I need assistance in finding out the likelihood of getting a case dismissed where I, a landlord, am being sued by the son of a former tenant for the amount of the security deposit that he gifted to his father, my former tenant. I am wondering if, since I have no contractual relationship with the son, if this will allow to have the case dismissed. :confused:

If you kept the deposit for legitimate reasons I can't see any court making you pay it back. If you kept it without good reason, the tenant could fight to get it back, or if he was unable, I would imagine the son could on his behalf.

If you took the son's CHECK in payment for the father - he can probably sue.

Unless the former tenant is deceased and the son is acting for the estate I can't see where he has any legal standing here.

Hello boogy:

I agree with Scott. You had no contractual relationship with the son, and he has no standing to sue.

excon

But what if the son is handling the fathers estate... wouldn't he be allowed to collect money owed to his father, just the same as he would be responsible to pay off debts against his fathers estate?

As excon noted we were not told the father is dead. I did mention that as an exception though. That would be the only way the son would have legal standing, as the executor of his estate or with Power of Attorney.

This is true... I guess I assumed since it wasn't the father that asked for the money back and the fact he was a "former" tenant. Hmmm, well if he's still alive then the son could get him to request the money back, then you'd pretty much have to refund it, unless of course they messed up the place, this was never answered. Was there a real reason to keep it?

The security deposit is the former tenant's asset. Unless the son was a co-tenant or a co-signor or legal guardian or has written consent of the tenant, the only one that can sue for the return of the asset is the former tenant or the estate of the former tenant if the tenant is deceased. How and when a security deposit is to be returned is something that should be written into the lease when it is signed. We do this most often when two or more unrelated roommates move in together. It is a real shame when the security deposit is returned to one former tenant, and then the roommate sues the landlord in small claims court claiming that he/she is the actual owner of the deposit.

I've rented to tenants(fire damaged their home) and had their insurance company pay me the deposit AND monthly rent and when the tenant departed the insurance company got the balance of the deposit monies - not the tenant.

The money was held for the benefit of the tenant and it was used for the tenant's damage; however, it was returned to the insurance co.

The same thing happens when a govt agency gives grant money for FMR and deposit... once the tenancy has ended, the agency wants the money back to be used for the benefit of another client.