Deadline for Security Deposit Refund Notification to Tenants Was Tolled During Pandemic

LVT Number: #33256

Former tenants sued landlord, seeking recovery of double the amount of their security deposit after they moved out. Tenants claimed that they gave landlord written notice of their vacatur on July 15, 2020, after paying an additional month's rent for June and July 2020. Tenants also claimed that they left the unit in broom clean condition, and that landlord waited until October 2020 to deliver an itemized statement about the security deposit and seeking to withhold $12,375 of the $18,600 security deposit.

Former tenants sued landlord, seeking recovery of double the amount of their security deposit after they moved out. Tenants claimed that they gave landlord written notice of their vacatur on July 15, 2020, after paying an additional month's rent for June and July 2020. Tenants also claimed that they left the unit in broom clean condition, and that landlord waited until October 2020 to deliver an itemized statement about the security deposit and seeking to withhold $12,375 of the $18,600 security deposit. Tenants asked the court to rule in their favor without trial, claiming that they were entitled to the relief sought under General Obligations Law Section 7-108(1-a)(e).

The court ruled against tenants, noting that tenants moved out during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Their lease had expired on June 15, 2020, but they only notified landlord that they were vacating on July 15, 2020. The move-out date wasn't precise, and tenants never handed in their keys. So there was a question of fact as to when tenants vacated or surrendered the unit. Landlord claimed that they didn't give back keys until Aug. 28, 2020.

The record also showed that, during the initial stages of the pandemic, there was significant confusion and lack of communication at the building. The parties were operating under unusual circumstances that delayed both the move-out and inspection process. And, during this time, statutory deadlines were tolled and extended under executive orders. Tolling a time limit for taking a specific action under the GOL falls directly within the purpose of the executive orders.

The court found that requiring adherence to strict deadlines at the height of the pandemic ran counter to the reason for the tolling orders. Landlord also had become willing to return the entire security deposit before tenants filed the lawsuit. Questions of fact remained as to whether landlord had grounds to withhold a portion of the security deposit.

Eisner v. Zaim: Index No. 656238/2020, 2024 NY Slip Op 31615(U)(Sup. Ct. NY; 5/7/24; Bluth, J)