Brett Robson wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 2004 22:14:59 +0900, Declan Murphy  ...
> 
>>The shikikin is not intended to be a fully refundable deposit, 
>> there will always be wear and tear, cleaning, repapering of walls etc 
>>to do. 
> 
> I know it's not your strong point but try reading the relevant law first.

Oh I know that I'm no lawyer, but from talking to gawd knows how many 
people over the years I believe it is rare for anyone (gaigin or local) 
to retrieve a full refund. In actual practise, it seems to me to be not 
so much a matter of law as of custom. The cost of hiring a lawyer 
(usually on short notice) will probably always exceed the difference 
between the shikikin paid and the offered refund (such that it is).

The cost of legal services to chase rent skippers is the whole point of 
the shikikin in the first place - with few exceptions (corporate tenants 
etc) a landlord usually will need the shikikin for rent security. Plus 
it is practically impossible to prove what is normal wear and tear (me 
walking on my floorboards), as opposed to wear and tear due to lack of 
care by the tenant (me forgetting to close a window when going to work 
on a cloudy then rainy day, me scratching the floor moving the furniture 
, me spilling silk screen ink etc). If the shikikin is so large that it 
seems worth paying for legal services then by all means, but in my case 
I consider the shikikin I paid to be pretty much written off. Trying to 
get back more than whatever % of less than 180,000 they might offer me 
probably isn't going to be worth the time or the expense.

-- 
"Oh don't give me none more of that Old Janx Spirit/ No, don't you give 
me none more of that Old Janx Spirit/ For my head will fly, my tongue 
will lie, my eyes will fry and I may die/ Won't you pour me one more of 
that sinful Old Janx Spirit"