My question involves a security deposit in the State of: CA
I had a one year lease for a house that just recently expired and I had moved out. A proper 30-day notice was given and the landlord was OK with this. I performed a walk-thru with him prior to turning over the house so that we could try to get it to the best of their expectations. I had a professional cleaner come in and clean the carpets, bathrooms, and kitchen areas (as well as clean the windows, doors/door jams, etc). He was aware of this and approved the work. I am now finding out that the landlord is planning on charging me well over $1000 against my deposit, which if so, may turn out to be half of my deposit. This is ridiculous to me, as we were only there for a year, the house looked great when we turned it over, but yes I do admit that there were minor fixes here and there.
My first question is: I am under the belief that a second and third quote is sometimes required for costly jobs when it comes to security deposit situations. The landlord is trying to charge me $700 for yard work (which includes replacing two dry spots in the lawn and an area that had a weed control tarp covered by tanbark) He is blaming the dry grass on me, meanwhile he has a weekly gardener who I believe should have been responsible with the upkeep and reporting of this (not just at the end of the lease!). Also, he is stating that the weed control tarp was ripped and dug up by my small dog (a Chihuahua which passed away 6 months into the lease) and it all has to be replaced because of her. I do take some responsibility for the tarp being torn, but not all! Regardless I believe $700 to be excessive, and when I asked if the landlord got another quote he said he didnt have time. I requested him to (since the work had not yet been performed) and he denied this request.
Also: When finding out about what the cost of this might be, I told him that he was required to provide receipts for everything. He quickly started to tell me that it took him four days along with another person for two of the days, etc. I am pretty sure that most of the work was completed by him and he may not have all of the receipts for the work. Can I then argue any charges that proof is not provided for? Also, isnt he only allowed to charge for the cost of items to fix, not his own personal labor??
Lastly: If there was work that he claims he completed during the lease but we never received a receipt or any type of formal/informal letter from him stating the issue and reimbursement required, yet includes it in the withheld amount from the SD, is that legal???
PLEASE HELP!! Over $1000 in charges from a $2600 SD, for a one year lease is ridiculous!!
ONE THING I DID NOT INCLUDE: During the inital walk-thru with the landlord, he emailed me a list of the things he said must be fixed prior to the move out. It was quite a detailed list and many of the things he is now trying to charge were not stated in this list. Per Civil Code 1950.5:
Based on the inspection, the landlord shall give the tenant an itemized statement specifying repairs
or cleaning that are proposed to be the basis of any deductions from the security the landlord intends
to make pursuant to paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive of subdivision (B). This statement shall also
include the texts of subdivision (D) and paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (B). The
statement shall be given to the tenant, if the tenant is present for the inspection, or shall be left
inside the premises.
3. The tenant shall have the opportunity during the period following the initial inspection until
termination of the tenancy to remedy identified deficiencies, in a manner consistent with the rights
and obligations of the parties under the rental agreement, in order to avoid deductions from the
security.
4. Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent a landlord from using the security for deductions itemized
in the statement provided for in paragraph (2) that were not cured by the tenant so long as the
deductions are for damages authorized by this section.
5. Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent a landlord from using the security for any purpose
specified in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (B) that occurs between completion of
the initial inspection and termination of the tenancy or was not identified during the initial
inspection due to the presence of a tenant's possessions.
--If our only possessions that were inside were a bed and some clothes, but things being claimed afterwords were not "hidden" by these items. Can they then NOT be claimed??

