The Furnace, the Escrowed Rent, and the 47-Day Deposit Letter
In November, Lena Ortega signed a 12-month lease for a two-bedroom apartment in Columbus at $1,450 per month and paid a $2,175 security deposit. The lease says nothing about repairs. On January 9 the furnace failed. Lena called RPK Properties that day and sent written notice; the manager promised a repair 'by Friday.' No repair occurred for 17 days, while outdoor temperatures stayed below 20°F. On January 14 Lena paid a licensed HVAC company $900 and deducted that amount from her February rent. She paid nothing else for February. RPK served a three-day notice to vacate under R.C. 1923.04 and filed a forcible-entry-and-detainer action in Franklin County Municipal Court. Lena vacated at the end of the term and gave RPK her forwarding address in writing the same day. Forty-seven days later RPK mailed an itemization-$400 carpet cleaning, $650 painting, $75 blinds, and $900 'unpaid rent'-with a check for $150.
1. Was Lena's $900 repair-and-deduct and her withholding of February rent lawful under Ohio law?
Read the worked answer
No. Ohio does not give residential tenants a self-help repair-and-deduct remedy absent a lease provision authorizing it, and this lease has none.
The statutory remedy is rent escrow. R.C. 5321.07 requires the tenant to (1) give the landlord written notice of the condition; (2) wait a reasonable time for repair-shorter for conditions materially affecting health and safety; (3) deposit the rent with the clerk of the municipal court; and (4) let the court order release of the funds for repairs or permit termination. Lena completed step one and skipped the rest.
Her deduction and nonpayment are breaches. Withholding February rent without escrow gives RPK a nonpayment ground under R.C. 1923.02.
Two qualifications. First, RPK breached its duty to keep the premises in a fit and habitable condition under R.C. 5321.04(A)(6), which requires compliance with health and safety codes; a 17-day heat failure in January is a genuine violation, and Lena has an affirmative damages claim for the $900 and for any consequential losses. Second, R.C. 5321.02 bars retaliation-terminating or threatening to terminate within one year after a tenant complains-so if RPK moved because of her written notice, she has a retaliation defense to possession.
Bottom line. She may recover the $900 as damages in her own action for breach of the statutory duty, but she may not treat it as an offset against rent. Had she escrowed, she would have had both a defense to eviction and a path to repair.
2. What are Lena's rights regarding the $2,175 security deposit?
Read the worked answer
R.C. 5321.16 controls, and the 47-day delay is decisive.
The statute requires the landlord, within 30 days after the tenant surrenders possession and provides a forwarding address, to return the deposit together with an itemized list of any deductions. Lena gave the forwarding address on move-out day, so the clock started then. RPK responded on day 47.
Consequence. Under R.C. 5321.16(C), a landlord who fails to comply is liable for the amount of the deposit plus an amount equal to the amount wrongfully withheld, plus reasonable attorney's fees. That is effectively double recovery and mandatory fees-which is why the missed deadline matters more than the deposit itself. Lena can seek $2,175 plus $2,175 plus fees.
The set-off argument fails. RPK will argue the $900 in unpaid rent justified withholding, but the statute's deadline governs the deposit; the rent claim is a separate affirmative claim RPK must bring, not a defense to the deposit statute. If Lena had never supplied a forwarding address, the 30-day clock might not have started-that is the landlord's only escape, and the facts foreclose it.
Even a timely list would be shaky. Painting after three years and worn hallway carpet are ordinary wear and tear, which a landlord may not charge back; charges for damage beyond wear and tear require proof of the item's age, useful life, and a prorated cost. 'Carpet cleaning $400' with no condition detail is the kind of conclusory itemization Ohio courts reject. The $75 blinds are arguable if actually broken.
Practical point. The deposit claim belongs in a separate civil action, not the eviction case.
3. How should the forcible-entry-and-detainer action be handled procedurally, and what can Lena litigate there?
Read the worked answer
Ohio's FED action is a summary proceeding about possession, not a general civil case.
Notice. R.C. 1923.04 requires a three-day notice to vacate, served in the manner the statute allows and specifying the breach. A defective notice-wrong dates, no stated ground, or improper service-defeats the complaint and forces a refiling, so Lena should inspect the notice first.
Counterclaims. Ohio courts generally do not permit counterclaims in FED; the action is limited to the right of possession, and the tenant's damages claims (security deposit, habitability, retaliation) must be brought separately in the same municipal court's civil division. Some judges consolidate related matters for efficiency, but Lena cannot count on litigating the deposit inside the eviction. RPK's unpaid-rent claim is likewise not fully adjudicated in FED; rent matters only as it bears on possession.
Preclusion. A judgment for possession can have issue-preclusive effect on discrete issues actually litigated-for example, whether rent was wrongfully withheld-but it does not bar her later deposit action unless that claim was raised and decided.
Lena's strongest positions in the FED. First, the notice and repair failure under R.C. 5321.04(A)(6) supports a retaliation defense under R.C. 5321.02 if RPK acted because of her written complaint within the prior year. Second, tender of the withheld rent before judgment can sometimes cure nonpayment, though the statute does not guarantee it. She should not expect the FED judge to award deposit damages-she needs a separate complaint, and she should file it promptly, since the statutory fee-shifting makes the 47-day lapse worth far more than the deposit.