sec. deposit dispute with my ex please help

He moved out shortly after we moved in together. We each paid half towards the sec.deposit (675$ each). When he moved out, he wrote a letter to the property management company stating he wanted his half back when I move out. I have no problem with that. I shortly sent in a letter of agreement to them. Even without any written agreement between us, that is how the property management company would be legally handling it. Well now, 1 1/2 years later, hes demanding me to give him his money now, not wanting to wait for me to move and threatning to take me to court. Does he have a case or am I ok?

[OHlandlord]

He's barking up the wrong tree, so to speak. You do not have his money. The property manager does. He needs to ask the property manager for his money back. Most likely, the PM will politely refuse, saying the unit is not vacated yet. (All state laws require the deposit to be returned after the unit is vacated - not before!) So state law, plus the fact that he already authorized them to return it to him after you moved, will probably get him no where. You can not get them to return this deposit as long as you still occupy the property. He will have to wait unless you feel like being generous enough to refund his half to him with a signed release of any claim of the deposit after you move out.

BTW, when two people are on the lease and the unit is vacated, I write the deposit check out to BOTH tenants (whether or not they are still together). They can work it out how much each receives. That way I'm not involved in the disagreement.

the only concern I have is that he could dispute saying that he is no longer on the lease and a new lease should of been written up after he moved with just my name on it, and he should of gotten his share back since he is no longer on the lease. could that be a problem? the PM is refusing to give him his money, saying it is between the two of us.

[OHlandlord]

And how is that your fault if the PM didn't write up a new lease? You don't write the leases, the PM does. Did the PM ever take him off the lease? Does the ex have a paper from the PM saying he was no longer liable for the lease obligations? (Normally, we do not remove anyone from the lease for the life of the lease, regardless if they break up/divorce,/if one moves out/etc.) We leave everyone on the lease who signed it originally, so we can still collect from the other person should the first not pay. If the PM didn't write a new lease, offer you one to sign, or take him off the original, it's not your problem. You didn't do it. The PM did. State law says the deposit gets returned once the unit is vacated. He signed a paper agreeing to this.

If the PM wants to give him his half of the money back and request you bring the deposit back up to the correct level, he can do so. If you want to be generous, you can refund his half of the deposit to him, but only if he signs a paper saying he no longer has any rights to the deposit (and that the entire deposit is to be retuned to you upon vacating), and gives both you and the PM a copy of it.

One other thought... Had he damaged the unit before he moved out, he would be responsible for the damages he caused. If he gets his full deposit back now, that will leave you to pay the full amount of any damages to the unit. Do did he cause any damages before he left that you will be responsible for when you move out?

he left no damages, he moved out a month after we moved in. He was only removed from the lease, a new one was not drawn up and I didnt sign anything new. He is not responsible or have any rights for anything that has to do with the townhouse, the sec. deposit is the only thing hes still attached to. PM says they will not return it to him, its between us to come to an agreement, and we did. I dont want to give him his money until I move, he doesnt deserve it. Theres alot of bad blood between us. It angers me that this whole agreement we have was his idea, and I agreed to it, and now Im the witch for not wanting to give in to his demands now that hes changed his mind. I know he'll take me to court, and if I lose it will be totally humiliating.

[OHlandlord]

If he takes you to court, kindly tell the judge that you do not have his security deposit, the PM has it. He paid that money to the apartment complex, not to you. (Your receipt shows that he paid them, not you!) He will be taking the wrong party to court. Let the judge know that the PM has not refunded the deposit to him and refuses to do so*, and that the PM has not asked you to replace any portion of the deposit. (If the PM refunded his money to him, you would have to make up the other 1/2 of the deposit with the PM. Would you be willing to do this if asked to by the PM?) Additionally, let the judge know that your ex signed a paper with the PM to allow management to keep his deposit until such time as you vacated the unit, then to refund his 1/2 of the deposit to him (your ex). You may want to get a copy of this letter from the PM if you are sued. Since he signed this agreement, it will be hard to argue in court that he now wants to change it.

* Additionallly, although you say he left no damages, did the PM do an inspection to prove that there were no damages to the unit when he moved out? If not, they have every right to keep the entire deposit until such time as they inspect the unit and see that no damages have been done. The purpose of the deposit is to protect the owner against damages to the unit. If no inspection has been done, they have no way of knowing that nothing is damaged, and then have a right to keep the money in case there are damages. If they were to inspect after a tenant moves out (and the couple breaks up), whose deposit would they take those damages out of - his half or yours? It would be a he said - she said argument about who did the damage. (Management doesn't want involved in that!) So they wait until everyone moves out, subtract the damage from the total, and send each of you back half of what's left. You could then argue with each other who did what to the unit, and leave management out of the scuffle.