well, if there is no security deposit to return, then that portion of the law obviously cannot apply. That doesn't mean the rest of the laws, especially the laws speaking to claims for damages, does not have to be followed.
this is the law he is arguing he benefits from not having to comply with since he is not withholding and of your deposit:
but I do not believe it allows him to not comply with the requirement of making the claim itself554.609 Itemized list of damages; check or money order; contents of notice of damages.Sec. 9.
In case of damage to the rental unit or other obligation against the security deposit, the landlord shall mail to the tenant, within 30 days after the termination of occupancy, an itemized list of damages claimed for which the security deposit may be used as provided in section 7, including the estimated cost of repair of each property damaged item and the amounts and bases on which he intends to assess the tenant. The list shall be accompanied by a check or money order for the difference between the damages claimed and the amount of the security deposit held by the landlord and shall not include any damages that were claimed on a previous termination inventory checklist prior to the tenant's occupancy of the rental unit. The notice of damages shall include the following statement in 12 point boldface type which shall be at least 4 points larger than the body of the notice: “You must respond to this notice by mail within 7 days after receipt of same, otherwise you will forfeit the amount claimed for damages.”.
so, since he sent you notice within that 30 days, he can legitimately make the claim of damages.554.610 Effect of noncompliance with notice of damages requirement.Sec. 10.
Failure by the landlord to comply with the notice of damages requirement within the 30 days after the termination of occupancy, constitutes agreement by the landlord that no damages are due and he shall remit to the tenant immediately the full security deposit.
but take note of this statute:
within 45 days...54.613 Action for damages; retention of security deposit; waiver.Sec. 13.
(1) Within 45 days after termination of the occupancy and not thereafter the landlord may commence an action in a court of competent jurisdiction for a money judgment for damages which he has claimed or in lieu thereof return the balance of the security deposit held by him to the tenant or any amount mutually agreed upon in writing by the parties. A landlord shall not be entitled to retain any portion of a security deposit for damages claimed unless he has first obtained a money judgment for the disputed amount or filed with the court satisfactory proof of an inability to obtain service on the tenant or unless:
(a) The tenant has failed to provide a forwarding address as required by section 11.
(b) The tenant has failed to respond to the notice of damages as required by section 12.
(c) The parties have agreed in writing to the disposition of the balance of the deposit claimed by the landlord.
(d) The amount claimed is entirely based upon accrued and unpaid rent equal to the actual rent for any full rental period or portion thereof during which the tenant has had actual or constructive possession of the premises.
(2) This section does not prejudice a landlord's right to retain any security deposit funds as satisfaction or partial satisfaction of a money judgment obtained pursuant to summary proceedings filed pursuant to chapter 57 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as amended, being sections 600.5701 to 600.5759 of the Compiled Laws of 1948 or other proceedings at law. Failure of the landlord to comply fully with this section constitutes waiver of all claimed damages and makes him liable to the tenant for double the amount of the security deposit retained.
that means, if he does not sue you within 45 days after the termination of occupancy, he cannot make a claim in court. Then, his failure to comply with the rules within constitute a waiver of all claimed damages.
so, unless he sues you within 45 days, this is no longer a valid debt and he cannot legally allow it to be reported to the credit reporting agencies.
the "for damages which he has claimed...." section means the lack of deposit is not relevant.
his failure to demand a security deposit does not excuse him from the requirements to make a claim, which if there was a deposit would be above and beyond that amount, within 45 days.



