Traditionally, security deposits are funds reserved for repairs beyond “normal wear and tear”. This common language is defined by our own perspectives in the way we keep our personal homes, versus what courts of law are going to typically find worthy of a security deposit deduction. So, sometimes what an owner finds to be a security deposit deduction item is based on personal standards that in a court of law would be found to be actual normal wear and tear.
Security deposit funds are reserved for damages caused by a tenant, whether accidental or intentional. The fine line is the one between normal wear and tear that even the most careful tenant could incur on a property, and that which would be considered excessive. The degree of soiling and wear on floor coverings often comes to mind. Carpets, in particular, show the degree of wear when the furniture that was sitting on top of them are removed. If a normal carpet cleaning brings the carpets back to life, this would be considered normal wear and tear. If a large stain takes a $100 extra charge to be removed, or can’t be removed at all, this would be considered excessive and worthy of a deduction to the security deposit to pay for the eventual repair.
A couple of other common areas of confusion. Paint will incur scuffs and dings in normal living. Small holes for wall hangings are also to be expected. Excessive amounts of either (drywall damage or large mollys pounded into the drywall every five feet) would likely be considered damage.
As I have stated in other posts, we mitigate the relative amount of change to a unit with a before and after walk-through to include pictures. This allows us the greatest leverage if a security deposit deduction is required. For more information, here is a link to a table posted at WilmothGroup.com with more examples of Wear and Tear versus Damages.
