[SJ196]

Originally Posted by von949

It not about what the pet has done to the carpet. It's about the next tenant that is allergic to pet hair and then wants to sue the property manager/owner for not disclosing that the previous tenants owned pets. My wife stays in court for stuff like this. Most times it's a fluke case but there was one very serious situation where a young child was very sensitive to anything to do with long hair house pets even months after the previous renters moved out. The pet fee and pet deposit pays for new carpet every time.

Better safe than sorry.

Really not fair to charge your tenant a high enough pet fee to replace carpet. When a lot of people have pets and still can keep carpet looking like new.

On the very rare case someone has and can prove a allergy. Still most cases carpet can be cleaned. If not you deal with it then. They move or you replace at that time. Like I say, rare and no law requires you disclose that info on the last tenant. But if tenants ask you tell the truth.

[SJ196]

Also of course the OP simply does not understand what he is talking about. No state has a law requiring carpets to be changed in X amount of years.

They do have laws. That if a tenant damages the carpet you can only charge for a prorated amount over a certain life span.

Like Calf is 8 to 10 years. So you can still have 20 year old carpet. But if they damage the carpet. Then cant charge the tenant anything.


https://homeguides.sfgate.com/can-la...ars-44474.html