Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This type of tenant is the reason that landlords usually refuse to rent to people with pets. The tenant is trying to find a way to lie her way out of have a destructive dog. She may very well end up, having to pay for a new carpet, which is not unusual in such a situation.
This landlord, will probably not let a tenant have a pet from here on. And from being an investment real estate broker from 1972 till I finally retired, I have rented to hundreds of people, and was the president of a large county wide owners and managers association. Our members quit renting to anyone with a pet, due to people like the OP.
One thing I doubt the carpet was in the shape she says it was, when she moved in. It may not be new, but the way she describes it, it would not be something an experienced landlord would have allowed to be like. She should be charged for another carpet job similar to what is there now. Her dog destroyed the carpet, and she is responsible. Only a very irresponsible renter, would have allowed a dog to tear up a property like that. It is not time to pay for her letting it happen.
If you feel you have to lie in such a situation, then you have either chosen the people you interface with poorly, or you have no moral backbone. An outside person suggesting that I should lie would have zero effect on my actions. However, I would also have no problem telling the landlord face-to-face that it was a cheap-azz carpet that should have been replaced before renting to me, and that if he tried to ding me for the entire security deposit I would see him in court, even if I would accept a reasonable part of the deposit being taken.
I'm guessing a rough estimate of 650 square feet for all the damage. How often do landlords go after more than the deposit? I told him I am not made of money.
I'm guessing a rough estimate of 650 square feet for all the damage. How often do landlords go after more than the deposit? I told him I am not made of money.
But you and your dog caused the damage, have the money to pay for patches and the sense of humor to post about creative thinking on a public forum. None of us is "made of money" but most of us live up to our responsibilities.
Carpet has a depreciation. It also has a lifetime. If your carpet was 4-5 years old, it is likely at the end of its life. Even if you have to pay, it should be for the depreciated value of a carpet that was 4-5 years old. So 650 sq ft of carpet with perhaps an 8 year lifespan (I'm being generous, it could only be 5 years) would cost an amount, and your dog ended the life of that carpet roughly 60% into its lifespan, so your damages are 40% of the price to replace the carpet your dog damaged. Hopefully you took pictures and documented the damage that existed prior to you moving in. Keep the pieces the carpet repair person gave you in case you need to prove the quality in court.
I'm guessing a rough estimate of 650 square feet for all the damage. How often do landlords go after more than the deposit? I told him I am not made of money.
If you are not made of money you should not have let your dog chew on the carpet and ruin it.
This type of tenant is the reason that landlords usually refuse to rent to people with pets. The tenant is trying to find a way to lie her way out of have a destructive dog. She may very well end up, having to pay for a new carpet, which is not unusual in such a situation.
This landlord, will probably not let a tenant have a pet from here on. And from being an investment real estate broker from 1972 till I finally retired, I have rented to hundreds of people, and was the president of a large county wide owners and managers association. Our members quit renting to anyone with a pet, due to people like the OP.
One thing I doubt the carpet was in the shape she says it was, when she moved in. It may not be new, but the way she describes it, it would not be something an experienced landlord would have allowed to be like. She should be charged for another carpet job similar to what is there now. Her dog destroyed the carpet, and she is responsible. Only a very irresponsible renter, would have allowed a dog to tear up a property like that. It is not time to pay for her letting it happen.
This.
I had tenants with pets. And those pets for the most part were undeclared. They simply hid or moved them when I came over. I could tell there were pets but I could never prove it. After repairs I didn't take pets for a long time.
I have two tenants currently with pets. But they declared them and paid the required deposits. i charge a hefty pet deposit. The houses are clean and they pick up after the dogs and the dogs are well behaved.
In the OP's case I would of replaced the carpet before they moved in if it was stained and burned they would be responsible for damages. I replaced $2400 worth of carpet recently because the cleaning guy couldn't get the old carpet high traffic dirt areas and some of the smells out. I could of rented it as is and saved my money but I don't like to have any complaints.
I would be charging for the pet damage that OP did. The existing damage wouldn't be her issue but the additional damage would. I have two tenants who have pets. Both houses are immaculate. I take HEFTY deposits. Why do people think they shouldn't be charged for damage because there was existing damage.
Fir all we know the LL took in account the damaged carpet and adjusted the rent accordingly
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.