The tenant is paying less because of an asserted defect. You consider the reduction unjustified and want to take the missing amount from the existing deposit. The contract even states that due claims may be covered from it during the tenancy. Before any withdrawal, the claim and the function of the security must be examined separately.
Do not decide the dispute by a ledger entry
Present the claim with its factual background: agreed amount, deduction, reported defect, reaction to date and existing evidence. A merely disputed allegation is not finally determined by one’s own debit.
Our editorial recommendation: carry out two processes with mutual reference. The first reviews the asserted defect and the payment derived from it. The second concerns the legal treatment of the deposit. That way a technical or legal objection is not simply booked out of sight.
Understand the limit from the BGH case
In its judgment VIII ZR 234/13 the BGH decided that the landlord side may not make use of the security for disputed claims during an ongoing residential tenancy. In the case at hand it also concerned a rent reduction and an additional clause on ongoing access. The BGH focused on the trust character and protection of the deposit. [BGH]
The statutory framework of § 551 requires in particular that the deposit be kept separate from the landlord’s assets and prohibits disadvantageous deviations. [KAUTION] An existing contractual addition is therefore not automatically the required release for the proposed disbursement.
Prepare a claim assessment that does without consuming the deposit
Compile the current state of affairs so that legal counsel can assess the claim and the appropriate further course. This includes the tenant’s objection in full. A message is not removed from the file merely because its reasoning is inconvenient.
For technical questions the specific problem is examined professionally. For a purely calculation or booking problem the documents are suitably organised. The article does not confirm a rent reduction or any particular arrears amount. It separates the necessary checks from an impermissibly pre-emptive withdrawal.
Fictitious case: a contractual addition initially appears to be a shortcut
Mona finds a broadly worded deposit clause in her contract. She wants to use it to settle a disputed monthly difference and then demand replenishment. Before the disbursement she presents the clause, payment history and defect communication.
The legal review takes into account the current contractual status and the claim actually disputed. Mona pursues the claim separately instead of already marking it as settled by deposit payment in the working account. The case does not decide a concrete monetary claim and does not constitute an enforcement measure.
After a withdrawal has already taken place, disclose the actual status
If money has already been taken, that transaction with date and evidence belongs in the professional clarification. In the decided BGH case the re-crediting of the deposit was the subject of the successful claim. [BGH] Your own file must therefore not look as if there had never been a withdrawal.
The article specifically addresses the disputed claim during an ongoing residential tenancy. It does not decide all cases of undisputed claims and does not derive from the judgment a general rule for utilisation after the end of the contract. Your result should be a claim examined separately with the security treated correctly.