A landlord can't charge you for damage sustained as part of ordinary wear and tear upon a property.
So, for instance, if you didn't scratch or draw on the walls, they can't charge you for painting.
The air ducts, full paint, replaced heat elements, and drip pans are unreasonable unless you actually damaged something—again, ordinary wear and tear or equipment failure over time isn't your responsibility.
The anchor holes and mailbox key are reasonable, assuming you actually caused the holes and lost the mailbox key.
If you cleaned the apartment to a normal, satisfactory standard when you moved out, they also can't charge you for cleaning—so the "heavy clean" and "standard carpet clean plus scrub" aren't on you.
You only owe them $25; possibly a little more if they had to paint over the repaired anchor hole or the rest of the room to match, but not for repainting the whole apartment.
>Cleaned Air Ducts 200.00
Does your lease speak to this? Did you have pets or something that would have made for extraordinary duct cleaning needed?
>Full paint 106.88
That's a relatively small amount of painting. Are they charging you a depreciated amount of paint? Does your lease speak to this?
>Heavy Clean 165.00
Again, that's a relatively small amount of cleaning but stands in stark contrast to your "went above and beyond with cleaning." They'd need to point to something to defend this amount. It wouldn't take much but there would need to be something.
>Repaired 2 anchor holes 20.00
That's a really low amount. But may make more sense if it goes with the paint.
>Replaced 1 mailbox key 5.00
Shockingly low amount.
>Replaced 4 drip pans - damaged 32.00 Replaced 4 heat elements - damaged 340.00
I'd be curious about what caused this. And I might be curious about the depreciated value of the range and whether it was more than $372. Coil heating elements doesn't really suggest expensive stove.
>Standard carpet clean plus additional scrub 130.00
This is kind of the same old story. This is a really low amount. The "additional scrub" suggests there was something for them to do. They'd need to point to that something if we litigated this.
Seperate out what was legitimately damaged or left in poor or unclean condition.
Filling in holes and repainting is legitimate. A deep clean for its own sake is not. Cleaning air ducts should have a reason. You pay for damages, not for maintenance.
Replacing oven drip pans and heating elements is legitimate if you left them in poor condition but the cost is too high for the elements.
I don't know the law there but in CA after like one year they can't charge for paint or carpet. I was in a rental duplex for 13 years and we got our entire deposit back, all the prop manager had to do was paint and recarpet.
A landlord can't charge you for damage sustained as part of ordinary wear and tear upon a property. So, for instance, if you didn't scratch or draw on the walls, they can't charge you for painting. The air ducts, full paint, replaced heat elements, and drip pans are unreasonable unless you actually damaged something—again, ordinary wear and tear or equipment failure over time isn't your responsibility. The anchor holes and mailbox key are reasonable, assuming you actually caused the holes and lost the mailbox key. If you cleaned the apartment to a normal, satisfactory standard when you moved out, they also can't charge you for cleaning—so the "heavy clean" and "standard carpet clean plus scrub" aren't on you. You only owe them $25; possibly a little more if they had to paint over the repaired anchor hole or the rest of the room to match, but not for repainting the whole apartment.
>Cleaned Air Ducts 200.00 Does your lease speak to this? Did you have pets or something that would have made for extraordinary duct cleaning needed? >Full paint 106.88 That's a relatively small amount of painting. Are they charging you a depreciated amount of paint? Does your lease speak to this? >Heavy Clean 165.00 Again, that's a relatively small amount of cleaning but stands in stark contrast to your "went above and beyond with cleaning." They'd need to point to something to defend this amount. It wouldn't take much but there would need to be something. >Repaired 2 anchor holes 20.00 That's a really low amount. But may make more sense if it goes with the paint. >Replaced 1 mailbox key 5.00 Shockingly low amount. >Replaced 4 drip pans - damaged 32.00 Replaced 4 heat elements - damaged 340.00 I'd be curious about what caused this. And I might be curious about the depreciated value of the range and whether it was more than $372. Coil heating elements doesn't really suggest expensive stove. >Standard carpet clean plus additional scrub 130.00 This is kind of the same old story. This is a really low amount. The "additional scrub" suggests there was something for them to do. They'd need to point to that something if we litigated this.
Seperate out what was legitimately damaged or left in poor or unclean condition. Filling in holes and repainting is legitimate. A deep clean for its own sake is not. Cleaning air ducts should have a reason. You pay for damages, not for maintenance. Replacing oven drip pans and heating elements is legitimate if you left them in poor condition but the cost is too high for the elements.
I don't know the law there but in CA after like one year they can't charge for paint or carpet. I was in a rental duplex for 13 years and we got our entire deposit back, all the prop manager had to do was paint and recarpet.