[RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I
believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups,
someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a "Risk Mitigation Fee".
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit,
bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this "fee" is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner
or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest
rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: http://www.evict.com/ www.evict.com
Email: mailto:harry@evict.com harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND
INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR
DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
<image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:20:39 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
<image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Where have you seen these fees disclosed? When the claim on the deposit is imposed? In the terms of the lease? I have never seen this.
*sent via mobile phone
Jordan Marcus Brill, Esq.
6421 Congress Ave., Suite 120
Boca Raton, FL 33487
(561)859-0679
jordan@glachmanbrill.com
www.glachmanbrill.com
The information contained in this email message is intended for review and use of the senders intended recipient and no other. Any recipient or reader of this email that is not an intended recipient or reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited; any wrongful dissemination or receipt shall not constitute a waiver of any privilege held by the sender or any intended recipient or client of the sender. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us via email directed to jordan@glachmanbrill.com and by telephone to 561-859-0679, and destroy the original message and all copies thereof and related communications thereto. Thank you.
On Oct 26, 2019 12:22 PM, Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com wrote:
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
<image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
I tell my clients to NOT charge a fee for making a claim on the Security Deposit and to NOT charge the tenant for the certified mail postage but I have nothing to back up why I am telling them this other than I feel it is unconscionable.
It does not seem fair that the tenant is charged for something the landlord is required to do and send by law.
I really would not like to see this decided in a class action.
Is something like this allowed in other areas of law like foreclosures?
Yates v. Equity held that if it was not allowed in the Act, it was NOT legal as it pertained to termination fees. The only reason they are allowed now is because of the law change that specifically allows it. Prior to Yates, EVERYONE was charging termination fees and forfeiting security deposits for lease breaks. Yates rocked the multifamily housing industry.
For anyone that was not around when Yates went down, that was a major case. Millions were paid out in that case and all the others that were settled.
How far do we take this?
Are there any hard core consumer law lawyers and FCRA and FDCPA lawyers out there that will know whether “risk mitigation fees” are allowed?
I am really at a loss to advise clients and this stuff is spreading so fast.
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Leonard Cabral
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:21 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: http://www.evict.com/ www.evict.com
Email: mailto:harry@evict.com harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870 <image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
The “risk mitigation fee” is asked for if the applicant has bad credit or is a higher risk. There is no lease at that stage.
The fee for certified mail and the fee for making the claim on the deposit is not disclosed at all. It is just being done.
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Jordan M Brill
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:41 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
Where have you seen these fees disclosed? When the claim on the deposit is imposed? In the terms of the lease? I have never seen this.
*sent via mobile phone
Jordan Marcus Brill, Esq.
6421 Congress Ave., Suite 120
Boca Raton, FL 33487
(561)859-0679
jordan@glachmanbrill.com
www.glachmanbrill.com
The information contained in this email message is intended for review and use of the senders intended recipient and no other. Any recipient or reader of this email that is not an intended recipient or reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited; any wrongful dissemination or receipt shall not constitute a waiver of any privilege held by the sender or any intended recipient or client of the sender. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us via email directed to jordan@glachmanbrill.com and by telephone to 561-859-0679, and destroy the original message and all copies thereof and related communications thereto. Thank you.
On Oct 26, 2019 12:22 PM, Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com wrote:
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: http://www.evict.com/ www.evict.com
Email: mailto:harry@evict.com harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870 <image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Eric,
Yates went totally against this: “If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease”
Yates held that forfeiture of a deposit or liquidated damages was NOT a remedy in the statute therefore not legal. This is the whole reason for the law change a couple years AFTER Yates.
83.595 was totally changed after Yates.
Remedy 4 did not exist prior to Yates.
Harry
83.595 Choice of remedies upon breach or early termination by tenant.--If the tenant breaches the rental agreement for the dwelling unit and the landlord has obtained a writ of possession, or the tenant has surrendered possession of the dwelling unit to the landlord, or the tenant has abandoned the dwelling unit, the landlord may:
(1) Treat the rental agreement as terminated and retake possession for his or her own account, thereby terminating any further liability of the tenant;
(2) Retake possession of the dwelling unit for the account of the tenant, holding the tenant liable for the difference between the rent stipulated to be paid under the rental agreement and what the landlord is able to recover from a reletting. If the landlord retakes possession, the landlord has a duty to exercise good faith in attempting to relet the premises, and any rent received by the landlord as a result of the reletting must be deducted from the balance of rent due from the tenant. For purposes of this subsection, the term "good faith in attempting to relet the premises" means that the landlord uses at least the same efforts to relet the premises as were used in the initial rental or at least the same efforts as the landlord uses in attempting to rent other similar rental units but does not require the landlord to give a preference in renting the premises over other vacant dwelling units that the landlord owns or has the responsibility to rent;
(3) Stand by and do nothing, holding the lessee liable for the rent as it comes due; or
(4) Charge liquidated damages, as provided in the rental agreement, or an early termination fee to the tenant if the landlord and tenant have agreed to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, if the amount does not exceed 2 months' rent, and if, in the case of an early termination fee, the tenant is required to give no more than 60 days' notice, as provided in the rental agreement, prior to the proposed date of early termination. This remedy is available only if the tenant and the landlord, at the time the rental agreement was made, indicated acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee. The tenant must indicate acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee by signing a separate addendum to the rental agreement containing a provision in substantially the following form:
[ ] I agree, as provided in the rental agreement, to pay $_____ (an amount that does not exceed 2 months' rent) as liquidated damages or an early termination fee if I elect to terminate the rental agreement, and the landlord waives the right to seek additional rent beyond the month in which the landlord retakes possession.
[ ] I do not agree to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, and I acknowledge that the landlord may seek damages as provided by law.
(a) In addition to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, the landlord is entitled to the rent and other charges accrued through the end of the month in which the landlord retakes possession of the dwelling unit and charges for damages to the dwelling unit.
(b) This subsection does not apply if the breach is failure to give notice as provided in s. 83.575.
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:24 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease
Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:20:39 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: http://www.evict.com/ www.evict.com
Email: mailto:harry@evict.com harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870 <image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
I believe the inquiry was a fee for handling the escrow not a forfeiture issue
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Harry Heist harry@evict.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:54 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
Eric,
Yates went totally against this: “If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease”
Yates held that forfeiture of a deposit or liquidated damages was NOT a remedy in the statute therefore not legal. This is the whole reason for the law change a couple years AFTER Yates.
83.595 was totally changed after Yates.
Remedy 4 did not exist prior to Yates.
Harry
83.595 Choice of remedies upon breach or early termination by tenant.--If the tenant breaches the rental agreement for the dwelling unit and the landlord has obtained a writ of possession, or the tenant has surrendered possession of the dwelling unit to the landlord, or the tenant has abandoned the dwelling unit, the landlord may:
(1) Treat the rental agreement as terminated and retake possession for his or her own account, thereby terminating any further liability of the tenant;
(2) Retake possession of the dwelling unit for the account of the tenant, holding the tenant liable for the difference between the rent stipulated to be paid under the rental agreement and what the landlord is able to recover from a reletting. If the landlord retakes possession, the landlord has a duty to exercise good faith in attempting to relet the premises, and any rent received by the landlord as a result of the reletting must be deducted from the balance of rent due from the tenant. For purposes of this subsection, the term "good faith in attempting to relet the premises" means that the landlord uses at least the same efforts to relet the premises as were used in the initial rental or at least the same efforts as the landlord uses in attempting to rent other similar rental units but does not require the landlord to give a preference in renting the premises over other vacant dwelling units that the landlord owns or has the responsibility to rent;
(3) Stand by and do nothing, holding the lessee liable for the rent as it comes due; or
(4) Charge liquidated damages, as provided in the rental agreement, or an early termination fee to the tenant if the landlord and tenant have agreed to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, if the amount does not exceed 2 months' rent, and if, in the case of an early termination fee, the tenant is required to give no more than 60 days' notice, as provided in the rental agreement, prior to the proposed date of early termination. This remedy is available only if the tenant and the landlord, at the time the rental agreement was made, indicated acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee. The tenant must indicate acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee by signing a separate addendum to the rental agreement containing a provision in substantially the following form:
[ ] I agree, as provided in the rental agreement, to pay $_____ (an amount that does not exceed 2 months' rent) as liquidated damages or an early termination fee if I elect to terminate the rental agreement, and the landlord waives the right to seek additional rent beyond the month in which the landlord retakes possession.
[ ] I do not agree to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, and I acknowledge that the landlord may seek damages as provided by law.
(a) In addition to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, the landlord is entitled to the rent and other charges accrued through the end of the month in which the landlord retakes possession of the dwelling unit and charges for damages to the dwelling unit.
(b) This subsection does not apply if the breach is failure to give notice as provided in s. 83.575.
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:24 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:20:39 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist <harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com> wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
<image001.png>https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
Same thing Eric,
Law is silent on it. Yates held the silence in the statute meant it was illegal.
Yates did not care that forfeitures were in the lease.
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 1:12 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I believe the inquiry was a fee for handling the escrow not a forfeiture issue
Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Harry Heist harry@evict.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:54 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
Eric,
Yates went totally against this: “If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease”
Yates held that forfeiture of a deposit or liquidated damages was NOT a remedy in the statute therefore not legal. This is the whole reason for the law change a couple years AFTER Yates.
83.595 was totally changed after Yates.
Remedy 4 did not exist prior to Yates.
Harry
83.595 Choice of remedies upon breach or early termination by tenant.--If the tenant breaches the rental agreement for the dwelling unit and the landlord has obtained a writ of possession, or the tenant has surrendered possession of the dwelling unit to the landlord, or the tenant has abandoned the dwelling unit, the landlord may:
(1) Treat the rental agreement as terminated and retake possession for his or her own account, thereby terminating any further liability of the tenant;
(2) Retake possession of the dwelling unit for the account of the tenant, holding the tenant liable for the difference between the rent stipulated to be paid under the rental agreement and what the landlord is able to recover from a reletting. If the landlord retakes possession, the landlord has a duty to exercise good faith in attempting to relet the premises, and any rent received by the landlord as a result of the reletting must be deducted from the balance of rent due from the tenant. For purposes of this subsection, the term "good faith in attempting to relet the premises" means that the landlord uses at least the same efforts to relet the premises as were used in the initial rental or at least the same efforts as the landlord uses in attempting to rent other similar rental units but does not require the landlord to give a preference in renting the premises over other vacant dwelling units that the landlord owns or has the responsibility to rent;
(3) Stand by and do nothing, holding the lessee liable for the rent as it comes due; or
(4) Charge liquidated damages, as provided in the rental agreement, or an early termination fee to the tenant if the landlord and tenant have agreed to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, if the amount does not exceed 2 months' rent, and if, in the case of an early termination fee, the tenant is required to give no more than 60 days' notice, as provided in the rental agreement, prior to the proposed date of early termination. This remedy is available only if the tenant and the landlord, at the time the rental agreement was made, indicated acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee. The tenant must indicate acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee by signing a separate addendum to the rental agreement containing a provision in substantially the following form:
[ ] I agree, as provided in the rental agreement, to pay $_____ (an amount that does not exceed 2 months' rent) as liquidated damages or an early termination fee if I elect to terminate the rental agreement, and the landlord waives the right to seek additional rent beyond the month in which the landlord retakes possession.
[ ] I do not agree to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, and I acknowledge that the landlord may seek damages as provided by law.
(a) In addition to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, the landlord is entitled to the rent and other charges accrued through the end of the month in which the landlord retakes possession of the dwelling unit and charges for damages to the dwelling unit.
(b) This subsection does not apply if the breach is failure to give notice as provided in s. 83.575.
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.com http://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:24 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease
Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org on behalf of Leonard Cabral LensLaw@Lenslaw.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:20:39 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist harry@evict.com wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: http://www.evict.com/ www.evict.com
Email: mailto:harry@evict.com harry@evict.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870 <image001.png>
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
My question was about landlords charging an administrative fee or handling fee for holding the security deposit as required by statute. Lately I have been seeing more and more of these fees to which most landlords are taking Eric’s approach, “if it’s in the lease it’s in the lease”, without citing any authority. I have argued against these fees citing Yates, “silence in the statute means it is not permitted”. I have not lost this argument yet. Since I have been seeing more and more administrative fees for handling security deposits, I wanted to make sure I was still on good solid ground. I want to make sure there is no new case law or statutory law to the contrary before I initiate a suit. I am considering taking this up as a class, something that is on my bucket list before I retire (initiating a class action suit).
Thanks
.
If you need a response in less than 48 hours please call me at the number below.
Leonard P. Cabral, Esq.
Lenslaw@lenslaw.commailto:Lenslaw@lenslaw.com
(407) 324-2200
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org On Behalf Of Harry Heist
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 1:24 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee' landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
Same thing Eric,
Law is silent on it. Yates held the silence in the statute meant it was illegal.
Yates did not care that forfeitures were in the lease.
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 1:12 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I believe the inquiry was a fee for handling the escrow not a forfeiture issue
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Harry Heist <harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:54 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
Eric,
Yates went totally against this: “If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease”
Yates held that forfeiture of a deposit or liquidated damages was NOT a remedy in the statute therefore not legal. This is the whole reason for the law change a couple years AFTER Yates.
83.595 was totally changed after Yates.
Remedy 4 did not exist prior to Yates.
Harry
83.595 Choice of remedies upon breach or early termination by tenant.--If the tenant breaches the rental agreement for the dwelling unit and the landlord has obtained a writ of possession, or the tenant has surrendered possession of the dwelling unit to the landlord, or the tenant has abandoned the dwelling unit, the landlord may:
(1) Treat the rental agreement as terminated and retake possession for his or her own account, thereby terminating any further liability of the tenant;
(2) Retake possession of the dwelling unit for the account of the tenant, holding the tenant liable for the difference between the rent stipulated to be paid under the rental agreement and what the landlord is able to recover from a reletting. If the landlord retakes possession, the landlord has a duty to exercise good faith in attempting to relet the premises, and any rent received by the landlord as a result of the reletting must be deducted from the balance of rent due from the tenant. For purposes of this subsection, the term "good faith in attempting to relet the premises" means that the landlord uses at least the same efforts to relet the premises as were used in the initial rental or at least the same efforts as the landlord uses in attempting to rent other similar rental units but does not require the landlord to give a preference in renting the premises over other vacant dwelling units that the landlord owns or has the responsibility to rent;
(3) Stand by and do nothing, holding the lessee liable for the rent as it comes due; or
(4) Charge liquidated damages, as provided in the rental agreement, or an early termination fee to the tenant if the landlord and tenant have agreed to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, if the amount does not exceed 2 months' rent, and if, in the case of an early termination fee, the tenant is required to give no more than 60 days' notice, as provided in the rental agreement, prior to the proposed date of early termination. This remedy is available only if the tenant and the landlord, at the time the rental agreement was made, indicated acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee. The tenant must indicate acceptance of liquidated damages or an early termination fee by signing a separate addendum to the rental agreement containing a provision in substantially the following form:
[ ] I agree, as provided in the rental agreement, to pay $_____ (an amount that does not exceed 2 months' rent) as liquidated damages or an early termination fee if I elect to terminate the rental agreement, and the landlord waives the right to seek additional rent beyond the month in which the landlord retakes possession.
[ ] I do not agree to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, and I acknowledge that the landlord may seek damages as provided by law.
(a) In addition to liquidated damages or an early termination fee, the landlord is entitled to the rent and other charges accrued through the end of the month in which the landlord retakes possession of the dwelling unit and charges for damages to the dwelling unit.
(b) This subsection does not apply if the breach is failure to give notice as provided in s. 83.575.
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE, & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:24 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
If it’s in the lease it’s in the lease
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org <landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> on behalf of Leonard Cabral <LensLaw@Lenslaw.commailto:LensLaw@Lenslaw.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 12:20:39 PM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee <landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] "Risk Mitigation Fee"
I am now seeing a fee for handling the security deposit. Any thoughts about the legitimately of that fee?
Sent by Leonard P Cabral
On Oct 25, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Harry Heist <harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com> wrote:
It seems like each day property managers are coming up with fees that I believe will eventually cause a problem and be class action material.
They are spreading as these managers are on all of these Facebook groups, someone says they are doing it and then everyone thinks it is OK.
The latest one I have been seeing is a “Risk Mitigation Fee”.
This is a nonrefundable fee that the higher risk tenant (bad credit, bankruptcy, eviction etc) is being asked to pay as part of being approved.
Often this “fee” is being kept by the property manager, split with the owner or given to the owner. More often than not, kept by the property manager.
Does anyone have any info on the legality of this?
In the money lending world, creditors are free to charge a higher interest rate to a higher risk person but this now????
Harry
LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website: www.evict.comhttp://www.evict.com/
Email: harry@evict.commailto:harry@evict.com
<image001.png>https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heist-Weisse-Wolk-PA/343965575625870
Visit us on Facebook
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY. ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
landten mailing list
landten@lists.flabarrpptl.orgmailto:landten@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten