Real Estate Attorney in Brooklyn Wins Deposit Return

The client entered into a one year residential lease for a Brooklyn property after relocating to care for an ailing parent. 

Several months into the lease term, the parent passed away, creating a substantial change in circumstances that required the client to relocate out of state. 

Recognizing the impact of the situation, the client reviewed the lease terms and applicable New York law to determine the proper termination procedure.

Pursuant to the lease and New York General Obligations Law § 7-108, the client provided written notice of intent to vacate more than ninety days prior to the lease end date. 

The landlord responded in writing confirming receipt and acknowledging the planned termination. 

At that stage, no objections or conditions were raised by the landlord regarding the move out or the return of the security deposit.

Under New York General Obligations Law § 7-108(1-a), a landlord must return the security deposit within fourteen days after the tenant vacates the premises or provide an itemized statement of lawful deductions. 

In this case, the landlord did neither. 

No inspection report, deduction notice, or refund was issued following the client’s surrender of possession.

Repeated attempts by the client to contact the landlord were ignored. 

Phone calls, emails, and certified letters went unanswered. 

This pattern of avoidance supported an inference of bad faith, particularly given the landlord’s earlier acknowledgment of lease termination and awareness of the move out date.

Counsel established that the lease was properly terminated in accordance with its terms and New York law. 

Evidence included the written notice, landlord acknowledgment, proof of vacancy, and compliance with notice requirements. 

These facts demonstrated that the tenant had no continuing rental obligation beyond the lease term.

The attorney relied on New York General Obligations Law § 7-108 and relevant provisions of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) to argue that the landlord’s failure to timely return the deposit resulted in forfeiture of any right to retain it. 

The claim sought full deposit recovery, statutory interest, and litigation costs.

The court ordered the landlord to return the full amount of the security deposit to the client. 

Additionally, the landlord was directed to pay statutory interest and bear the full cost of the litigation. 

The ruling emphasized that silence and delay do not excuse noncompliance with deposit return requirements.