Quick Reference: What Missouri Regulates, and What It Leaves Open

Missouri Has No Comprehensive Landlord-Tenant Code

Some states consolidate more landlord-tenant rules in a single code than Missouri does. Missouri never adopted the Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, and there is no single chapter listing a landlord's duties, defining habitability, setting notice periods for every situation and cataloguing tenant remedies.

The Missouri Attorney General's guide identifies Chapters 441, 534 and 535 as the principal chapters addressing landlord-tenant issues:

• Chapter 441, landlord and tenant, carrying the self-help prohibition and the repair-and-deduct remedy.

• Chapter 534, forcible entry and unlawful detainer.

• Chapter 535, landlord-tenant actions, including rent and possession and, at § 535.300, security deposits.

Those are the principal chapters, not the only relevant law. The statute of frauds at § 432.010 affects longer leases, §§ 441.500 to 441.643 address minimum housing code enforcement, § 441.920 provides protections connected to domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking, and Chapter 213 covers human rights. Local housing codes, federal law and common law apply on top.

The practical consequence is a shift in where the rules live. On several recurring questions, including entry notice, late fees and cure periods for many non-monetary breaches, Missouri does not supply a comprehensive statewide rule. The lease becomes correspondingly more important, and a thin lease may leave important questions to common-law standards, local ordinances and case-specific judicial analysis.

Managers coming from a heavily codified state like Maryland's failure to pay rent process, where nearly every step carries a statutory deadline, should expect to work from the lease, local ordinance and case law far more than from the state code.

Habitability Exists, But the Legislature Did Not Create It

Missouri landlords do owe a warranty of habitability. It comes from the courts.

The Supreme Court of Missouri recognised the common-law implied warranty of habitability in Detling v. Edelbrock in 1984. The elements are entry into a lease for residential property; the subsequent development of dangerous or unsanitary conditions on the premises materially affecting the life, health and safety of the tenant; reasonable notice of the defects to the landlord; and the landlord's subsequent failure to restore the premises to habitability.

It is a common-law cause of action rather than a single statutory checklist. Missouri has no comprehensive statewide provision listing every maintenance duty in URLTA style. What exists is a standard about dangerous or unsanitary conditions materially affecting life, health and safety, applied case by case. The Missouri Bar notes that trial courts have significant discretion in evaluating what counts as insufficient compliance and what counts as sufficient proof of damages.

Notice is an element. The tenant must have given reasonable notice, and the landlord must then have failed to restore habitability. That makes the date a complaint arrived, and what you did afterwards, central to any habitability dispute. Dated service history held against the unit through utility and asset management can provide important evidence on both points.

The Missouri Bar also notes that the common-law cause of action is not premised on the tenant paying rent into escrow, and is not superseded by Missouri's Enforcement of Minimum Housing Code Standards Act.

On rent escrow, one case is worth knowing. In Kohner Properties, Inc. v. Johnson, 553 S.W.3d 280 (Mo. banc 2018), the Supreme Court of Missouri addressed whether a tenant who remains in possession must deposit withheld rent with the court to raise the implied warranty of habitability. A tenant does not automatically lose a habitability defence or counterclaim merely because the tenant has not deposited withheld rent into court. The Court held that circuit courts have discretion to determine, case by case, whether an in custodia legis procedure requiring rent to be paid into court is appropriate, treating the blanket requirement suggested in King v. Moorehead as dicta.

Repair and Deduct Exists, but the Statutory Conditions Are Strict

Section 441.234 is more particular than most summaries convey, and the eligibility test in subsection 1 is narrower than the usual paraphrase.

Who qualifies. The section applies only to a tenant who has lawfully resided on the rental premises for six consecutive months, has paid all rent and charges due the landlord during that time, and did not during that time receive any written notice from the landlord of any violation of any lease provision or house rule, which violation was not subsequently cured.

That last limb is not the same as "not currently in violation of the lease." It looks backwards across the six-month window and asks whether you sent a written violation notice that was never cured. A landlord who documents violations in writing, where the tenant does not cure, may take the tenant outside the section entirely.

The threshold condition. There must exist a condition on residential premises which detrimentally affects the habitability, sanitation or security of the premises, and the condition must constitute a violation of a local municipal housing or building code. Both limbs are required, so in jurisdictions with no applicable code the remedy has nowhere to attach.

Three limits apply to the money. The reasonable cost to correct the condition must be less than $300, or one-half of the periodic rent, whichever is greater, and the statute adds a proviso that the cost may not exceed one month's rent. Separately, a tenant may not deduct in the aggregate more than the amount of one month's rent during any twelve-month period. That annual rule is an aggregate dollar cap, not a rule permitting only one repair a year.

The ordinary sequence. If the landlord fails to correct the condition within fourteen days after being notified by the tenant in writing, or as promptly as required in case of an emergency, the tenant may cause the work to be done in a workmanlike manner and, after submitting to the landlord an itemised statement including receipts, deduct the actual and reasonable cost as documented by those receipts.

The dispute sequence, which most guides omit. If the landlord provides the tenant, within the notice period, a written statement disputing the necessity of the repair, the tenant may not deduct the cost without first securing, before the repair is performed, a written certification from the local municipality or government entity that the condition constitutes a violation of local municipal housing or building code. Where certification is obtained, the tenant may proceed if the landlord fails to correct the condition within fourteen days after the later of the certification date or the date of the tenant's notice, or as promptly as required in an emergency.

Read that as a landlord: a written statement disputing the repair, delivered inside the notice period, shifts the burden onto the tenant to obtain municipal certification before spending anything. It is a real and underused response.

Tenant fault bars the remedy. A tenant may not repair at the landlord's expense if the condition was caused by the deliberate or negligent act or omission of the tenant, a member of the tenant's family, or another person on the premises with the tenant's consent.

Two provisions cut the other way. The tenant's remedy is not exclusive of any other remedies available under the law. And no lease agreement shall contain a waiver of the rights described in the section, so a Missouri lease attempting to contract out of repair and deduct is drafting a clause the statute forbids.

There Is No General Right to Withhold Rent

Missouri does not provide a general statutory right to unilaterally withhold rent. The Attorney General's guide puts it plainly for tenants: in most circumstances a tenant has no right to withhold rent, and a tenant who does so may be in violation of the lease and subject to eviction.

A tenant may nevertheless have a common-law habitability defence or counterclaim where the elements recognised in Missouri case law are met. How withheld rent is handled during the litigation can depend on the circuit court's exercise of discretion under Kohner. Neither side should treat a habitability claim as automatic permission to stop paying rent, and a tenant who stops paying risks being treated as in arrears.

That is why the rent ledger and the maintenance record need to be readable side by side, and why rent collection and payment records tied to specific rental periods matter when a nonpayment case turns into a condition dispute.

Missouri Expressly Prohibits Landlord Self-Help

Where Missouri is sparse about duties, § 441.233 is precise about self-help.

Under § 441.233.1, except as provided in § 441.065, a landlord or its agent who removes or excludes a tenant or the tenant's personal property from the premises without judicial process and court order, or causes such removal or exclusion, or causes the removal of the doors or locks to the premises, shall be deemed guilty of forcible entry and detainer as described in Chapter 534.

Under § 441.233.2, any landlord or agent who willfully diminishes services to a tenant by interrupting or causing the interruption of essential services, including but not limited to electric, gas, water or sewer service, shall be deemed guilty of forcible entry and detainer, provided that the section does not apply if the action is taken for health or safety reasons.

Three points.

Doors and locks are named expressly. Removing a door is treated the same as a lockout.

• "Willfully diminishes" reaches interruption you cause, not only interruption you perform. Letting an account lapse so the utility disconnects could create risk if the interruption were found to be a willful diminution of essential services.

• The statute classifies the conduct as forcible entry and detainer under Chapter 534. It is not framed as a fine. The landlord cannot use the conduct as a substitute for judicial process.

• On abandonment. Section 441.233.1 opens with "Except as provided in section 441.065," and § 441.065 provides the specific abandonment procedure that exception refers to. If you believe a unit has been abandoned, follow § 441.065's specific notice and timing procedure rather than treating vacancy alone as abandonment.

The Absences Are Half the Story

• No landlord-entry statute. Missouri has no provision setting a notice period before entry, listing permitted purposes, or restricting hours. Entry is governed by the lease and by the common-law right to quiet enjoyment and exclusive possession. If the lease is silent, the parties lack a specific contractual entry standard, though common-law limits on unreasonable interference still apply. Put a notice period, permitted purposes and reasonable hours in the lease, apply them consistently, and log every entry.

• No general anti-retaliation statute. Missouri has no general statewide residential anti-retaliation statute comparable to those enacted in many states. That does not make retaliation lawful or leave a tenant without arguments: local ordinances may address it, federal fair housing law applies, targeted statutes such as § 441.920 exist, and § 441.233 still prohibits the self-help conduct retaliation often takes the form of.

• No general statutory late fee cap or safe harbour. Neither Chapter 441 nor Chapter 535 sets a general residential dollar amount or percentage benchmark for late charges. A late fee should be stated in the rental agreement, and enforceability generally depends on the lease and applicable contract law, including whether the fee is so disproportionate to actual harm that a court treats it as an unenforceable penalty.

• No single statewide cure-period schedule. Missouri does not prescribe a single statewide cure-period schedule for most non-monetary residential lease violations, which is the strongest argument for treating the Missouri lease as a compliance document and holding lease terms, notice dates and derived deadlines on one record through contracts and renewals.

• And a preemption provision that grew in 2025. Section 441.043 has always preempted local rent regulation: no county or city, including one with a charter form of government, may enact, maintain or enforce any ordinance or resolution regulating the amount of rent to be charged for privately owned single-family or multiple-unit residential or commercial rental property.
  
  

  As amended effective 28 August 2025, the section reaches further. Subsection 2 bars a county or city from enacting, maintaining or enforcing an ordinance or resolution that prohibits landlords from refusing to lease to a person because the person's lawful source of income to pay rent includes funding from a federal or other housing assistance program; that restricts a landlord's ability to use or consider income-qualifying methods, credit scores, credit reports, eviction or property damage history, or criminal history according to the landlord's own customarily applied criteria; or that requires tenants to automatically receive a right of first refusal.

  Subsection 3 preserves the ability of a county, city or authority to regulate property belonging to that city, county or authority, to enter voluntary agreements with private persons regulating rent for subsidised rental properties, and to enact ordinances restricting rent for properties assisted with community development block grant funds. Read the current section in full, including its later subsections, before relying on its scope.

  For a multi-market Missouri portfolio this matters directly: source-of-income and screening-criteria ordinances that would bind a landlord in many states are now within the scope of the statewide preemption, subject to those exceptions and to federal and other state law.

Security Deposits: Missouri's Most Detailed Residential Deposit Statute

Section 535.300 is where Missouri gets specific, and where most avoidable claims arise. Missouri courts have treated it as a protective security-deposit statute, so follow its accounting, inspection and timing requirements precisely.

The cap. A landlord may not demand or receive a security deposit in excess of two months' rent.

The account requirement, which the AG guide omits. All security deposits shall be held by the landlord for the tenant in a bank, credit union, or depository institution which is insured by an agency of the federal government. Any interest earned is the property of the landlord. A housing authority created under § 99.040, or any other government entity acting as landlord, is not subject to that subsection.

The deadline runs from termination of the tenancy, not from move-out day. Within thirty days after the date of termination of the tenancy, the landlord shall either return the full amount of the deposit, or furnish the tenant a written itemised list of the damages for which the deposit or any portion is withheld, along with the balance. The landlord complies by mailing the statement and any payment to the tenant's last known address.

The inspection has its own procedure. The landlord shall give the tenant or the tenant's representative reasonable notice in writing at the last known address, or in person, of the date and time when the landlord will inspect the unit following termination to determine the amount to be withheld, and the inspection shall be held at a reasonable time. The tenant has the right to be present. This is the requirement most commonly missed, because managers treat the walkthrough as an internal task rather than a noticed event the tenant may attend.

Carpet cleaning has a specific gateway. Restoring the unit to its condition at the commencement of the tenancy, ordinary wear and tear excepted, is a permitted purpose. The statute does not preclude the parties agreeing in the rental agreement on amounts or fees for carpet cleaning, and amounts actually expended can be withheld, so long as the rental agreement also includes a provision notifying the tenant that they may be liable for actual carpet cleaning costs exceeding ordinary wear and tear. Within thirty days of the end of the tenancy the landlord shall provide the tenant a receipt for the actual carpet cleaning costs.

Inadequate notice to terminate is a permitted deduction. The deposit may compensate the landlord for actual damages sustained as a result of the tenant's failure to give adequate notice to terminate under law or the rental agreement.

The penalty is mandatory. If the landlord wrongfully withholds all or any portion of the deposit in violation of the section, the tenant shall recover as damages twice the amount wrongfully withheld. "Shall," not "may," and measured against the amount wrongfully withheld rather than the whole deposit.

Two saving provisions. Nothing in the section limits the landlord's right to recover actual damages in excess of the deposit, and nothing permits a tenant to apply or deduct any portion of the deposit at any time in lieu of paying rent.

Dated condition records at both ends of the tenancy can provide important evidence in disputes over actual damage, ordinary wear and tear, and the amount properly withheld, which is what move-in and move-out management exists to produce.

Ending a Tenancy

• Tenancy at will, sufferance, or for less than one year. Under § 441.060.1, such a tenancy may be terminated by the person entitled to possession by giving one month's notice, in writing, to the person in possession, requiring them to vacate.

• Month-to-month. Under § 441.060.4(1), the landlord or the tenant may terminate a month-to-month tenancy by written notice to the other party stating that the tenancy shall terminate upon a periodic rent-paying date not less than one month after the receipt of the notice. That is the statutory formulation, and it explains the Attorney General's plainer gloss that one month's notice means a full rental period: if rent is due on the third, a notice received on the tenth cannot terminate on the tenth of the following month.

• Mobile home lots. Under § 441.060.4(2), where a person occupies and has an ownership interest in a mobile home and leases the land or lot, a tenancy of less than one year may be terminated by the landlord on written notice that the tenancy terminates not sooner than sixty days from the date the rent payment next becomes due, notwithstanding any written lease provision regarding earlier termination to the contrary.

• Occupancy. Under § 441.060.2, an occupancy limitation of two persons per bedroom residing in a dwelling unit shall be presumed reasonable for this state. The two-person limitation does not apply to a child or children born to the tenants during the course of the lease. It is a presumption of reasonableness, not an absolute statewide maximum.

• Fixed-term leases. Where a written lease specifies a termination date, Missouri's general month-to-month notice rule does not automatically require a separate termination notice merely because the fixed term is expiring. The lease may impose its own notice or nonrenewal requirements, and the parties' conduct after expiration can affect the resulting tenancy.

• Longer leases. Under § 432.010, a lease for longer than one year generally must be evidenced by a writing signed by the party to be charged.

• Military. Certain qualifying members of the Armed Forces and Missouri Army or Air National Guard may terminate a residential lease on written notice after qualifying orders. Verify the current requirements in RSMo § 41.944, including the qualifying orders, notice period and required documentation, before relying on the remedy.

• Double-rent provisions are narrower than commonly stated. In an action for rent or possession, a court may award damages not exceeding twice the rent due where the tenant allowed another person to take sole possession without the landlord's permission, under § 534.347. It is not an automatic right to double the rent. Separately, a willful holdover after termination, demand and written notice can expose the occupant to double the yearly value of the premises under § 441.080, and § 441.100 addresses the different case of a tenant who gives written notice of an intention to quit and then fails to surrender possession. Three distinct provisions, three distinct triggers.

Two Possession Tracks

Rent and possession, Chapter 535, is the action for nonpayment. Section 535.020 requires a demand for rent before filing a verified statement. A tenant may be able to stop or stay possession by tendering the required rent and court costs at the hearing under § 535.040 or on the judgment date under § 535.160, but the effect depends on the stage of the case and whether a money judgment was entered; § 535.160 does not provide a stay where the judgment is limited to possession, except as otherwise allowed.

Chapter 534 governs forcible entry and unlawful detainer, including specified holdover and wrongful-possession situations, foreclosure circumstances and others. The precise cause of action, and the notice or demand it requires, depends on how possession became unlawful.

Choosing the wrong track is a common and expensive error. The correct procedural route depends on the legal basis for seeking possession, for example nonpayment of rent, unlawful detainer, or one of the expedited proceedings authorised by Chapter 441.

An expedited route exists for specified conduct. Sections 441.740 to 441.780 provide an expedited proceeding covering circumstances including emergency situations imminently threatening the safety of other tenants or threatening damage exceeding a year's rent, and drug-related criminal activity connected with the leased property. The grounds and the notice requirements are fact-specific and should be read directly in the current statutory text before use, with Missouri counsel.

Whichever track applies, the Attorney General's ground rule holds: a landlord may not evict a tenant without a court order.

Common Mistakes Property Managers Make in Missouri

1. Assuming a single comprehensive statute governs every issue. On entry, late fees and many cure periods, Missouri supplies no statewide rule.

2. Looking for a single comprehensive URLTA-style statutory duty list. Habitability is a common-law cause of action from Detling.

3. Ignoring a repair complaint because no statutory deadline attaches. Notice and subsequent failure are elements of the claim.

4. Misstating the repair-and-deduct money limits. Less than $300 or half the periodic rent, whichever is greater; not exceeding one month's rent; and no more than one month's rent in aggregate per twelve months.

5. Treating the annual limit as one repair per year. It is an aggregate dollar cap.

6. Misreading the eligibility test as "not currently in violation." The statute asks whether the tenant received written notice of a lease or house-rule violation during the six-month period that was not subsequently cured.

7. Forgetting the code-violation limb. The condition must violate a local municipal housing or building code.

8. Not disputing the repair in writing inside the notice period. A written statement disputing necessity forces the tenant to obtain municipal certification before spending.

9. Putting a repair-and-deduct waiver in the lease. Section 441.234 forbids it.

10. Holding deposits in an uninsured or otherwise non-compliant account. Section 535.300.2 requires a federally insured bank, credit union or depository institution, with interest belonging to the landlord.

11. Running the 30-day deposit clock from move-out. It runs from termination of the tenancy.

12. Conducting the move-out inspection without noticing the tenant. Reasonable written notice of date and time is required, and the tenant may attend.

13. Charging carpet cleaning without the lease provision or without providing the receipt within 30 days.

14. Assuming the deposit penalty is discretionary. The tenant shall recover twice the amount wrongfully withheld.

15. Changing locks or removing a door. Section 441.233.1 names both expressly.

16. Treating vacancy alone as abandonment instead of following § 441.065's notice and timing procedure.

17. Letting a utility lapse during a dispute.

18. Treating oral notice as sufficient where § 441.060 requires written notice.

19. Getting the month-to-month termination date wrong. It must fall on a periodic rent-paying date not less than one month after receipt.

20. Treating two persons per bedroom as an absolute maximum. It is a presumption of reasonableness.

21. Merging the double-rent provisions. Sections 534.347, 441.080 and 441.100 have different triggers and measures.

22. Assuming a local source-of-income or screening ordinance binds you. Since 28 August 2025, § 441.043 restricts those local ordinances, subject to its exceptions.

23. Filing the wrong possession action. The route depends on the legal basis for seeking possession.

Build the Record Missouri's Gaps Require

In a codified state the statute tells you what to prove. In Missouri the absence of a comprehensive code means the lease and your own records carry more of that weight.

Five things belong in the system. The lease terms that stand in for missing statutes: entry notice period, permitted purposes and hours, late fee amount, and cure periods for non-monetary breaches. The date every repair complaint was received and what was done after it, because notice and subsequent failure are elements of a Detling claim and because a written statement disputing necessity must land inside the notice period. A record of written violation notices and whether they were cured, because that history is what determines eligibility under § 441.234.1. An entry log recording the notice given and the time of entry. And the deposit sequence: the date the tenancy terminated, the notice of inspection date and time, whether the tenant attended, the itemised list, the 30-day deadline, the carpet cleaning receipt where applicable, and the account the deposit sits in.

Because so much Missouri compliance is lease-driven rather than statute-driven, the risk concentrates in inconsistency between properties and managers. Portfolio-level dashboards and reports showing which leases carry which entry and late-fee terms, and which deposit deadlines are approaching, turn a set of individual judgement calls into a policy you can defend.

Conclusion

Missouri asks a different first question than many states. Not "what does the statute require," but "does a statute cover this at all."

Often it does not. Missouri has no single comprehensive residential landlord-tenant code and no comprehensive URLTA-style list of landlord duties, no entry-notice provision, no general anti-retaliation statute, no general late fee cap, and no general statutory right for a tenant to withhold rent. The warranty of habitability is real but judicial, from Detling, and Kohner leaves the in custodia legis procedure to the circuit court's discretion rather than making it automatic either way.

Where Missouri is prescriptive, it is worth knowing exactly. Deposits are capped at two months, must sit in a federally insured institution with interest belonging to the landlord, and must be returned or itemised within thirty days of termination of the tenancy after a noticed inspection the tenant may attend, on pain of the tenant recovering twice the amount wrongfully withheld. Repair and deduct under § 441.234 requires six months' lawful residence, payment of all rent and charges due during that period, no uncured written violation notice during that period, a local code violation, written notice of the condition and intention to repair, and fourteen days, with three separate money limits, and it cannot be waived by lease.

Self-help is prohibited by § 441.233. Landlords must use judicial process; § 441.065 provides a specific abandonment procedure, and § 441.233.2 contains a separate health-or-safety exception for service interruptions. And § 441.043, as amended in August 2025, preempts local rent regulation and also restricts local ordinances on housing-assistance source of income, screening criteria and automatic rights of first refusal, subject to its exceptions.

The operating discipline follows from the gaps. Write the lease as though it is the statute on the questions Missouri leaves open. Date every repair complaint, and answer one in writing if you dispute it. Keep a record of violation notices and cures. Notice the move-out inspection. Itemise the deposit and keep it in a compliant account. Pick the right route before you file. And never use a lock change, door removal or utility interruption as a way to force a tenant out.

Where a System Earns Its Keep

Missouri's difficulty is not that the rules are harsh. It is that so many of them are not written down at state level, which pushes the burden onto your own documents and your own consistency.

That produces a specific failure mode. Two managers in the same portfolio apply different entry notice, different late fees, different cure periods, because each is reading a different lease and no statute forces alignment. Then a dispute arrives and there is no external standard to fall back on, only whatever the file happens to show.

RIOO is built for that problem. Contracts and renewals keeps the lease terms that stand in for Missouri's missing statutes on the same record as the notice and deadline dates derived from them. Move-in and move-out management produces the dated condition evidence a § 535.300 claim turns on and supports the noticed inspection the statute requires.

Because many Missouri issues are governed by the lease, common law and local rules rather than a single code, being able to show what you did and when is most of the answer.

This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Missouri's landlord-tenant provisions are spread across RSMo Chapters 441, 534 and 535 and other statutes, and are supplemented by common law and by local ordinances that vary considerably between Kansas City, St. Louis and other jurisdictions. Section 441.043 was amended effective 28 August 2025, and other provisions discussed here have been amended in recent sessions. Verify the current statutory text with the Missouri Revisor of Statutes before acting, and consult a licensed Missouri attorney on a specific matter.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. Does Missouri have a landlord-tenant act?
Missouri has no single comprehensive residential landlord-tenant code comparable to the Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. Its rules are distributed among Chapters 441, 534 and 535, other statutes, local housing codes and common law.

Q2. Is there a warranty of habitability in Missouri?
Yes, from case law rather than a general statute. Detling v. Edelbrock (Mo. banc 1984) requires entry into a residential lease, the subsequent development of dangerous or unsanitary conditions materially affecting the tenant's life, health and safety, reasonable notice to the landlord, and the landlord's subsequent failure to restore habitability.

Q3. Can a Missouri tenant withhold rent for repairs?
There is no general statutory right to withhold unilaterally. Under Kohner Properties, Inc. v. Johnson, 553 S.W.3d 280 (Mo. banc 2018), a tenant does not automatically lose a habitability defence by failing to deposit withheld rent, but the circuit court has discretion to decide whether an in custodia legis procedure requiring rent to be paid into court is appropriate.

Q4. Who qualifies for repair and deduct in Missouri?
Under § 441.234.1, only a tenant who has lawfully resided on the premises for six consecutive months, has paid all rent and charges due during that time, and did not during that time receive any written notice from the landlord of a lease or house-rule violation that was not subsequently cured.

Q5. How does repair and deduct work?
The condition must detrimentally affect habitability, sanitation or security and violate a local municipal housing or building code. The tenant gives written notice of the condition and the intention to repair. If the landlord does not correct it within fourteen days, or as promptly as an emergency requires, the tenant may have the work done in a workmanlike manner and, after submitting an itemised statement with receipts, deduct the actual and reasonable cost. The remedy is unavailable where the condition was caused by the deliberate or negligent act or omission of the tenant, a household member or another person on the premises with the tenant's consent.

Q6. What happens if the landlord disputes the repair?
If the landlord provides a written statement disputing the necessity of the repair within the notice period, the tenant may not deduct without first obtaining written certification from the local municipality or government entity that the condition violates the local code. After certification, the landlord has fourteen days from the later of the certification date or the tenant's notice date.

Q7. What are the repair-and-deduct money limits?
The reasonable cost must be less than $300 or one-half of the periodic rent, whichever is greater, and may not exceed one month's rent. Separately, a tenant may not deduct in the aggregate more than one month's rent during any twelve-month period.

Q8. Can a lease waive repair and deduct?
No. Section 441.234 provides that no lease agreement shall contain a waiver of the rights described in that section.

Q9. How much can a Missouri landlord charge as a security deposit?
No more than two months' rent under § 535.300.1.

Q10. Where must the deposit be held?
In a bank, credit union or depository institution insured by an agency of the federal government. Interest earned belongs to the landlord. Housing authorities under § 99.040 and other government entities acting as landlord are not subject to that subsection.

Q11. When must the deposit be returned?
Within thirty days after the date of termination of the tenancy, either in full or with a written itemised list of the damages withheld and any balance, which the landlord may mail to the tenant's last known address.

Q12. Does the tenant have a right to attend the move-out inspection?
Yes. The landlord must give reasonable written notice, at the tenant's last known address or in person, of the date and time of the inspection, which must be at a reasonable time.

Q13. Can a Missouri landlord charge for carpet cleaning?
Only if the rental agreement provides for it and also contains a provision notifying the tenant they may be liable for actual carpet cleaning costs exceeding ordinary wear and tear, and the landlord provides a receipt for the actual costs within thirty days of the end of the tenancy.