‘Real Housewives Of Beverly Hills’ Denise Richards and Husband Aaron Phypers Face Lawsuit for Trashing Rental Property

Denise Richards of Real Housewives of Beverly Hills is back in the headlines, along with husband Aaron Phypers. This time around, it seems that there is legal trouble brewing for the couple.

“Real Housewives of Beverly Hills'” Denise Richards | Pablo Cuadra/Getty Images

Married Phypers in 2018

Richards shares two daughters with ex-husband Charlie Sheen. The reality star also adopted a daughter in December 2017 after her divorce. She tied the knot with Phypers in September 2018, according to Bustle.

During the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills reunion show last year, she told her co-stars that her husband gets along well with her ex. “They actually do get along,” Richards said. “And when we got married, Aaron called Charlie to let him know that we were getting married, just out of respect, that he was going to be a stepdad to our girls. They get along.”

Regardless of their highly publicized divorce and the many scandalous headlines that have featured Sheen, Richards never speaks negatively of her ex-husband. “I’m not a saint and I do my best and I’ve made a lot of mistakes with Charlie, but I think it’s best to not talk in such a negative manner about your children’s father because they’re the ones that suffer ultimately,” she said.

The lawsuit

The Blast recently reported on legal documents that state Richards and Phypers leased a home together in Los Angeles in July 2018. According to the article, the couple signed a lease which included specifics on what pets they were allowed to have inside of the house.

As the lease reads, the lawsuit claims that Richards agreed to the terms of “no animals on the property other than two pot-bellied pigs and three dogs.” Also, they would “properly use, operate, and safeguard the property, keeping it clean and sanitary, would pay for all damage to the property caused by tenants or pets.”

The lawsuit goes on to say that the contract specified the couple “would not, and would not permit guests, to disturb or annoy neighbors, and upon vacating the premises defendants would return the surrender the property to plaintiffs empty of all personal property, and would remove all debris, return the property in the same condition as at the commencement of the lease.”

According to The Blast, the owner of the property now claims the couple, “breached the foregoing written contract through causing significant damage to the leased property, and knowingly and willingly violated the Pet Addendum.” The owner also stated they have “sustained damages, monetary and otherwise,” and goes on to say, “the intentional misrepresentations engaged in by defendants, and each of them were done with malice, oppression, and fraud. Further, said conduct was despicable in that it was so vile, base, contemptible, miserable, wretched, and loathsome it would be looked down upon and despised by ordinary decent people.”

Richards’ turn

The attorney for the RHOBH star fired back a letter addressing the accusations, making a decent case for rebuttal. “First and foremost, since you are claiming damages to the property for repair and replacements then I am entitled to see descriptive invoices paid or pending, including receipts and other documents describing damages,” attorney Stephen Bernard wrote in his response on behalf of Richards and Phypers.

The letter stated that the owners refused to send any photos or video of the damages they were accusing Richards and Phypers of causing, and since the house recently sold at fair market value, the couple should not be held liable for previous issues with the home.

These points are outlined in the lawyer’s letter, stating, “it is my understanding that the house has been sold at fair market value according to comps in the area, so not only are your estimate of damages irrelevant but beyond that, simply a shakedown in an attempt to obtain monies because of my client’s celebrity status.”

Bernard goes on to detail significant issues with the home that were discovered when the couple first signed the lease, such as “fecal matter found in virtually every room, rat and possum carcasses were found in the attic, severe mold was found in the cabinets and surfaces in the restrooms, broken dishwasher, the flooring in the kitchen, living room, dining room, and the hallways had completely mismatched wood flooring.”

Richards’ lawyer concluded his letter by informing the owners that she and her husband have evidence of their statements, writing, “my clients had videotaped the premises after moving out. There does not appear to be damaged as you describe. I am more than happy to share the videotape with you.”

Time will tell how this real-life drama plays out for Richards and Phypers.