landlord

[Oildog]

Dude, pay up. It stinks, but it only gets worse if you try to hide and ignore it.


Many things in life work like this.

[hendersj31]

I am a little surprised at many of the responses here. I am a landlord of several properties over the past twenty years and I have never been involved in a lease that states the tenant is responsible for NSF charges I incur due to insufficent funds. Yes there are late fees but never will it be written that the tenant is responsible for my NSF charges if I decide to write checks before the rent check clears. The returned check penalty is written in the lease not all NSFs fees the landlord gets.

You are responsible for whatever the lease states. Not what the landlord tells you. Now with that said, you may have late charges that exceed the 300 dollars. But I would be surprised if you were legally obligated to pay for all the landlords NSF fees in addition to what is documented in the lease for late charges. That is a risk landlords have to accept, which is why the late rent penalties are so high.

With that aside, if it was me I would try to find a reasonable solution to keep the relationship with your landlord healthy( assuming it is healthy). I think this is what most responders are trying to say.

[marksmu]

My leases all state that in addition to the rent still being owed, tenants have must pay my bank charges for NSF (usually $30-$40) a late fee penalty of $100, and $75/day that the rent remains unpaid, with interest accruing daily from the date rent should have been paid.

I dont run a hotel, I am not a charity. I own rental property for a profit...Period. I take good care of my tenants, and I expect to be paid timely in full every single time.

[cheryjohns]

Originally Posted by aba030

I don't see why the OP should be responsible for paying NSF fees on checks the landlord wrote. The landlord should not be writing checks for funds that are not physically in their account. What if the OP's check didn't bounce but took an extra day or two to clear? Would it be right for the landlord to demand payment for NSF fees from the OP because the check took longer to post than expected? I absolutely agree OP should be responsible for all NSF (for the check the OP wrote) and late fees as stipulated in the lease.

Is the landlord demanding late fees in addition to the $300 of NSF fees?

It was my understanding that the $300 was the total - not the addition to all other charges. No, the landlord would not be entitled to both.

[aba030]

Originally Posted by hendersj31

...I am a landlord of several properties over the past twenty years and I have never been involved in a lease that states the tenant is responsible for NSF charges I incur due to insufficent funds. Yes there are late fees but never will it be written that the tenant is responsible for my NSF charges if I decide to write checks before the rent check clears. The returned check penalty is written in the lease not all NSFs fees the landlord gets...

This was exactly my point earlier. The landlord is not entitled to being paid NSF charges on checks the landlord wrote.

Look, I agree the OP made a huge mistake here, but why are people never willing to take responsibility for their own actions? If you write checks for funds that are not physically in your account, you take on the risk for those checks bouncing. Plain and simple. Quit trying to pass the buck, accept the consequences of the mistake you made.

[cheryjohns]

Originally Posted by hendersj31

I am a little surprised at many of the responses here. I am a landlord of several properties over the past twenty years and I have never been involved in a lease that states the tenant is responsible for NSF charges I incur due to insufficent funds. Yes there are late fees but never will it be written that the tenant is responsible for my NSF charges if I decide to write checks before the rent check clears. The returned check penalty is written in the lease not all NSFs fees the landlord gets.

You are responsible for whatever the lease states. Not what the landlord tells you. Now with that said, you may have late charges that exceed the 300 dollars. But I would be surprised if you were legally obligated to pay for all the landlords NSF fees in addition to what is documented in the lease for late charges. That is a risk landlords have to accept, which is why the late rent penalties are so high.

With that aside, if it was me I would try to find a reasonable solution to keep the relationship with your landlord healthy( assuming it is healthy). I think this is what most responders are trying to say.

My guess is the $300 are the charges everyone, yourself included, are talking about - and the tenant OP is confused as to what that $300 actually represents. Run a calculator on marksmu's leases and you will see that paying that $300 is something of a bargain (I bet marksmu doesn't have very many people pay rent late - which was his sensible goal).

[diggity101]

The standard TAR lease does not provide any relief to the landlord for the NSF fees.

Read your lease and see what it says.

[hendersj31]

Perhaps the OP is confused but the original post says that the landlord is wanting payment for the fees incurred from the landlord authorizing payments before the rent cleared.
Either way there is definitely some late penalty due. Its not the amount that is question (since none of us know how long it was before the payment did in fact clear) but the method or wording being used by the landlord to demand it.