You can take the owners to court for the $85 dollars, but if you lose in court...the judge may make you liable for the owners attorney fee which seems to be $400.
You can take the owners to court for the $85 dollars, but if you lose in court...the judge may make you liable for the owners attorney fee which seems to be $400.
My understanding, at least in NY, is that in small claims, the other party is expected to be able to ONLY recover court costs. I'm not sure the defendant is even allowed to bring a $1000/hour attorney in, to intimidate the planitiff, as it'll certainly upend the logic and spirit of the small claims system.
I'm a landlord, and I find I usually replace blinds when people leave. It seems the cost of labor here greatly exceeds the replacement costs, certainly from consumer friendly places like "Blinds to Go" in my area.
I beleive the argument can be made that the landlord is making an end run around the principle of "wear and tear", by calling it a "repair" cost.
I can even see if he got another renter coming in, leaving in pristine condition again, and zap that guy with another $85.00 repair cost, for the same three broken slats. What would prevent him from storing the broken slats, and putting them in when the next tenant leaves, claiming the tenant did it??
Check with someone in small claims, and I'm pretty sure he can't start hiring $1,000/hour attornies on matters on $3.00 slats, and zap you with the bill. I beleive you have a good chance of prevailing, and as two can play the game, get your own $1,000/hour attorney.
Thank you all for weighing in. Money is tight now so I won't be taking a risk in Small Claims Court. I'm up against a huge management company and a couple of doctors who own the house. I know it's only $84.00, but that could pay a bill and if they did this to me, what are they doing to others? I still could use a little retribution, though. What if I report them to the BBB? Maybe it's not that big of a deal to be investigated. Or perhaps I should get what's left of my deposit and drop it?
I checked a FAQ's page for NY, hiring an attorney is permissable for either side. It said nothing about fees, but I am not aware of any state's SC court which permits fees to be compensable to the prevailing party, this would undermine the legislative purpose of SC. Costs of filing though, if the Plaintiff wins, yes.
My thought was that for the small claims system to work, where citizens are allowed to bring and litigate cases without the expense of an attorney, because many litigants cannot afford one, and then to allow someone to purposely bring in a "high price" attorney, and expect to collect fees on it, certainly would defeat the whole purpose of litigating in small claims.
I have watched a "People's Court" case, where they follow the laws of the state involved, one litigant did bring an attorney, but the attorney was not allowed to speak, for the reason that it was not permitted for that state. What state it is, I don't recall now.
I do know some states permit attroney's, some don't, true!
My state permits attorney's, but as far as compensable reimbursment to the victor, here is the statute on that:
1925.15 Costs.
The actual disbursements of the prevailing party for filing fees, execution fees, and other court fees may be allowed as costs. No other costs shall be allowed either party except by special order of the court. Costs allowed under this section may be apportioned between the parties, or waived, in whole or in part, as the court determines to be equitable.
No other costs shall be allowed....
Unless it is proven the suit by the Plaintiff is pure harassment/abuse of process, or a SLAPP suit, etc., and the defendant decides to hire an attorney to prevail, and does, attorney fees won't be ordered. This may be, at least here, one exception.
I loved the PC with Judge Wapner, he was a brilliant jurist. Some shows, yes, they did go "on the road", so that state's laws applied.