agreement. If all or part of the deposit may be withheld to indemnify the
> landlord for damages to the premises for which the tenant is responsible,
> the rental agreement shall be in writing and shall so specify. No deposit
> may be collected by a landlord unless the rental agreement is in writing
> and a written checklist or *statement specifically describing the
> condition and cleanliness of or existing damages to the premises and
> furnishings, including, but not limited to, walls, floors, countertops,
> carpets, drapes, furniture, and appliances, is provided by the landlord to
> the tenant at the commencement of the tenancy. *The checklist or
> statement shall be signed and dated by the landlord and the tenant, and the
> tenant shall be provided with a copy of the signed checklist or statement.
> No such deposit shall be withheld on account of normal wear and tear
> resulting from ordinary use of the premises. The tenant has the right to
> request one free replacement copy of the written checklist. If the landlord
> collects a deposit without providing a written checklist at the
> commencement of the tenancy, the landlord is liable to the tenant for the
> amount of the deposit, and the prevailing party may recover court costs and
> reasonable attorneys' fees. This section does not limit the tenant's right
> to recover moneys paid as damages or security under RCW 59.18.280
> <http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=59.18.280>.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Robert R. Rowley* | Attorney at Law
>
> 505 W. Riverside Ave, Suite 500
>
> Spokane, WA  99201
>
> Telephone: (509) 252-5074
>
> Mobile: (509) 994-1143
>
> Facsimile: (509) 928-3084
>
> Email: rob at rowleylegal.com
>
> Web Site: www.rowleylegal.com
>
>
>
> Practice concentrated on business, real estate and general legal matters
> in Washington and Idaho.
>
>
>
> <https://www.facebook.com/rowleylegal>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/rob-rowley/11/172/b20>
> <https://twitter.com/ROBERTRROWLEY>
> <http://www.yelp.com/biz/robert-r-rowley-spokane>
>
>
>
> NOTICE: The contents of this message and any attachments may be protected
> by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine or other applicable
> protections.  If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, please notify the sender and promptly delete the
> message.  Thank you for your assistance.
>
> DISCLAIMER: You should recognize that responses provided by e-mail means
> are akin to ordinary telephone or face-to-face conversations and do not
> reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be
> applied in the case of a formal legal opinion. A formal opinion may very
> well reach a different conclusion.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image010.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1351 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image010.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1936 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image006.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1295 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image009.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image011.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 939 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image011.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2555 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image003.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1317 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image007.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 25077 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141213/2cf12f0d/image004.jpg>