mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)

Citation: mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
Parent Document: mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2025-07-16
Original Source: https://www.vermontjudiciary.org/media/19222 ↗

Full Text

1,166 chars

Landlord introduced evidence that it had to purchase eight gallons of paint ($301.80) and
pay laborers to perform 34.5 hours of painting/cleaning and 3.5 hours of sheetrock repair
($1,710) to bring the condition of the unit to the standard required before renting it to the next
group of tenants. It introduced evidence that there were some scuff marks left on the
baseboards/walls and marks or rubber buildup from boots on some stair risers that did not come
off with normal cleaning and required repainting. It also offered testimony that some walls
required so much touch-up or sheetrock repair that it made more sense to repaint the entire wall
rather than just touch up certain areas. Landlord claimed that it only deducted from the security
deposit the amounts it paid for materials and labor and that it was, therefore, entitled to deduct
these amounts from Tenants’ security deposit. Mr. Dean was the individual who inspected the
unit and did some of the repairs and painting. He was unable to remember clearly the condition
of each of the rooms because too much time had passed. Neither Tenant nor Landlord
introduced photographs of the unit. Legal Standard

Other Sections in This Document (24)

Full Text