[saugustine]

Hi I live in California and have been leasing an apartment for 4 years (1 year lease terms started 2003). My lease is up May 31,2007. I gave my 30 day notice in writing, along with a check for the month of May in advance on April 20th. In the 4 years I have been late twice due to returned checks (2).
No excuse for the returns, just did not balance the check book correctly. I paid the associated late fee's and fee for the return both times. After the second one, the leasing office refused to except personal checks from me. I called the leasing office and told them that it would be a inconvenience for me to go to the bank and get a money order. They told me that it was the policy. I did not argue the fact my lease was not up until May and this happened in February. When I Looked at my lease agreement to see the exact day for terminating the lease, so I can give 30 day notice. I read the section on RENTS, it stated because of the (Inconvenience) of returned checks, That there would be a $50.00 late fee plus a $25.00 return check fee. I paid those fee's both times for their (Inconvenience). No where in the lease did it say that I had to pay by money order. That's why I wrote a check in advance for finale payment. They returned the check to me and stated that in 2003 I signed an (Addendum) stating, in the event of 2 or more returned checks, that I would pay by money order. If my lease agreement is on a yearly bases? Renewed with new lease every year. How can they impose something from a 2003 lease agreement? In my current lease agreement I singed no such Addendum.

[Cvillecpm]

It is a common policy not to accept personal checks when they have been returned NSF... submitting your rent in a check is not a RIGHT... should should pay in cash or by money order of bank check so that you have a receipt... sending it in with USPS delivery confirmation gives evidence that it was delivered within the time frame allowed.

You INCONVENIENCED mgmt by submitting NSF checks 2X... now you are going to be inconvenienced by having to provide them with guaranteed payments.

[Fr_Chuck]

I doubt it has to even be in a lease, the mannor that they will accept payment can be a management choice. If their office will not accept checks after a ceertain number, that is their policy you can not force them to in my opinoin

[RichardBondMan]

I don't think any business is REQUIRED to take anyone's check. Accepting a check just makes sense for most businesses ESPECIALLY for offices that manage/rent apartments that have historically employee dishonesy issues. That's probably why they want a money order and didn't insist on a cash payment from you. But in your case, I can understand their reasoning for not accepting a check since youv'e written them a couple before. It's the price (inconvenience to you) you pay for your having inconvienced them and perhaps costing them NSF check fees from their bank. As to the addendum you referred to, read it closely as well as your original (very first) lease agreement and I bet you will find that the addendum applies also to the current lease.

[excon]

Hello S:

No, they're not required to take your check. BUT, if that's the only way they're going to get paid, I'll bet they'll take it. This IS your final payment, remember. I would present it again, enclosed in a letter, sent certified, informing them that that's all they're going to get.

If they want to be pissy, they'll take the rent out of your deposit. However, they can't do that. If they do, sue them. In California, you may be able to get triple your deposit back.

Again, from a business and legal perspective, your landlord is NOT required to take your check. However, I suggest California law will support YOU in this situation. Or, they may not.

excon

PS> As mentioned, you did inconvenience the apartment complex when you bounced two checks on them. However, given the outrageous NSF fees you were charged, they were WELL compensated for their trouble.

[ScottGem]

Most state laws DO allow the landlord to take rentals owed out of the deposit when a tenant vacates.

And, as noted, they don't even need to addendum. As long as they have a stated policy that they apply without discrimination, that is sufficient.

I would get the money order and proceed with your move.

Oh and either get overdraft privileges on your checking account or get Quicken or MS Money and balance your checkbook better.

[froggy7]

PS> As mentioned, you did inconvenience the apartment complex when you bounced two checks on them. However, given the outrageous NSF fees you were charged, they were WELL compensated for their trouble.

$25 is actually the most common NSF fee I see quoted. Of course, the issue is that the store charges you that, and then your bank hits you up with fees for bouncing checks as well. But it doesn't seem that outrageous to me.

[saugustine]

Thanks all for your input especially excon for being the most positive. I simply wanted to know if they can force me to give them a money order. They have been compensated for their inconvenience via late fee's. Am I the only one that has ever had I check returned for insufficient funds?

[ScottGem]

I haven't had an NSF check in well over 10 years. I can't recall the last one I had. That's because I have overdraft privelges, plus I keep a tight reign over my balance.