In 1989, the Illinois Court 

of Appeals discussed the 

history and purpose of the 

severe penalties for 

landlords and large 

deposit-sized awards for 

tenants:

Individual Tenants represent Public Rights

   The legislative history clearly states that the 

purpose of section 2 was to set forth a penalty for

lessors who ignored the mandate of section 1 of the 

Act. While debating the severity of the penalty to 

be imposed for violation of section 1, one of the 

legislators stated:

   "[I]t was pointed out to me that the average rent 

   is three hundred, so it would mean that the landlord 

   would be liable or the management firm would be liable 

   for fifteen dollars[.] [Y]ou and I know that this is 

   not a realistic figure that he's not going to abide by 

   the law for fifteen dollars knowing full well that the

   tenants would not engage a lawyer, would not take

   the day off * * * to appear in court and as a result

   we had to bring it to a realistic position so that,

   the owners of these buildings would comply and this

   is the reason for it." (citation omitted)

   Another legislator noted that from his experience in his

district lessors were not abiding by their legal obligation 

under section 1 of the Act to pay interest on security 

deposits. (Citation omitted). In essence, the legislative 

purpose was to impose a statutory penalty at a severity 

level that would secure statutory compliance by lessors.

Gittleman v. Create, Inc., 189 Ill. App.3d 199, 203-204 (1989).