Comments on: Landlords Should Not Play Games With Tenants’ Security Deposits

By: Tristan R. Pettit, Esq.

Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 23:49:44 +0000

Zena — Leases stay with the property so even in a foreclosur situation. So the lease would need to be honored. There also is a federal law re: tenants rights in foreclosure situations.

But if a lease ends or is void and if tenant stays and landlord accepts rent then it typically is on a month to month basis.

Late fees can only be charged if they are set forth in the written agreement – so it would depend if the lease is still in place or not as to whether or not late fees can still legally be charged.

Yes, tenants are responsible for damages caused by them. Key is to prove that the damages was not pre-existing and was beyond normal wear and tear.

By: Zena

Zena — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 03:44:37 +0000

Mr. Petit,
Thank you and I agree…
…due to many foreclosures: if lease doesn’t transfer in most cases and tenants choose to stay, does that mean tenants are staying on month to month bases….do late fees apply if they were in the old lease? If tenants destroy property during that short time are they liable in general? Thanks lot!

By: Tristan R. Pettit, Esq.

Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 20:13:52 +0000

Sena — Yes, sometimes it is frustrating to not have a definition of “normal wear and tear” but I also caution beware of what you wish for. If you hav e definition that you don’t like you will be stuck for it. In my opinion if a definition is drafted for normal wear and tear I doubt it will allow landlords to recover anything for cleaning. Currently many courts allow landlords the cost of cleaning — if such a definitaion excluded cleaning – no court court award those costs.

By: sena

sena — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:11:20 +0000

If there is so much speculations around “normal wear and tear” that cloogged up courts with the cases why legislation wont come up with some type of definition for that. Everything has a definition except “wear-tear”. To the point when com-r states “she doesn’t know if walls painted with the semi-gloss or flat but feels that paint, markers, burns could be washed off the wall” Cleaning companies say even if it is gloss it has top be repainted. Respectfully…thank you

By: Tristan R. Pettit, Esq.

Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:56:45 +0000

Allie — I cannot give legal advice via this blog as you pointed out. To my knowledge there is no law, regulation of case in Wisconsin that defines what “normal wear and tear” is. That determinination is left up to the judge or court commissioner based on the specific facts elicited at trial. Specific facts would be needed to give you an opinion —- how long did you live there, what caused the odor, if odor caused by a pet were pets allowed etc etc. Regardless of the facts and even if I could give you advice on this questions a court could disagree with me.

Not much help, I realize, but the issue of what is “normal wear and tear” is always a crap shoot as it means different things to different judges and even different things to the same judge on different days. It is a veritable “black hole”

By: Allie

Allie — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 02:25:41 +0000

Mr. Pettit,
I have an issue with my ex-landlord that I’m confused about. I hope this doesn’t count as specific legal advice, but is it considered “normal wear-and-tear” if there was an “odor” left on the mattress, comforter set, pillows, and curtains in the bedroom? They said they were forced to buy a new comforter set and pillows, and then deep clean the curtains and mattress. This “odor” wasn’t explained with any specific description or even adjectives, and we never smoked in the house and had no pets so it couldn’t be anything that breached the lease. Is “odor” without proven cause a matter of opinion or at least covered under “normal wear-and-tear” ?

By: R May

R May — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:23:26 +0000

Mr. Finger’s comment is the first comment, 1-8-2010