Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Granberry v. Islay Investments, 161 Cal. App. 3d 382 (1984)

Citation
Granberry v. Islay Investments, 161 Cal. App. 3d 382 (1984)
Parent Document
Granberry v. Islay Investments, 161 Cal. App. 3d 382 (1984)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1984-10-30

Other Sections in This Document (61)

Full Text

706 chars
which gave tenants a right to recover payments to landlords when the primary function of such payments was to secure the performance of a rental agreement. Immediately prior to the enactment of section 1950.5 Islay had been charging its tenants a “refundable security deposit” in addition to the first month’s rent. Tenants had to remain tenants for a specified time in order to qualify for this refund. Upon the enactment of section 1950.5, Islay converted its so-called “refundable security deposit” to a “non-refundable cleaning fee” in order to avoid disputes in litigation over refunds. Islay determined the amount of this cleaning fee by whatever the market would bear. In Bauman v. Islay Investments