My landlord charged me a late fee and a court fee for last months rent. I paid the rent on time but used a personal check. I went on vacation for a week out of town. Rent is due by 5th; I submitted check on the 4th; left for vacation on 6th; landlord returned check on 7th with late notice and notice stating no personal checks are allowed; landlord issued a delingquent notice along with court fee notice on 11th; I returned from vacation on the 13th and read all documents; paid rent and late fee on 14th; landlord insists I pay court fee also. Am I being unreasonable in asking that I not pay this court fee? I was out of town and didn't get the notice to be able to respond.

Did you know that personal checks weren't accepted? If so, then you have no excuse.

If, however, you were not informed about this, (i.e. this was your first payment), then I would tell the landlord to sue you for them. Tell him you think it was unreasonable for him to take you to court when you had paid the rent and where unaware of the rule.

Of course doing so could cause bad feelings between you and if you plan on living there for a while, it might be better to bite the bullet.

Hello Fred:

While Scott is right, he's a much better bullet biter than I am.

In the very first instance, you PAID your rent ON TIME. I can not imagine what this landlord sued you for SEVEN days after receiving your check. He must be some kind of jerk.

If he wants to evict you for THIS, you better not pass gas very loudly. If it were me, I would tell him to stick his court fees where the sun don't shine, and move. But, that's just me.

excon

This whole thing does sound kind of strange. First, why wouldn't a landlord accept a personal check? Its not like he doesn't know where you live. Second, why wouldn't the tenant not know that personal checks weren't accepted. This would have been spelled out in the lease or at least at the time the lease was signed. I would imagine the security deposit would also have not been by personal check. If this provision was changed, notice should have been given. If this was the first month, as seems likely, then it seems odd that the landlord would not have given some leeway. There is also the question of whether the landlord knew the tenant was on vacation or not.

It just doesn't seem to add up.