There is nothing ""normal"" about house dust. Just ask Madison Property Management.
That is what UW-Madison graduate Elizabeth Gokey discovered in August when MPM withheld $175 from her security deposit for five hours of ""cleaning.""
Gokey, who works at Madison's Tenant Resource Center, asked to see what MPM had cleaned at her Jenifer Street apartment, since she knew a recent city ordinance required landlords to document security deposit deductions for cleaning. MPM sent her more than 40 photos. However, Gokey said most of the cleaning depicted was for ""normal wear and tear,"" an illegal deduction under another city ordinance. Gokey was especially upset to see photos depicting dust, peeling paint and dirt under her refrigerator. Several of the photos, she added, were blurry or indecipherable, and others, including one of a bucket under her kitchen sink full of water from a leaking pipe, ""showed more that the apartment was crappy than that I had not cleaned."" (A slideshow of photos from MPM is available here.)
Gokey is not alone. A monthlong investigation into dozens of tenant complaints and the policies of three prominent property management companies in the campus area—MPM, Apex Property Management and Steve Brown Apartments—revealed several disturbing trends.
Of the 28 tenant complaints collected during the investigation, 18 were directed against MPM, three against Apex and a total of seven against Anchor Property Management, Wisconsin Management Company, Ripple Management and JSM Properties. The most common accusations dealt with negligent, predatory or even illegal policies toward security deposits, late-fee accounting or maintenance issues. Complaints came from the Department of Consumer Protection, Dane County Small Claims Court and interviews with members of two anti-MPM Facebook groups. No similar Facebook groups were found criticizing Madison's other property agencies. However, among the three agencies investigated, only MPM was found with strong evidence of security deposit policy violations, problematic accounting practices and neglected maintenance issues.
Shifting costs
According to Wisconsin Bureau of Consumer Protection Director Jim Rabbitt, Gokey's story reflects a larger problem among some property managers today.
""One of the things you see in the industry ... is that [landlords] are shifting a lot of their costs which used to just be part of rent,"" Rabbitt said. Increasing security deposit deductions, he added, has become one popular tactic for keeping rents low.
Ald. Brenda Konkel, District 2, said some landlords are especially predatory in the campus area because students are often uninformed or too busy with schoolwork to explore legal options.
""I've had landlords in the past tell me, ‘You know, if I take $100 out of everyone's security deposit, one out of 10's going to complain, and then I just give them their money back,"" Konkel said, though she could not recall who had made the statement.
Complaints target MPM
Konkel, who also directs the Tenant Resource Center, said she handles about 10,000 complaints each year but does not record the number of complaints per landlord. Nevertheless, she said MPM, which rents to between 2,000 and 3,000 students in the campus area, has a reputation as one of Madison's most criticized property agencies. According to Konkel, the Bureau of Consumer Protection was ""particularly concerned about Madison Property Management"" in the fall and asked the resource center to direct its MPM complaints directly to the bureau.
""It's unusual that we would've had contact with [Consumer Protection] in the first place,"" Konkel said.
Bureau of Consumer Protection officials would not say whether the organization was investigating MPM, citing confidentiality.
Photo ordinance follies
Gokey's problems went beyond MPM's contentious interpretations of ""normal wear and tear,"" though.
""[MPM] never informed me in the first place that I could request pictures,"" Gokey said.
Gokey said she contacted an attorney, who let MPM off with a warning because no similar complaints had been made and the ordinance was only five months old.
Gokey said she was not surprised by MPM's violation.
""They care more about getting money than they do about their tenants. They have their reputation of being a bad landlord for a reason,"" Gokey said.
According to MPM attorney Rachel Govin, the violation was a rare error, since MPM had been using sticker notifications at the time and must have forgotten to attach one to Gokey's security deposit receipt.
However, UW-Madison senior Josh Thornton said he and his roommates had a similar experience with MPM in August. According to Thornton, MPM deducted $210 from his security deposit to clean his Breese Terrace apartment for six hours. Like with Gokey, no photo ordinance notification appeared on Thornton's receipt. Thornton was unaware of the ordinance until recently, but will not pursue legal action since his roommates left behind a broken window. However, the window is only briefly noted on the cleaning checklist MPM provided Thornton, and no damages were referenced on his official list of security deposit deductions, violating a city ordinance. Govin said MPM ""would not dispute that a mistake was made.""
In May 2008, MPM did notify Madison resident Michelle Williams of her right to see photos of her security deposit deductions. However, the notification appeared in nearly illegible fine print on a copy of the receipt obtained from the Bureau of Consumer Protection. The notification also appeared to be typed onto the receipt, though Govin said MPM was using sticker notifications at the time.
Konkel said the Tenant Resource Center has not heard complaints against other landlord agencies for violating the photo ordinance. She said a new amendment is being proposed to regulate font size for photo ordinance notification, though MPM said it now uses a larger stamp to display the ordinance.
The investigation did not find similar photo ordinance problems at other Madison agencies. Both Steve Brown Apartments and Apex Property Management fully endorsed the ordinance last year.
""The photo ordinance, to me, is just good management,"" Steve Brown Apartments Community Manager Dan Seeley said. Seeley said Steve Brown Apartments, which rents to approximately 2,000 tenants in the downtown area, documents each house it cleans with digital video. Individual photos, Seeley said, cannot put tenant damages in their proper context and could easily be manipulated.
Apex owner Brian Bosben, who rents approximately 150 units near campus, produced security deposit receipts listing the ordinance's notification in bold, readable font.
But Apex and SBA are hardly the minority. Ald. Eli Judge, District 8, who sponsored the photo ordinance, said MPM was the only large agency in Madison not to fully endorse the April 2008 measure.
""Madison Property Management did not care much for the ordinance ... There were some concerns about the costs of implementing policies,"" Judge said.
MPM President James Stopple said he didn't ""throw any stones at the ordinance ... but it cost a huge amount of overhead.""
However, Judge said landlords will also profit in the long run from the ordinance, since it will save them money from potential legal challenges.
Normalizing ‘normal'
Gokey's familiarity with tenant rights helped her catch MPM's photo ordinance violation, and unsatisfied with the photos MPM produced, she took action. MPM eventually reimbursed Gokey's full deposit, but only after she threatened to seek triple damages through small claims court.
According to Nancy Jensen, executive director of the Apartment Association of South Central Wisconsin, excessive security deposit deductions like Gokey's are a problem mainly with students.
In a recent e-mail, however, Govin supported MPM's decision to charge Gokey and said the cleaning deductions were ""beyond the normal wear and tear.""
According to Stopple, problems arise because everyone has their own definition of ""normal,"" including the Tenant Resource Center.
""They have an agenda,"" Stopple said. ""They don't think there should be any cleaning charges, period. And that's not true ... Their idea of ‘normal wear and tear' is a hugely different interpretation than mine."" Stopple added that if tenants realize they won't be charged for anything, they will be more likely to neglect their apartments.
Bosben agreed the ""wear and tear"" concept is unclear. Still, after examining Apex's security deposit receipts from last August, Bosben said he ""could hardly find a deduction other than unpaid rent."" Seeley, likewise, said Steve Brown Apartments tends to give the benefit of the doubt to renters.
Jensen said she wants a standard established for cleaning fees by the August 2009 turnover to distinguish reasonable and unreasonable deductions.
Check out Wednesday's paper for the second part of our landlord investigation, which takes a closer look at the accounting and maintenance practices in the UW-Madison campus rental industry.
