In Hovanesian v. Nam, 213 Mich App 231; 539 NW2d 557 (1995), the plaintiff sued his landlord for the return of his security deposit. The plaintiff claimed that the landlord converted the security deposit and that treble damages were warranted pursuant to MCL 600.2919a; MSA 27A.2919(1). Id. at 237. Although this Court found that the landlord had wrongfully retained the security deposit, the landlord did not know that he had wrongfully retained the deposit when he did so. Id. Thus, the statute was inapplicable. The Court further stated: "Moreover, the act of retaining the security deposit did not amount to buying, receiving or aiding in the concealment of stolen, embezzled or converted property." Id.