A Kansas woman owes more than $21,000 in late fees for failing to pay her rent in 2020, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled last week.
Sherri Foster rented a Prairie Village house in November 2018, paying $1,900 per month in rent to John Schutt. Schutt also employed Foster to work on renovations of rental properties, attorney Jadh Kerr told Supreme Court justices.
“The lease had a late-fee provision that $20 for each day was due for rents that remain unpaid after the due date, which is the first of the month,” Kerr said.
Foster did not pay rent for three months in early 2020, but she and Schutt agreed to bring her current as of June 2020, Kerr said. Foster again missed three months of rent, which ultimately brought the two before the Johnson County District Court.
“Normally, under a landlord-tenant action, you would go to trial within 14 days,” Kerr said. “That did not happen here. It took from September of 2020 to March 2 of 2023 for this case to get to trial.”
The district court ruled that Foster owed $5,700 in unpaid rent and $21,240 in late fees, which was calculated by assessing $20 per day for 1,062 days between the first missed rent payment and the judgment date.
However, Schutt also owed Foster $545 for failing to pay her for managing construction work on his rental properties, according to court documents.
Foster’s attorney Eric Kraft appealed the district court ruling to the Kansas Court of Appeals, claiming that $21,000 in late fees was “unconscionable,” a legal term meaning a contract is so unfair or oppressive for one party that it offends the conscience of the court. In Kansas, the Consumer Protection Law focuses on “misleading, deceptive and unconscionable trade practices.”
The appeals court agreed with Foster and lowered the late fee assessment to $1,700, which covered the days between when Foster failed to pay her rent and when the case went before the district court. But Schutt then appealed that decision to the Kansas Supreme Court.
Kraft said the district court judge, John McEntee, was new, and Kraft believed the former judge in district court would have limited the late fees.
“As much as we try to protect the tenants in the landlord and tenant act, this smacks that completely upside down,” Kraft told the Supreme Court.
While Supreme Court justices peppered Schutt’s lawyer with questions about the fairness of late fees accruing through an unusually long court proceeding, they ultimately found in favor of Schutt.
The unanimous decision from the Supreme Court reversed the appeals court’s decision. It said that Foster did not appropriately raise the issue of unconscionability, and the Court of Appeals should not have taken that into account when reversing the district court’s initial decision.
This story was originally published by the Kansas Reflector.
