Free Colorado Security Deposit Itemization

A Colorado Security Deposit Itemization is the written statement a landlord must deliver to the tenant under C.R.S. § 38-12-103 at the end of a tenancy, accompanying the return of any deposit balance. The statement must specifically describe each deduction, list the amount, and include copies of receipts for completed work or estimates for work to be performed by a third party for any deduction of $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more. Delivery must occur within 30 calendar days of the tenant vacating. Failure to deliver the statement on time, deductions for normal wear and tear, vague factual descriptions, and missing receipts on $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deductions all expose the landlord to bad-faith retention damages of up to three times (treble) deposit amount under C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a), in addition to the disputed deduction itself. The form on this page produces a complete itemized statement with a built-in deductions calculator; the rest of this guide walks through the legal framework, the deductible-versus-non-deductible standard, and the documentation requirements.

▶ Watch: Colorado Security Deposit Itemization — C.R.S. § 38-12-103 explained

What this itemization does

A Colorado Security Deposit Itemization is the written statement a landlord must deliver to a tenant under C.R.S. § 38-12-103 at the end of a tenancy. It accomplishes three distinct things at the same time.

First, it explains every deduction. The landlord cannot keep any portion of the deposit without specifying — in writing, with particularity — what the deduction is for, the amount, and (for any deduction of $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more) supporting receipts or estimates. A general statement that “deductions were made for cleaning and damage” fails the statute. Each deduction must stand on its own, identified by category and described with enough specificity that the tenant and a court can evaluate whether the deduction is for damage (deductible) or normal wear and tear (not deductible) and whether the amount is reasonable.

Second, it returns the deposit balance. The landlord must deliver the itemized statement together with any portion of the deposit not lawfully retained. Holding the balance pending the itemization, or delivering the itemization without the balance, is itself a violation of C.R.S. § 38-12-103 and exposes the landlord to bad-faith retention damages — independent of whether the underlying deductions were valid.

Third, it triggers the timing requirements. The 21-calendar-day window in C.R.S. § 38-12-103 runs from the date the tenant surrenders possession, not from the lease end date and not from the date the tenant gives notice. Late delivery — even by one day — is an independent violation. The combination of these three requirements (specific itemization, balance delivered together, 21-day deadline) is what Colorado courts use to evaluate whether a deposit retention is defensible or whether bad-faith damages under C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) apply.

The form on this page produces a complete itemized statement with a built-in deductions calculator, automatic balance computation, the required statutory references, and a delivery certification block. The remainder of this guide walks through the legal framework, the deductible-versus-non-deductible standard, and the documentation requirements that make a deduction defensible.

Colorado legal framework — C.R.S. § 38-12-103

The Colorado security deposit framework is governed by C.R.S. § 38-12-103, one of the most landlord-tenant-protective statutes in Colorado residential law. The itemization requirements specifically come from C.R.S. § 38-12-103, but several other subsections set up the broader framework that controls when deductions are allowed, what records must be kept, and what damages apply when the framework is violated.

The four subsections that matter for itemization

C.R.S. § 38-12-103 — 30-day return. “No later than 30 calendar days after the tenant has vacated the premises… the landlord shall furnish the tenant, by personal delivery or by first-class mail, postage prepaid, a copy of an itemized statement indicating the basis for, and the amount of, any security received and the disposition of the security, and shall return any remaining portion of the security to the tenant.” The 30 days is calendar days, not business days. The clock starts on the date possession is surrendered.

C.R.S. § 38-12-103 — itemization detail. Where the deductions exceed $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) in total or any single deduction is $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more, the itemized statement must include receipts (for completed work) or estimates (for work not yet performed by the landlord or by a third party). Receipts and estimates must be attached to the statement. The statute also allows the landlord to charge a reasonable hourly rate for the landlord’s own time, with documentation supporting the rate.

C.R.S. § 38-12-103 — no deductions for normal wear and tear. “No security shall be used by the landlord… as a means to satisfy the cost of restoring or replacing… ordinary wear and tear.” This is the statutory anchor for the wear-versus-damage distinction. Landlords who deduct for normal wear are not just wrong — they are violating the statute, and the deductions become a basis for bad-faith retention damages even on the otherwise-valid portions of the deduction package.

C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) — bad-faith retention damages. “The bad faith claim or retention by a landlord… may subject the landlord to statutory damages of up to twice the amount of the security, in addition to actual damages.” Bad faith is not narrowly defined — it generally means retention without reasonable basis, retention with intent to deprive the tenant of a refund the tenant is entitled to, or retention that ignores the statutory framework. Vague descriptions, deductions for normal wear, missing receipts on $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deductions, late delivery, and outright failure to return all support a bad-faith finding.

The pre-move-out inspection right under C.R.S. § 38-12-103

Colorado is unique among states in giving the tenant a statutory right to request a pre-move-out inspection within a reasonable time before the tenancy ends. The landlord must conduct the inspection if requested and provide an itemized statement of expected deductions during the inspection. The tenant then has the opportunity to remedy the noted conditions before vacating, and any condition the tenant remedies cannot be charged. The pre-move-out inspection does not replace the post-vacate itemized statement — C.R.S. § 38-12-103 still requires the formal itemization within 30 days of vacate. The pre-move-out is an additional procedural step that gives the tenant a chance to cure. See our Colorado Move-In/Move-Out Checklist guide for the full pre-move-out inspection procedure.

Federal anti-discrimination overlay

Independent of § 1950.5, the federal Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.) and Colorado’s Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibit deposit-handling decisions that target tenants based on race, religion, national origin, familial status, disability, or other protected characteristics. Disparate-impact analysis can also reach facially neutral patterns of deductions that disproportionately affect a protected class. A landlord who consistently charges higher cleaning fees to families with children, or who applies different deduction standards to tenants of certain backgrounds, exposes themselves to fair-housing claims with their own damages framework — separate from the C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) bad-faith damages.

When and how to deliver

The 21-day clock

The clock starts on the date the tenant surrenders possession of the unit. This is typically the date the tenant returns the keys, completes a final walk-through, or otherwise relinquishes control of the unit. It is not the date the tenant gave notice, not the lease end date, and not the date a final cleaning crew completes work. If the tenant is gone but the landlord has not yet retaken possession, the clock can be ambiguous; document the surrender date carefully (key handover photographs, walk-through documentation, written tenant acknowledgment).

Within those 30 calendar days the landlord must do both of the following: deliver the itemized statement, and return any deposit balance. Sending the statement on day 18 and the balance on day 25 is a violation. Sending the statement late even by one day is a violation. Holidays and weekends do not toll the deadline.

Method of delivery

C.R.S. § 38-12-103 authorizes “personal delivery or first-class mail, postage prepaid.” Personal delivery requires the tenant’s actual receipt; placing the statement at the unit door without confirmation is not personal delivery. Certified mail with return receipt requested is the safest practical method — first-class mail is statutorily compliant but provides no proof of mailing. Email delivery is allowed under C.R.S. § 38-12-103 only if the tenant has previously given written consent to email delivery; without that prior written consent, email alone is not statutorily compliant.

Delivery address

Deliver to the tenant’s forwarding address if the tenant provided one. If no forwarding address was provided, deliver to the tenant’s last known address — which is typically the rented unit itself. The landlord is not excused from the 21-day deadline because no forwarding address was given. Send to the unit by certified mail; even if undeliverable, the attempt and the documented mailing satisfy the statutory delivery requirement and the tenant bears the consequence of having failed to provide a current address.

What to do if you discover damage after delivery

If the landlord delivers a statement on day 15 and discovers additional damage on day 20, the landlord cannot simply send a supplementary deduction. The 21-day clock is fixed; deductions discovered after the statement is delivered are generally lost unless the landlord can show that the conduct was concealed or could not have been reasonably discovered within the inspection period. The practical remedy is to inspect thoroughly before issuing the statement — wait until day 18 or 19 if needed to ensure all conditions have been identified.

Categories of deductible expenses

C.R.S. § 38-12-103(b) authorizes the landlord to use the security deposit only for the following four purposes. Deductions outside these four categories are not statutorily permitted, regardless of how the lease is written.

1. Unpaid rent

Rent that the tenant owes but did not pay can be deducted from the deposit. Document the unpaid rent with the lease (rent amount), the rent ledger (what was paid, what was missed), and any late notices issued during the tenancy. Late fees that are reasonable under the lease can also be deducted, but only if the lease specifies the amount; Colorado courts review late fee provisions as liquidated damages and routinely strike fees that are punitive rather than compensatory.

2. Repair of damages caused by the tenant beyond normal wear and tear

Specific damage attributable to the tenant — large holes, broken fixtures, pet damage, water damage from negligence, missing items — can be deducted. The landlord must distinguish damage from normal wear; the standard is covered in detail in section 5. Repairs require itemization with description, amount, and (for $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deductions) receipts for completed work or estimates from third parties for work not yet performed.

3. Cleaning, only to bring the unit to the same level of cleanliness it was at the start of the tenancy

This is the single most contested category. Routine end-of-tenancy cleaning that brings the unit back to ordinary clean condition is generally not deductible — that is normal wear, and the tenant is entitled to ordinary use cleaning at lease end without paying for it. Cleaning beyond ordinary — heavy grease accumulation in the kitchen, pet odor remediation, mold cleanup, biohazard cleaning, hoarding cleanout — is deductible because it brings the unit back to the start-of-tenancy condition. The deduction must specifically describe what the cleaning was for; “general cleaning” is not specific. “Oven and range cleaning, $85” is specific.

4. Restoration of personal property or appurtenances if specified in the lease

If the lease includes a personal-property or appurtenances restoration provision (e.g., the unit was rented with specific furniture or appliances), the cost of restoring those items can be deducted. Most residential leases do not include this provision; it is more common in furnished rentals.

What you cannot deduct: Routine carpet cleaning between tenancies (without specific damage), repainting between tenancies (without specific damage), normal wear and tear of any kind, costs of repairs that pre-existed the tenancy, costs that were the landlord’s obligation under the warranty of habitability, costs of leasing the unit to the next tenant (advertising, leasing commissions), or any cost not falling within the four authorized categories.

Wear and tear vs. damage — the standard

The wear-versus-damage distinction is the single most important analytical question in security deposit deductions, and the most common source of bad-faith retention claims. Colorado courts and the statutory framework draw the line clearly: damage is what allows a deduction; wear is what doesn’t. The challenge is identifying which side of the line a given condition falls on.

Definitions that Colorado courts apply

Normal wear and tear is the deterioration that occurs in the ordinary use of residential property by a tenant of average care. It is the unavoidable consequence of habitation: paint that fades from sunlight, carpet that flattens in high-traffic areas, minor scuffs on walls from furniture and movement, small nail holes from picture hanging, light scratches on hardwood floors, faint marks on countertops from ordinary use, mineral deposits in bathroom fixtures from normal water use.

Damage is deterioration beyond normal wear caused by the tenant’s negligence, abuse, intentional acts, or pets. Examples: large holes in walls (more than nail-hole size), broken windows, broken fixtures, broken cabinets, pet stains in carpet, pet odor in subfloor or padding, water damage from unreported leaks, smoke damage, missing items, significant cleaning needs from food spills or hoarding, structural damage of any kind.

Borderline cases — and how to resolve them

Most disputes are not at the extremes; they are in the borderline. A few common borderline scenarios with the the Colorado analysis:

Carpet replacement. Carpets have a useful life of approximately 8–10 years. If a carpet was new at the start of a 5-year tenancy and is replaced at lease end, the replacement is at least 50% wear-and-tear and not chargeable. Even if the carpet has visible stains from the tenant, the landlord can typically charge only the portion of the carpet’s remaining useful life consumed by the damage — not the full replacement cost. A useful-life proration is the defensible approach; charging full replacement value for normal-end-of-life carpets routinely fails in court.

Repainting. Paint has a useful life of approximately 2–4 years for residential rentals. A tenant of three years cannot generally be charged for repainting at lease end if the paint shows only normal wear; the paint had a planned replacement in that timeframe. If the tenant caused specific damage (large stains, holes, smoke discoloration), the cost of repairing the specific damage is chargeable, but full repainting of a unit that was already due for repaint is not.

Cleaning. A reasonably clean unit at move-out is the tenant’s baseline obligation. A unit that requires heavy cleaning beyond ordinary — heavy grease, pet odor, smoke smell, hoarding cleanup, biohazard, mold — is chargeable. The line is whether the cleaning brings the unit back to start-of-tenancy condition or whether it would have been needed anyway as ordinary turnover.

Pet damage. Pet stains in carpet, scratches on doors and floors from pet claws, urine smell in subfloor or padding, and damage to walls from pets are all chargeable as damage. The deduction is for the specific damage, not for general wear of the unit.

Documentation that supports a wear-versus-damage finding

The strongest evidentiary record consists of: a signed move-in checklist with date-stamped photographs, a signed move-out checklist with parallel photographs from the same angles, contractor invoices or estimates that specifically describe what was charged, and (for older items) a useful-life calculation showing the proration. The landlord with this record almost always prevails. The landlord without it almost always loses on borderline charges.

The $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) receipts and estimates rule

C.R.S. § 38-12-103 requires that any single deduction of $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more be supported by either (a) receipts for work that has already been completed, or (b) estimates from third parties for work that has not yet been performed. The receipts and estimates must be attached to the itemized statement. This is a hard statutory requirement, not a best practice.

Receipts — for completed work

If the work has been done — cleaning, repair, replacement — by the time the itemized statement is delivered, the receipt must accompany the statement. The receipt should show the vendor, the date, the specific work performed, and the amount. A handwritten note from the landlord saying “$200 to ABC Cleaning” is not a receipt; an actual invoice or paid receipt from ABC Cleaning is.

Estimates — for work not yet performed

If the work has not been done by the time the statement is delivered (perhaps the landlord has not yet engaged a contractor, or the work requires additional specification), the landlord must attach an estimate from a third party for the work to be performed. The estimate should specifically describe the work, the price, and identify the vendor. After the work is completed, C.R.S. § 38-12-103 further requires the landlord to deliver, within 14 days of completion, copies of the receipts for the actual work to the tenant. Failure to follow up with receipts converts the entire estimate-based deduction into an unsupported one.

The landlord’s own labor

The landlord is allowed under C.R.S. § 38-12-103 to charge a reasonable hourly rate for the landlord’s own time. The hourly rate must be supported (typically by reference to comparable contractor rates), and the time spent must be specifically itemized. Charging $200 for “my time cleaning” without specifics is unsupported; charging $200 as “8 hours at $25/hour for oven, range, and bathroom cleaning per attached time log” is supportable.

Practical implications

The $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) threshold creates a simple decision tree. Each deduction line item is evaluated independently:

• Under $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) — itemize specifically (description, amount), no attached supporting documentation required by statute.
• $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more, work completed — itemize specifically, attach receipt or invoice from the vendor.
• $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more, work not yet done — itemize specifically, attach estimate from a third party, follow up with receipts within 14 days of completion.
• $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more, landlord’s own labor — itemize specifically with hours and rate, attach time log and supporting documentation for the rate.

The most common defect is a $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deduction with no attached supporting documentation. This is treated as an unsupported deduction by Colorado courts and creates direct exposure under C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a).

Required information for the document

While § 1950.5 does not prescribe a specific form, settled practice in Colorado and the evidentiary requirements of C.R.S. § 38-12-103 establish a minimum set of elements the document must contain to function as a defensible itemized statement.

Header information

The parties. Full landlord name (or property management company), full tenant names (all tenants on the lease), property address, and the dates of tenancy (lease start, vacate date). Without these, the document cannot be authenticated as the statement for this tenancy.

Deposit information

The deposit total. The original security deposit amount. If the tenant paid a separate “last month’s rent” deposit, list it separately — it has different statutory treatment under C.R.S. § 38-12-103 and may not be an actual security deposit.

Itemized deductions

Each deduction listed separately with: a specific description (not “cleaning” but “oven and range cleaning”), the amount, the category (cleaning, repair, unpaid rent, etc.), and a reference to the attached supporting documentation (receipt or estimate) for any $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deduction.

Calculation

The total of deductions, the deposit balance returned (deposit minus deductions, if positive), or the additional amount owed by the tenant (if deductions exceed deposit). Show the math; do not just give the bottom-line balance.

Attached documentation

Receipts for completed work and estimates for work not yet performed, for every $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deduction. Photographs of damage are not statutorily required but strongly support the deduction package and are routine in any litigated dispute. Move-in and move-out checklists, if available, should be referenced and (best practice) attached.

Delivery and signature

Method of delivery (certified mail, personal delivery, etc.), date of delivery, forwarding or last-known address, landlord signature with printed name and title, and date.

Common mistakes that expose landlords to damages

Most Colorado security-deposit disputes are not lost on the underlying merits — they are lost on procedural defects that expose otherwise-valid deductions to bad-faith damages under C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a). The pattern is consistent across cases: the landlord had a colorable basis for some of the deductions, but the procedural failures converted the entire package into an unsupported retention.

Vague descriptions

“Cleaning.” “Wall repair.” “General damage.” These descriptions cannot satisfy C.R.S. § 38-12-103. Specific descriptions can: “Oven and range cleaning, $85.” “Patching and repainting two 4-inch holes in living room wall, $145.” “Carpet cleaning to address pet stains in master bedroom, $175.” Specific descriptions allow the tenant and the court to evaluate whether the deduction is for damage or wear; vague descriptions presume against the landlord.

Deductions for normal wear

Charging for repainting a 3-year-old paint job, charging for full carpet replacement on an 8-year-old carpet with normal wear, charging for routine end-of-tenancy cleaning, charging for minor nail-hole repair from picture hanging — all are deductions for normal wear and all violate C.R.S. § 38-12-103. They also operate as evidence of bad-faith retention on the entire package.

Missing receipts on $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions)+ deductions

The most common defect across Colorado security-deposit cases. A $200 cleaning deduction with no attached receipt, a $300 carpet deduction with no estimate, a $450 repair deduction with no contractor invoice — all fail C.R.S. § 38-12-103 and convert otherwise-defensible deductions into unsupported ones.

Late delivery

The 21-day clock is hard. Day 22 is too late. Day 23 is too late. The landlord who delivers on day 25 has violated the statute and exposes the entire deduction package to bad-faith damages — even if every individual deduction was substantively valid. Calendar the date the tenant vacates and work backwards; aim for day 18 to allow delivery margin.

Withholding the balance

Some landlords deliver the itemized statement and then “hold” the balance pending tenant agreement, or deliver the statement and “wait for the tenant to dispute.” Both are violations. C.R.S. § 38-12-103 requires the balance to be delivered with the statement. Withholding the balance is an independent retention that exposes the landlord to bad-faith damages on top of any deduction issues.

Email delivery without prior consent

C.R.S. § 38-12-103 authorizes email delivery of the itemized statement only if the tenant has previously given written consent. Email delivery without prior written consent does not satisfy the statute. The deposit balance can never be delivered by email — it must be a check or other negotiable instrument delivered personally or by mail.

Failing to follow up on estimate-based deductions

If the landlord uses estimates for work not yet performed, C.R.S. § 38-12-103 requires the landlord to send the actual receipts within 14 days of work completion. Many landlords issue the estimate-based statement and never follow up. The follow-up is statutorily required; failure converts the entire estimate-based portion into an unsupported deduction.

Tenant rights and C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) damages

Colorado tenants have several rights connected to the security deposit return process and substantial remedies when those rights are violated. Understanding these is the landlord’s clearest motivation for procedural compliance.

Right to itemized statement and balance within 30 days

The tenant’s primary right under C.R.S. § 38-12-103 is to receive both the itemized statement and any deposit balance within 30 calendar days of vacating. Late delivery, missing itemization, or missing balance is each an independent violation.

Right to specific descriptions and supporting documentation

Under C.R.S. § 38-12-103, the tenant has the right to specific descriptions of each deduction and (for any single deduction of $0 (no statutory threshold; itemize all deductions) or more) supporting receipts or estimates. Vague descriptions or missing receipts entitle the tenant to challenge the deductions and recover.

Statutory damages of up to three times (treble) deposit under C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a)

Where the tenant proves bad-faith retention, the court may award damages of up to twice the security deposit amount, in addition to actual damages (the disputed deduction itself). On a $2,000 deposit, the tenant who proves bad-faith retention can recover up to $4,000 in statutory damages plus the $2,000 actual damages — a $6,000 exposure for the landlord on a deposit dispute that started over a few hundred dollars.

Small claims jurisdiction

Most Colorado security-deposit disputes proceed in small claims court (jurisdictional limit currently $12,500 for individuals). Small claims procedure is informal, no-attorney-required for the tenant, and routinely treats the documentation packet as the entire case. The landlord with strong documentation typically wins; the landlord with weak documentation routinely loses, often on default for failing to appear or for failing to produce documents.

Anti-retaliation framework

If the deposit decision is part of a pattern of retaliation against the tenant for exercising landlord-tenant rights (habitability complaints, code-enforcement contacts, tenant union activity), the tenant has additional remedies under Colorado’s applicable anti-retaliation statute — actual damages, statutory penalties, attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief. A retaliation claim layered on a C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) claim significantly increases exposure.

Attorney’s fees

If the lease contains an attorney’s fees clause, it is bilateral under Civil Code § 1717 — the prevailing party (whether landlord or tenant) recovers fees. A tenant who prevails on a C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) claim with an attorney represented case can recover reasonable fees from the landlord, often substantially exceeding the underlying deposit amount.

Bottom line for landlords. A clean itemized statement with proper documentation, delivered on time, is the cheapest insurance available against deposit-related litigation. The documentation effort takes a few hours; the cost of getting it wrong can run into thousands of dollars in statutory damages and attorney’s fees. The form on this page handles the mechanics; the analysis above is the legal context.

Colorado statute reference table

Colorado statute citations are to the Colorado’s applicable statutes as currently in effect. Local ordinances (San Francisco Rent Ordinance, Los Angeles Rent Stabilization Ordinance, Oakland Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance, and others) may layer additional requirements on top of state law and should be consulted independently for properties in covered cities.

Frequently asked questions

Published by Tenant Screening Background Check

Established 2004 · 20+ Years · All U.S. States & Territories · Statute-Based · Attorney-Reviewed

A Private Eye Reports™ service trusted by landlords, property managers, and attorneys.

This form and the accompanying guidance are provided for general informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Colorado landlord-tenant law has technical requirements that can change with legislation and case law. C.R.S. § 38-12-103 (security deposit framework), C.R.S. § 38-12-103 (itemization requirements), C.R.S. § 38-12-103 (no deductions for normal wear and tear), and C.R.S. § 38-12-103(3)(a) (bad-faith retention damages) depend on facts and case-specific circumstances that this general guidance cannot fully address. Always verify current requirements with the the applicable Colorado statutes or a qualified Colorado landlord-tenant attorney before relying on this itemized statement in any contested deposit-deduction situation. Review Colorado security deposit laws.