[Direct answer]The loss of a receipt does not necessarily result in the loss of the right to request a refund of the deposit. Whether the deposit can be refunded depends on whether the three facts—that the deposit has actually been paid, the agreed amount, and the conditions for refund—can be substantiated with other materials. The deposit serves a guarantee function in housing leases, covering unpaid rent, unpaid utility bills, and damage to the property. After the lease expires, the property is returned as agreed, and all expenses are settled, the party collecting the deposit has an obligation to refund it. The provisions on lease contracts in the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) constitute the basis for this right. A paper receipt is just one of the proofs of payment, not the only one: bank or third-party payment transaction records, payment notes specified at the time of transfer, clauses specifying the deposit amount in the lease contract, two handover forms for move-in and move-out, expense settlement forms, and chat records of communication between the parties regarding the deposit can all corroborate each other. What matters is not whether the paper receipt still exists, but whether the alternative materials can form a complete chain of evidence. If the receipt is lost, the parties should immediately collect and preserve all scattered evidence according to the timeline rather than assuming that there's no recourse.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

The deposit disputes almost always unfold along the same timeline. On the day of signing the contract, the tenant pays a deposit equivalent to one or several months' rent, and the landlord issues a handwritten receipt or simply adds a sentence stating that the deposit has been received in the main body of the lease contract. When moving in, both parties fill out a house handover form, record the readings of water meters, electricity meters, and gas meters, and list the inventory of furniture and appliances and their condition. Afterward, the receipt may be tucked into the contract or stuffed into a drawer. After a move, a cleanup, or a rainy season causing moisture damage, it often can't be found when the tenant moves out. During the final inspection, the landlord may claim that there are nail holes in the walls, stains on the curtains, or scratches on the floor, or present unpaid utility bills, and then deduct the entire deposit on the grounds that there's no original receipt. The tenant, however, insists that the deposit was paid in full, the house was returned in its original condition, and the keys and access cards were handed over in person. The payment method makes a huge difference in the difficulty of obtaining evidence: bank transfers and mobile payments naturally leave traceable transaction records and timestamps, and it's most beneficial if the transfer notes explicitly mention the deposit. For cash payments without witnesses or contractual records of the amount, there's often only the parties' testimonies. Situations such as payments collected by agents, landlords charging double rent, roommates covering the deposit, or deposits being transferred to the final month's rent also raise disputes about the identity of the recipient and the nature of the payment. In Beijing's rental market, short-term rentals, shared accommodations, agent-managed rentals, and direct landlord rentals coexist, each with different document retention practices, but the triggering point of disputes is highly consistent—not at the signing of the contract, but at the moment of the final settlement and the failure to refund the deposit when it's due. 押金争议几乎都沿着同一条时间线展开。签约当天，承租人按约定支付与一个月或数月租金等额的押金，出租人开具一张手写收据，或仅在租赁合同正文里添加一句已收押金若干；入住时双方共同填写房屋交接单，抄录水表电表燃气表读数，列明家具家电清单与成色。此后收据或夹在合同里，或随手塞进抽屉，经过一次搬家、一次清理、一次雨季受潮，等到退租时往往已经找不到了。退租验收环节，出租人提出墙面有钉孔、窗帘有污渍、地板有划痕，或拿出未结清的水电账单，进而以没有原始收据就不认这笔钱为由整笔扣留；承租人则坚称押金早已付清、房屋按原状交回、钥匙与门禁卡都已当面交还。支付方式不同，取证难度差别很大：银行转账与移动支付天然留下可回溯的流水与时间戳，转账备注里写明押金二字最为有利；现金交付又无人见证、合同也未载明金额时，几乎只剩双方陈述；通过中介代收、由二房东收取、合租室友代为垫付、续租时未换开新收据、押金转抵末月租金等情形，还会额外引出收款主体与款项性质的争议。在北京的租赁市场里，短租、合租、代理出租与房东直租并存，各有不同的单据留存习惯，但争议爆发的节点高度一致，不在签约时，而在退租结算、押金该退未退的那一刻。

II. Key points of contention

The review of such disputes typically proceeds along four lines. First, whether the delivery of the deposit can be proven: The party claiming the return must first provide evidence that the deposit has indeed been paid. After the receipt is lost, it depends on whether indirect materials such as transfer records, contract provisions, chat admissions, and handover notes can be linked together to form a mutually corroborating chain and meet the high standard of proof; isolated screenshots or retrospectively written explanations often have insufficient probative value. Second, the determination of the amount: If the amount stated in the contract is inconsistent with the actual amount paid, partial cash and partial transfers, a different name between the payer and the lessee, or the mixing of the deposit with the prepaid rent in a single transfer, these may all become points of contention regarding the basis for the return. Third, whether the conditions for return have been met: If the lessor claims that there are arrears in rent, unpaid utilities, damage to property, breach of contract penalties for early termination, or cleaning fees and uses these to offset the deposit, according to the rule of "who claims, who provides evidence," the lessor should provide accounting records, invoices, maintenance certificates, and a comparison of the condition of the property at the time of move-in to support the offset items and amounts, rather than simply withholding the deposit based on a vague claim of "damage." Fourth, the subject and statute of limitations: Whether to claim against the contractual counterparty, the actual recipient of the payment, or the intermediary; in the case of secondary subleases, who is the obligated party for the return. The statute of limitations begins from the date the return is due, that is, when the lease relationship terminates and the settlement is completed. The points of interruption and restarting the calculation must be documented. The arguments of both parties typically focus on these areas: the lessee claims that the money has been paid, the property has been returned, there are no arrears, and the lessor is delaying the return for no reason; the lessor claims that the cash has not been received, the receipt is the only proof, and the damages and arrears have already offset the deposit. The order of determination by the adjudicator typically proceeds as follows: first, confirming the lease relationship and the deposit agreement; then reviewing the evidence chain of delivery; subsequently verifying the basis for the offset claims; and finally determining the amount to be returned and interest.

III. Professional analysis by Hengluo Lawyers

Divide the available materials into three piles according to the acquisition path, and your thoughts will become much clearer. The first pile includes materials that can be fixed by the tenant immediately: the original lease contract and the deposit clause page, the electronic transfer receipts and bill details from banks or payment platforms, screenshots of transfer notes indicating the nature of the payment, exported chat records of all communication with the landlord regarding the deposit collection, payment, and return, two handover forms for moving in and moving out, settlement certificates for utilities, and signed receipts or chat confirmations for returning keys and access cards. These materials each prove a single piece of evidence, but together they can reconstruct the three key stages of delivery, performance, and return. The second pile includes materials that need to be obtained from third parties: transaction certificates with stamps issued by payment institutions, contracts and receipt records kept by real estate agencies, property registration records and resident information, bank statement printouts, and, if necessary, affidavits from co-tenants or previous tenants. When requesting or obtaining these materials, the name, creation date, custodian, storage format, and the facts to be proven should be clearly specified. A general request to obtain all materials may be rejected due to unclear scope. The third pile involves the transfer of evidentiary burden: if the landlord claims that the deposit was used to offset arrears, damages, or penalties, they must provide evidence for each item. If the landlord refuses to submit accounting records and receipts despite their possession, or if their statements contradict each other, the court may rule against them. Key procedural steps include: sending a written notice of default after the settlement period and retaining delivery proof; submitting a structured evidence list and explanation when filing a lawsuit; supplementing the full set of alternative evidence before the evidentiary deadline; checking the accounting records submitted by the opposing party during pre-trial evidence exchange; and presenting cross-examination opinions on the generation, storage, and integrity of electronic data during the trial. For more details, please refer to the following sources:Real estate transactions and construction projectsAn extended explanation on leaving traces in real estate transactions. The court's reasoning is not mysterious: first, it examines whether the lease relationship and the deposit agreement are established; then, it uses indirect evidence to determine whether the delivery fact meets a high degree of plausibility; next, it reviews whether there is any basis for the claim of deduction; finally, it determines the principal amount to be refunded and the corresponding interest. Any break in the chain of evidence will weaken the overall claim.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The main legal basis for this case stems from the provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) regarding lease contracts, deposit guarantees, and breach of contract liability. The procedural and evidentiary rules are governed by the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021, effective January 1, 2024) concerning types of evidence, burden of proof, and electronic data review. The litigation fee payment method (effective April 1, 2007) governs the payment of fees based on the litigation subject amount in stages. The Urban Real Estate Management Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on August 26, 2019) can be used to verify the legality of the leased property and the lease relationship. The following seven practical suggestions are provided: 1. Immediately prepare an evidence inventory list, listing the name of each document, its creation date, source, purpose of proof, and whether it is an original, to avoid discovering missing evidence at the last minute during case filing. 2. Apply to payment platforms for official electronic receipts or transaction details, preserving the transfer notes, the real name of the recipient's account, and timestamps, which are more reliable than screenshots from mobile phones. 3. Send written notices in a traceable manner, specifying the lease period, deposit amount, returned property, return deadline, and account information. Delivery via mail or instant messaging preserves evidence. 4. Actively calculate the deduction items that the other party may claim, comparing utilities, unpaid rent, and damages item by item. Only claim parts with strong legal basis, and clearly state the calculation method for the total amount. 5. Prioritize pre-litigation mediation and small claims litigation for cases with low costs and shorter timeframes when the litigation amount is not large. 6. Check the statute of limitations and the defendant's identity, and, if necessary, include collection agents as third parties in the lawsuit. 7. If the other party refuses to provide accounting records or original documents, apply for a court order to compel their submission within the evidentiary deadline. The essence of the deposit is a guarantee, not a fine. There is no legal basis for the collecting party continuing to hold the deposit after settlement. This forms the foundation of the entire legal claim.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

There are three points worth paying special attention to. First, act promptly: The earlier you collect and transfer receipts, chat records, and handover materials after losing them, the less likely the electronic records will be lost due to device replacement, cache clearing, or account deactivation. It is recommended to take photos of key documents and sync them to the cloud while keeping the original copies. Second, clarify time limits and parties: The statute of limitations for litigation begins from the date of lease termination, settlement completion, and when the deposit should be returned. If you assert your rights during this period, be sure to keep written or traceable records to interrupt the statute of limitations. When the recipient is a sublandlord, intermediary, or the landlord's spouse, choosing the wrong defendant will only add unnecessary complications. Third, rationally assess costs: If the evidence chain is complete and the other party lacks substantive deduction grounds, there's a higher chance of winning the case. However, if the payment was made entirely in cash, the contract didn't specify the amount, and there's no chat record to confirm it, the burden of proof will significantly increase. In this case, it's better to gather indirect clues first before deciding whether to sue. It's also important to correct a common misunderstanding: Receipts are important evidence, but they don't constitute the rights themselves. The law protects the fact that the deposit was actually paid and should be returned. Conversely, don't assume that simply saying "I did pay the money" can replace evidence. Developing the habit of noting the payment nature in transfer remarks, specifying the amount in contracts, and indicating the deposit status in handover documents is far more efficient than remedying the situation afterward.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can the loss of the deposit receipt be confirmed as having been paid simply by providing a bank transfer record?

It can be identified, but a single transaction record is usually not enough. It needs to be corroborated by other materials. The Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) recognizes various forms such as contracts, transfer records, and electronic data as evidence to prove civil legal facts. The Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021, and effective January 1, 2024) also lists electronic data as a statutory type of evidence. If the transfer amount matches the deposit amount specified in the contract, the transfer occurs shortly after the signing date, and the remarks indicate the deposit, combined with the landlord's admission of receiving the payment in the chat, a relatively complete chain of evidence can be formed. However, if the amount does not match, or the recipient is an unrelated third party, it is necessary to supplement with handover forms, settlement statements, and communication records to exclude other interpretations.

Q2: How can the transfer notes on WeChat and the house handover document be used to prove the deposit?

The two documents respectively reinforce each other from the perspectives of the nature of the payment and the delivery context, which significantly enhances the evidentiary value of the evidence. The transfer notes clearly indicate the deposit and the address of the rented house, which specifically identifies the ordinary transfer as the deposit in this case; if the handover form notes in the "check-in" column or the "remark" column that the deposit has been received, the furniture list, and the water and electricity readings, it links the payment to the specific lease relationship and the specific house, and also establishes a benchmark for comparing the condition of the house when moving out. Operationally, it is necessary to take a complete screenshot or export the details page of the electronic bill, retain the other party's real-name account and timestamp, and try to obtain the original handover form or a copy signed by both parties. Chat records should be exported in chronological order to avoid only capturing favorable segments. When the three documents point to the same amount, the same time, and the same subject, even if the paper receipt is not available, the facts are sufficient to reconstruct the situation.

Q3: Which party should advance the acceptance fee charged according to the amount of the subject matter in a case involving a deposit?

The plaintiff pays the litigation fees in advance when filing the case, and the final burden of the fees shall be determined by the arbitration result. According to the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Fees" (implemented on April 1, 2007), in property cases, the acceptance fees shall be paid in stages according to the amount of the litigation subject matter. For the case of returning the deposit, the subject matter is the principal amount of the deposit requested to be returned, and the interest that can be claimed shall generally be calculated separately. The amount of the subject matter is usually not high, and the corresponding fees are also relatively low. Those who meet the conditions for judicial assistance can also apply for deferral, reduction or exemption of the fees according to law. After the case is concluded, the acceptance fees shall generally be borne by the losing party. In cases where the plaintiff partially wins and partially loses, the fees shall be shared in accordance with the proportion of responsibility. In cases settled through mediation, the fees shall be determined by the parties through consultation or by the court.

Q4: How long does it take to conclude a first-instance trial of a deposit dispute case through small claims litigation?

It is usually much faster than ordinary procedures, depending on which channel is applicable. According to the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021 and implemented on January 1, 2024), cases tried under the simplified procedure shall be concluded within three months from the date of filing, and cases under the ordinary procedure within six months. Where there are special circumstances requiring an extension, the approval shall be handled in accordance with the law. For simple monetary payment cases with clear facts, clear rights and obligations, and a subject amount below a certain percentage of the average annual salary of local employees in the previous year, the small claims procedure may be applied, with a first-instance final judgment and shorter trial time limits.

Q5: If the landlord withholds the security deposit without a receipt, should the tenant issue a written reminder first or directly file a lawsuit?

On that day, first fix the evidence and send a written notice of reminder, and then decide whether to file a lawsuit. These two steps are not conflicting. The notice of reminder should specify the leased house, the lease term, the amount of the deposit, the fact that the tenant has returned the house and settled the accounts according to the contract, the specific time limit for returning the deposit and the receiving account. It should be delivered and saved with proof in a traceable manner. This step not only leaves a window for the other party to perform voluntarily, but also fixes the time of the dispute, the content of the claim, and the other party's attitude, and can also play the role of interrupting the statute of limitations. At the same time, organize the transfer receipts, contracts, handover forms, and chat records into an evidence catalog, calculate the deductible items, and determine the amount of the claim. If the tenant still fails to return the deposit after the expiration of the reminder period, you can file a lawsuit with the court having jurisdiction with all the materials; for cases with a small amount and clear facts, you can consider pre-litigation mediation at the same time.

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.