Quote Quoting Mr. Knowitall
View Post
If you damaged the paint, such that your landlord has a valid charge for the paint, a court won't be interested in hearing you try to make the sort of confused argument about the lease language that you have tried to make here. You need to focus on whether or not the charge is valid.
Thank you.
I'm sure the court won't be, if the repaint was due to damage. But I'm not sure how you got so confused. My argument is that ORC 5321.16(B) says the landlord has 30 days to return deposit or send an itemized bill with deductions listed. He did not. We have proof. Motion for Summary Judgment, done.

If denied. They will either argue the painting was done due to damage or they will argue the language in the lease says they can charge for "any and all turn over costs".

If they argue painting due to damage, we will show our pictures and emails and hope the Magistrate rules in our favor.

If they argue the lease language then I want to be able to argue that the language in the lease doesn't override ORC 5321.16. This last possibility is the reason for my question.