I just ended the lease of a Condominium in Florida in good standing. The landlord actually commented over the phone that he had inspected the property and that I had left it in better shape than when it was given to me. There was literally no "normal wear and tear" let alone legitimate damage and that was agreed upon by the landlord.

I was on the road for a new destination by the time I got the call and the landlord said that because of the superb condition of the unit, he would mail my deposit out to my forwarding address the following day. I received the deposit refund minus $120 which was subtracted "per the lease : $55 for lock changes, $65 for carpet cleaning".

The only section that deals with the security deposit in the lease agreement says:
"The security deposit set forth shall secure the performance of Tenant's obligations hereunder. Owner may, but shall not be obligated to, apply all portions of said deposit on account of Tenant's obligations hereunder. Any balance remaining upon termination shall be returned to Tenant..."

The owner knew my situation (I've been forced to move by military orders) and was aware that I wouldn't be in a position to check up on the work they've charged me for. Knowing the condition of the carpet upon move out I'm quite certain that they wouldn't have paid for cleaning as it was very recently cleaned at my own expense (and unnecessary by anyone's standards, even to turn over to a new tenant). In addition the large majority of the condo is tiled and only a very small portion is carpeted. I know from my recent cleaning that it doesn't cost $65 to have the small area steam cleaned and shampooed. Changing of the locks, although reasonable, is not listed as the liability of the previous tenant.

I believe they are quoting me arbitrary prices for work that either isn't my liability, or wasn't actually performed in an effort to cash in off my security deposit even in the absence of damage.

Is their withholding from my deposit legal, and if so, is it my right to request receipts for the work performed (and the owners responsibility to provide them)?

Thanks.

If you did not clean the carpets before moving, it is possible they can charge you for it, merely ask them for a copy of the receipt.

Changing locks ( did you not return all of the keys) is normal they often change one old apartment lock set for another.
So I wouild say that the locks are not on you unless you failed to return the keys.

Here is the catch, if they just refuse to pay you, you have to sue them in the local small claims court there, so is it worth traveling back for 120 dollars ?

If you did not clean the carpets before moving, it is possible they can charge you for it, merely ask them for a copy of the reciept.

Changing locks ( did you not return all of the keys) is normal they often change one old apartment lock set for another.
so I wouild say that the locks are not on you unless you failed to return the keys.

Here is the catch, if they just refuse to pay you, you have to sue them in the local small claims court there, so is it worth traveling back for 120 dollars ?

All the keys were returned. The carpets were cleaned at my expense so recently that it would have been impossible for them to say "these carpets are dirty, they need a cleaning". If it is a situation where they clean the carpets following every tenant regardless of necessity, I believe it should have been spelled out in the lease agreement that a portion of my deposit was non-refundable.

It is certainly not monetarily worth it to me to pursue the $120 in court, but I would do it out of principle. If landlords learn from experience that tenants won't pursue small amounts of money, then the fraudulent ones will cash in every time a tenant vacates regardless of the condition of the property.

I'm in a unique situation that I could receive free legal counsel from the JAG and that I could get a free airplane ride back to Florida if I were to pursue this, so it would only cost me time and effort.

Additionally, the landlord is actually a realty company that operates in an area that is EXTREMELY high-density with military residents. If their practices are fraudulent I can take action that would legitimately cost them a large amount of business through working with the base housing offices in the area. The threat alone may turn the tables towards whether it's worth it for THEM to dispute $120, not me.

I'm not looking to collect on anything I'm not due. If they are within their right to withhold the portion of the deposit that they did, then I'll leave it be. That's what I'm trying to determine.

The lease states, "Tenant shall, at his own expense, and at all times, maintain the premises in a clean and sanitary manner including all equipment, furniture, furnishings therein and shall surrender the same at termination hereof, in as good condition as received, normal wear and tear excepted."

The carpets were without a doubt in better condition than I received them in. Barring an explicit notice that carpet cleaning is my liability at termination, I see none on my part.