Security deposit

Small claims court. Hopefully you kept evidence of your attempts to move out.

In addition, NY law does not allow landlords to use security deposits for unpaid rent without the tenant's consent.

This is probably the worst part of rentals and why I stayed in units as long as possible.
The only landlord that didn’t pull this BS was a family office of sorts that owned 100s of rent stabilized units and had an office straight out of the 60s. They even paid me interest for the 3 years it sat in a savings account.
Please take them to small claims court!

I’d love to see a system where security was kept in true escrow, maybe a value add service by rental brokers to help justify the near 2 months rent you pay them. The tech is there to do this pretty transparently and low effort/cost these days. Incentives just aren’t there until more renters put feet down.

Mila, The laws against landlords are very strict. If you have it in WRITING that you tried to setup inspection on the lease move-out date, and the landlord pushed it back, they have no right to deduct anything from the security deposit. Page 24.

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/tenants_rights.pdf

There are a ton of security deposit replacement companies out there - like Jetty, Rhino, The Guarantors, Insurent. The security deposit is a totally outdated concept.

Out in Nowhere, the brokers do hold the security deposits in their client trust account. If the landlord doesn't present them justification to retain part of the deposit, by law they have to return it.

I vaguely remember from a landlord-tenant pro-bono case 30 years ago in SF that leaving possessions/failure to remove all possessions actually did amount to a “holdover” under L-T law in that jurisdiction at that time. Vaguest of recollections is that industry practice at that time was most landlords would just confiscate or throw out possessions left on the apartment but that the landlord could treat leftover possessions as holdover if they wanted to. Landlords don’t do this when times are good; they would only resort to this if re-rental had not materialized and they were otherwise hurting/desperate. This is not intended to be legal advice, and I concur with others that small claims is the place to get a definitive answer.

These type of stories really upset me.

Before small claims, the tenant needs to re-read the lease. It should define what actions are necessary to terminate the lease, to notify the landlord of the surrender of the apartment, when a holdover tenancy is created, the effect of leaving personal property in the apartment, and what the security deposit can be retained to cover.

You'll likely win in housing court because in NYC judges usually side with the tenant.

That said, why did you leave your crap in the apartment after the lease end-date? You should have cleaned out the unit and left it fully vacant. Why are you surprised the landlord is taking issue with the fact that you didn't remove all your belongings??

Typically the remedy for the LL is to dispose of the belongings and charge the tenant. However, in court, the LL may argue that the tenant did not surrender.

It seems Mila did try to surrender the apartment by asking for a walkthrough but the landlord kept postponing. Unclear if court would view attempting to walkthrough as equivalent of surrender. But I wouldn't have left my stuff there even if it is two small bags without asking the landlord if it is ok after the lease expiration date.

I just reread my own lease.l, which is a standard Blumberg form of lease. It says that if I attempt to surrender the apartment without having removed all property, the LL can either charge me rent until I remove all my property, store the property at my expense, or dispose of it at my expense. Looks like OP will lose in court. Lesson learned.

I know from personal experience in NYC that tenant has no right to a walk through unless they were able to negotiate it as a provision of the lease up front.

As George highlights, the lease lays out how to surrender possession and asking for a walkthrough is not typically a listed mechanism for surrendering possession.

I'm a landlord and have been, on various properties, for decades. My feeling is that just because you have a piece of paper establishing certain rights doesn't mean you should be a jerk. If landlord was so intent on not housing the possessions, landlord should have opened his/her mouth AT THE TIME and said, "well, sure, but I'm going to have to charge you for your gym bag if you don't come pick it up." Failure to do that is kind of abhorrent, IMHO.

I'm not an attorney but, like 300 mercer, I wonder if the negotiations about walkthrough and pick up were in writing (via either email or text) in which cause mightn't they be a mutual agreement? (If they were by phone, you are probably out of luck).

ali r.
{upstairs realty}

Ali, I agree. While landlord may have lease terms favoring them as George quoted them from his lease form, landlord behavior assuming it is only two small bags/suitcases, which the renter was clearly going to remove at walkthrough, is not nice.

Certainly not nice, but the lease is the lease. These things are put in writing for a reason.

I put a lengthier comment in the “square footage” thread that I am too lazy to retype here, but the short of it is that no matter what the law is, if a plaintiff is willing to spend the time and money required to plead their case in a court of law, there is always a chance the the given judge will ignore whatever the law is and do what s/he thinks is “right.” If the law is unambiguously against the judge’s ruling, the onus is on the aggrieved party to appeal. One of the many flaws in our legal system is that judges who are routinely overturned on appeal face no consequence for their blatant disregard for the law.