Before the

for Montgomery County, Maryland

• Decision and Order

• Background

• Findings of Fact

• Conclusions of Law

• Order

This matter arises out of a Compliant filed by Michelle Lynne Disse (the Complainant) on October 3, 1996, in which she alleged that she was a tenant at 4511 Avondale Street, Apartment 101, Bethesda, Maryland (the Apartment), an apartment unit within Avondale Apartments which are owned and managed by Roger E. Herst (the Respondent). The Complaint further alleged that the Complainant commenced to occupy the Apartment on or about June 3, 1995, and vacated the Apartment on May 31, 1996. According to the Complaint, after the Complainant vacated the Apartment, the Respondent failed to present her with a written list of damages claimed under '8-203(g)(1) of the Real Property Article, Annotated Code of Maryland, 1996, as amended (the State Code) together with a statement of costs actually incurred. This failure, according to the Complaint, constituted a violation of '8-203(h)(1) of the State Code. The Complaint further alleged that the Respondent failed to credit the security deposit with simple interest at the rate of 4% per annum in violation of '8-203(f)(1) of the State Code. Finally, the Complaint alleged that after the termination of the tenancy, the Respondent improperly withheld the security deposit for repair of damages that were the result of ordinary wear and tear in violation of '8-203(g)(1) of the State Code, and that the Respondent, without a reasonable basis, failed to return the Complainant's security deposit plus accrued interest within forty- five (45) days after the termination of her tenancy, in violation of '8-203(f)(4) of the State Code.

The Respondent testified that the Complainant's security deposit was properly withheld, and that the notice required by '8-203(h)(1) of the State Code was not sent because the Complainant did not leave her forwarding address or telephone number and therefore, he had no place to send the notice. He further testified that after the Complainant left the Apartment, the new occupant discovered that it was infested with fleas, and that the Apartment was treated on four (4) occasions by Womack Exterminators without success; ultimately, the carpet was replaced, and the cost of replacement was charged to the Complainant. Finally, the Respondent testified that when the Complainant contacted him on August 13, 1996, and provided her forwarding address, he sent the notice required by '8-203(h)(1) of the State Code. The Respondent acknowledged an error (3% versus 4%) in calculating the security deposit interest, but contended that the error was easily absorbed by the cost of the repairs to the Apartment.

2. On or about June 3, 1995, the Complainant paid the Respondent a security deposit in the amount of $895.00. The receipt for the security deposit is contained in the lease agreement at paragraph No. 13 (at page 45 of Commission's Exhibit No. 1).

3. On or about March 30, 1996, the Complainant issued the Respondent a notice of her intention to quit and vacate the Apartment and terminate the lease as of June 1, 1996. The Respondent received the Complainant's notice without objection.

5. The Complainant provided the Respondent with her new telephone number and forwarding address by memorandum dated May 31, 1996 (at page 41 Commission's Exhibit No. 1).

1. The Complainant's tenancy terminated on May 31, 1996.

2. The Respondent failed to comply with the requirements of '8-203(h)(1) of the State Code, by failing to issue the required notice within thirty (30) days after the termination of the Complainant's tenancy. The Respondent could have, at the very least, sent such notice to the Complainant at the Apartment which, according to the Respondent, was her last known address.

3. The Respondent forfeited any right he might have had to withhold any portion of the Complainant's security deposit by his failure to comply with '8-203(h)(1) of the State Code.

4. The Respondent failed to credit the Complainant's security deposit with simple interest at the rate of 4% per annum, in violation of '8-203(f)(1) of the State Code. The Complainant is entitled to the return of her entire security deposit, in the amount of $895.00, plus accrued interest at the rate of 4% per annum accounting from June 3, 1995 until the date of this Order, which sum is $107.40 (3 years @ 4% per year).

5. The Respondent, without a reasonable basis, failed to return the Complainant's security deposit plus accrued interest within forty-five (45) days after the termination of her tenancy, in violation of '8-203(f)(4) of the State Code.

6. The Respondent caused a defective tenancy by failing to handle and dispose of the Complainant's security deposit in accordance with the requirements of '8-203 of the State Code.

7. The Commission is authorized under the State Code to award up to threefold of the amount wrongfully withheld. Based upon Respondent's failure to send the required notice and his unreasonable withholding of Complainant's security deposit, Respondent must pay an additional $100.00 to the Complainant as a penalty.