The terms of the lease are fairly illegal. The relevant statute is [here][1]. A security deposit must be deposited in a separate account (1e), a signed receipt must be given upon receipt of the deposit (2b), the deposit must go in an interest-bearing account with a receipt showing name and location of bank and account number provided within 30 days (3a), also note that "Failure to comply with this paragraph shall entitle the tenant to immediate return of the security deposit". Subsection 4 requires returning the deposit within 30 days (not "waiting at least 30 days", much less 30 *working* days), minus deductions for damage, specified under 4(iii) as damage *excluding* normal wear and tear (light bulbs burning out). This does not include cleaning. and "No deduction may be made from the security deposit for any purpose other than those set forth in this section".

Subsection 6 says:

> The lessor shall forfeit his right to retain any portion of the
> security deposit for any reason, or, in any action by a tenant to
> recover a security deposit, to counterclaim for any damage to the
> premises...

and the conditions triggering that forfeiture include under (6a) failing to deposit the funds per (3), or (6c)

> uses in any lease signed by the tenant any provision which conflicts
> with any provision of this section and attempts to enforce such
> provision or attempts to obtain from the tenant or prospective tenant
> a waiver of any provision of this section

which may be the case here and (6e)

> fails to return to the tenant the security deposit or balance thereof
> to which the tenant is entitled after deducting therefrom any sums in
> accordance with the provisions of this section, together with any
> interest thereon, within thirty days after termination of the tenancy.

("within" means "after N days or less"). 

Subsection 7 states that 

> If the lessor or his agent fails to comply with clauses (a), (d), or
> (e) of subsection 6, the tenant shall be awarded damages in an amount
> equal to three times the amount of such security deposit or balance
> thereof to which the tenant is entitled plus interest at the rate of
> five per cent from the date when such payment became due, together
> with court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.

And subsection (8) statutorily states DaleM's point about contract terms not being above the law:

> Any provision of a lease which conflicts with any provision of this
> section and any waiver by a tenant or prospective tenant of any
> provision of this section shall be deemed to be against public policy
> and therefore void and unenforceable.

It would be interesting to see if the Massachusetts courts interpret this as being an automatic severability clause.

  [1]: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartII/TitleI/Chapter186/Section15B