All Forum Posts by: Greg Smith

Quote from @Jason Smith:

@Greg Smith If you are making a claim against the deposit, the law says you have 30 days to send the notice, the tenant has 15 days to object, and then you have 30 days after the letter to send the remainder portion back. Unless you think the tenant may sue and then you can keep it all.

You see how stupid the last sentence sounds. You better get a check out or unstop that check within 60 days of them vacating. You better hope the security deposit was held properly in an non-interest bearing account (otherwise that is another easy win for tenant's lawyer). FIRE YOUR PM AFTER THIS IS RESOLVED.

Thanks, Jason.  So if I understand you correctly, the property manager is operating outside the Florida statutes.  It is going on 90 days since the landlord levied claims against the security deposit. The tenant responded disputing those claims within 15 days, the appropriate legal time frame.  The Stop Order was placed on the property manager's check over 60 days ago.  

Quote from @Patricia Steiner:

The PM is wrong - and has demonstrated a lack of knowledge and compliance with Florida Law.  I recommend that you have a check overnighted to the tenant to correct the stop or have the stop removed if possible to avoid the legal ramifications which will surely follow.  I also recommend that you know exactly what is being disputed; cleaning fees are an often-disputed assessment and under Florida Law cannot be imposed unless the cleaning required was excessive.  More importantly, you need to change your PM.  Security Deposit processing is pretty cut and dry in our state; if they don't get this, it's doubtful they know and abide by the other Landlord/Tenant Laws.

Here's an overview of the process - that was readily available online and in plain language:

https://www.amgrents.com/Kissimmee_Property_Management_Blog/...

Hiring a PM does not excuse the landlord from knowing and complying with the applicable state laws. I hope you'll step in and correct the error immediately; be sure to document what you did after/when learning of the PM's actions. You'll need that.

To be clear, I am not on the landlord/property manager side.  I know the tenants involved and want to see them recover what is rightfully their's.  We are aware of the specifics of the landlord's claims against the security deposit.  To me, many of the claims are greatly exaggerated, but that's another story. 

While the claim situation has yet to play out, the property manager placing a Stop Order on the check that was issued, withholding the last month's rent and a portion of the security deposit not in dispute, just seems shady.  That is why I am seeking advice here.

Quote from @Nathan Gesner:

Quote from @Greg Smith:

Why do they seem "retaliatory?"  I couldn't make that determination without knowing all the facts.

It seems retaliatory because the tenant received the check in the same mailing as the landlord's claims against the security deposit.  The property manager did not now, at that time, that the tenant would be disputing the landlord's claims.  After the tenant sent notice they were disputing the landlord's claims, a few weeks passed and attempts to resolve the dispute amicably proved unsuccessful.  It was then that the property manager placed a Stop Order on the previously issued check. 

I don't know, but something doesn't seem right about the property manager's course of action here.

Quote from @Nathan Gesner:

Quote from @Greg Smith:

I am not an attorney or expert in Florida law. 

I understand what the PM is trying to do...

Thanks for the response.  To your point, what do you think the landlord is trying to do?  The landlord's actions seem...retaliatory.

Upon moving out, the tenant received notice from the property manager (via certified mail) that the landlord was making a claim against the tenant's security deposit for repairs and cleaning. Included in this package was a check from the property manager for the balance of the security deposit which was not in dispute. The tenant responded (via certified mail) that they were disputing the claims of the landlord. Over the next few weeks, attempts to resolve the dispute were unsuccessful. Subsequently, the property manager placed a Stop Order on the previously issued check covering the portion of the security deposit that was not in dispute (the tenant had not yet cashed the check). The property manager stated the reason for the Stop Order was because with no resolution, the dispute could be headed to court and the losing party would have to cover court costs for the prevailing party.

Was the property manager within their rights to place a Stop Order on this check? Again, this is in Florida.

Upon moving out, the tenant received notice from the property manager (via certified mail)  that the landlord was making a claim against the tenant's security deposit for repairs and cleaning.  Included in this package was a check from the property manager for the remainder of the security deposit which was not in dispute.  The tenant responded (via certified mail) that they were disputing the claims of the landlord.  Over the next few weeks, attempts to resolve the dispute were unsuccessful.  Subsequently, the property manager placed a Stop Order on the previously issued check covering the portion of the security deposit that was not in dispute (the tenant had not yet cashed the check).   The property manager stated the reason for the Stop Order was because with no resolution, the dispute could be headed to court and the losing party would have to cover court costs for the prevailing party.

Was the property manager within their rights to place a Stop Order on this check?  Again, this is in Florida.