Val Kilmer loses small court battle to get back $5,000 security deposit on Malibu mansion after wallpapering over the kitchen cabinets
The Top Gun actor learned a tough lesson in being a tenant after he lost his small claims court battle in Van Nuys with the landlord of his rented abode
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Acting. Activism. Philanthropy. All skills that sit happily under the Val Kilmer umbrella.
Interior decorating, however, is not one of them.
The Top Gun actor lost a small claims court battle in Van Nuys with the landlord of his Malibu mansion to get back a full $7,000 owed from his original security deposit.
No, not because he’d enjoyed a wild party too many or spilt red wine all over the white furnishings. But because he’d wallpapered over the kitchen cabinets.
Kilmer told the judge he felt his handiwork – which also included some apparently shoddy paint work on the fireplace – had made an “improvement” on the home.
His landlord, however, heartily disagreed, and returned only $16,000 of his $23,500 deposit when he moved out, TMZ reports.
The judge agreed that the landlord did indeed have good cause to hold back some of the money to cover the cost of reversing Kilmer’s mistakes as the actor failed to seek his permission before making his “renovations”.
But the judge ruled that the landlord had withheld far too much of it, and instructed him to return $2,210 to Kilmer.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments