Registered: 1398506458 Posts: 28
Reply with quote #16
I've been doing this for quite sometime (text messaging my tenants). This saves a lot of time and also the labor of driving to the place and informing them about every minute detail.
__________________ Kingsbury Homes
Registered: 1436747276 Posts: 1
Reply with quote #17
Hello ... I have a question that this thread is dealing with.
My daughter rented an apartment this past year during school in Northridge CA. In November of 2014, she was informed via text message by the property management to NOT use the self-cleaning option of the installed electric oven (2 year old oven with a 5 year limited warranty) until repairs had been made. She did respond to the text message confirming she had received the message. Fast forward to May, 2015. I show up to help her clean the apartment. No further information regarding the oven issue was ever provided by the property management. She forgot about the text message. I cleaned the oven in the expected way, self-clean. The oven broke. Upon breaking, we notify the onsite manager, who indicates they are aware of an issue with the oven and not to worry about it. However, the landlord assesses a $1,450 charge against the security deposit to replace the oven. In every way, she has been the ideal tenant. Never a late rental payment, a $50 cleaning fee upon leaving. The oven incident was purely accidental. The lease states tenant is responsible for repairs except by normal wear and tear. My questions are this: 1) Is that text message really considered adequate (and legally binding) notification? Yes she did confirm and that does seem potentially problematic here for us. 2) When six months go by with no further communication on an issue, is that acceptable? 3) Wouldn't putting an oven in self-clean mode be considered "normal wear and tear"? 4) The limited warranty on the oven indicates it doesn't cover faulty installation. My assumption here is it was not properly installed, which led to failure. How is this ever the fault of the tenant? 5) I also assume, even if the landlord was within his rights to assess this charge, that the appliance would have to be depreciated. Is it appropriate to change a full replacement cost (assuming it was appropriate to hold the tenant responsible at all)? I understand this forum is primarily for landlords, so it may be easy to be "on the side" of the landlord when considering my questions. But I certainly would appreciate responses that would be helpful to me to understand what our rights really are at this point. Thanks and best regards.
Registered: 1405206449 Posts: 178
Reply with quote #18
90%+ of my communication is by text with my 24 tenants. It may be admissible in small claims court, but not district court.
You cannot be charged for using equipment the way it was designed. It is normal wear and tear. You are right, only the remaining depreciation amount left could be charged. __________________ http://www.NoNonsenseLandlord.com/
Landlording for maximum profitability and Financial Independence
Registered: 1454601969 Posts: 7
Reply with quote #19
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1-9DlBTM2ieT1l51aVDvFebkY6pZFpxHgQH-hf0fPnYY/edit?uiv=1 We are working to make everyones' lives easier when it comes to renting properties! Please help us with this survey so we know what would be most helpful to you! Just Copy the link and please help us out. We are trying to make this whole experience better. If you have any questions just let me know.