Chicago Residential Landlord And Tenant Ordinance Discussions

[Paul Bernstein]

What is the name of your state? Illinois

It is often VERY difficult to discuss a particular landlord and tenant issue when we are not talking about a specific state or other governmental unit, such as the City of Chicago. Hopefully, at some point in time, these forums will have lawyers from every state in the union who have experiences in representing landlords and tenants in their state.

I have been representing tenants in Chicago since 1989 and have handled many cases involving the Chicago Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance (which we will refer to as the Chicago RLTO or RLTO for short) and also matters involving the State of Illinois laws relating to landlord and tenant.

Here, we can and will have a focused discussion of both Illinois and Chicago landlord and tenant issues and, if not already present here, provide an approach that is a bit different but more focused.

Paul Bernstein, Esq.
Illinois Attorney

 

[Paul Bernstein]

Section 5-12-010 of the RLTO - Title, Purpose And Scope

In order to get a basic understanding of the Chicago RLTO, it is appropriate to learn about the "purpose"...and "policy" of the City in adopting the RLTO. Here is a part of the first section of the RLTO that talks to this issue and sets the stage for higher-court cases over the years:

"This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance", and shall be liberally construed and applied to promote its purposes and policies." (emphasis added)

"It is the purpose of this chapter and the policy of the city, in order to protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare of its citizens, to establish the rights and obligations of the landlord and the tenant in the rental of dwelling units, and to encourage the landlord and tenant to maintain and improve the quality of housing."

 

[Paul Bernstein]

Section 5-12-080 - Security Deposits

Illinois and Chicago law discussions:

Chicago is very protective of a tenant's security deposit. Under section 5-12-080 of the RLTO, Landlords are required to:

(a) Hold all security deposits in a separate, federally insured bank account, separate and apart from all other money of the landlord.
(b) Requires a receipt when the Security deposit is paid with certain information.
(c) Pay interest every twelve months.
(d) Return a security deposit within a certain period of time and if deductionis for repairs are made, provide information within certain time periods.
(e) If there is a sale of the premises, both the seller and buyer must quickly provide the tenant with a written advice that the security deposit has been transfered and who has it.

(f) Section (f) makes it clear that if the landlord fails to comply with ANY provision of Sections 5-12-080(a) to 5-12-080(e) that the damages to be paid to the tenant by the landlord are equal to two times the security deposit plus inteesst as provided by other provisions of the RLTO.

Also of great importance is the tie-in of Section 5-12-180 of the RLTO entitled "Attorney's Fees" that states, in part: "....the prevailing plaintiff in any action arising out of a landlorlord's or tenant's application of the rights or remedies made available in this ordinance shall be entitled to all court costs and reasonable attorney's fees..."

Thus, the improper handling of security deposits by Chicago landlords can and does lead not only to the payment of damages to a tenant (or former tenant), but also imposes on the landlord (or former landlord), the time-value of services rendered to the tenant by the tenant's attorney, assuming the tenant "wins"...that is, is the "prevailing plaintiff".

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Paul, was there a pending question?

IAAL

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

I haven't been onboard for quite some time, regretfully, and in a quick review of some of the messages, it seems that many questions are so state-specific that it is hard to discuss a given set of facts. Accordingly, I thought it advisable to start a series of more focused discussions in an area where I know something about, which is where I practice, in Chicago, IL. It is my intent and hope to encourage and get other lawyers from Chicago and throughout Illinois to particpate in this forum.

Good idea? Bad idea?

I also note that you are from LA? I have some special interest in your City and CA as VERY progressive results seem to have been obtained against slum landlords in your area. Are you familiar with those cases?

My response:

First, it's both a good idea and a bad idea. It's terrific to have you back, by the way, and it's always a good thing to have as many lawyers as we can get to participate on the forums. That's the good part.

The bad part is that all of your hard work, above, will in short order be "lost to the ages" because as more and more people post their scenarios and questions, the deeper your post gets - - and finally goes into that deep, dark abyss we call the archives, and rarely, if ever, seen again. So, unless there's a pending question by someone, and someone who can glean good use of the information that you posted above, I'm afraid that before this day is done, your post will be in the abyss.

I'm somewhat familiar with California's landlord / tenant decisions. My main practice focus in the office is, however, family law and personal injury.

But, we can discuss L/T laws anytime you'd like.

Again, nice to see you back and I certainly hope that you won't become a stranger once again.

IAAL