Being charged $1400 for "curry smell" by apartment at end of lease (house, tenants)

[asufan]

It's a bad smell. When I was looking at houses in Chandler back in 2013, I would sometimes enter a property that had that smell. I always said to myself I wouldn't rule a house like that out, but I would have to offer less so I can spend money eliminating the odor. I always change carpet and put up fresh paint anyway though, usually the chemical smell in new carpet overpowers anything else.

[armor1111]

when i leased the apartment this property was owned by X Group but before the lease is over Y Group had bought the property. There was no smell/odor mentioned in the lease agreement. I am not sure if Y Group renovated the apartment and charged us saying the apartment had curry smell. The amount 1400$ is really huge for me if it was 400$ maybe i would have paid though.

[Mister-A]

Originally Posted by Bungle

This world is becoming way to PC for my liking. Seriously discrimination because they mentioned the actual smell? If the smell were due to a strong dog smell would you want PETA on the case? "That's discrimination against my fur baby!". "Your apartment smelled like ammonium nitrate, fertilizer and diesel fuel!"...."Hey that's discrimination against us white domestic terrorists!"

Stop playing the race card when things don't go your way.

I don't think it's discrimination in the sense that they're intentionally bigoted against Indians or Indian practices, but cooking is an expected use of an apartment and there are smells. It gets a little weird to single out smells and call it damage after-the-fact based on a future tenant's subjective perception of what smells bad.

There's an argument to be made that this would be a normal kitchen smell if the next renter was Indian. As you acknowledge later, "billions of people eat curry daily and have for thousands of years". Claiming that the smell is not normal for a kitchen assumes that those billions of people are doing something abnormal. That's where the discrimination accusation comes from.

I'm not familiar with AZ law, but the obvious solution would be for the landlord to include an "odor clause" in the lease that provides for the costs of replacing materials permeated by any and all heavy smells "such as garlic, tobacco, lavender, curry, fish..."

Then you're just restating common sense, but it's right there in black and white and nobody can claim you're unfairly singling out some perfectly ordinary bit of their lifestyle while you ignore the guy who eats lutefisk every day.

[asufan]

Originally Posted by Mister-A

I don't think it's discrimination in the sense that they're intentionally bigoted against Indians or Indian practices, but cooking is an expected use of an apartment and there are smells. It gets a little weird to single out smells and call it damage after-the-fact based on a future tenant's subjective perception of what smells bad.

There's an argument to be made that this would be a normal kitchen smell if the next renter was Indian. As you acknowledge later, "billions of people eat curry daily and have for thousands of years". Claiming that the smell is not normal for a kitchen assumes that those billions of people are doing something abnormal. That's where the discrimination accusation comes from.

I'm not familiar with AZ law, but the obvious solution would be for the landlord to include an "odor clause" in the lease that provides for the costs of replacing materials permeated by heavy smells "such as garlic, tobacco, lavender, curry, fish..."

Then you're just restating common sense, but it's right there in black and white and nobody can claim you're unfairly singling out some perfectly ordinary bit of their lifestyle while you ignore the guy who eats lutefisk every day.

I agree, if there is no "odor clause", the use of a kitchen is to be expected. It's probably not worth contacting an attorney, but the threat of contacting an attorney may be worth it. Something along the lines of "The use of the kitchen was typical of any resident, and there is not clause stating which seasonings and spices are appropriate for use. I demand a substantial deduction in the cleaning fee, otherwise I have no other option than to contact an attorney and file a federal fair housing complaint as I believe I am being singled out due to ethnicity". Any smart property manager would make the problem go away and return most of the deposit.

[Bungle]

Originally Posted by asufan

as I believe I am being singled out due to ethnicity".

no no no no no.....stop with threatening to use this. Such BS.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by Bungle

no no no no no.....stop with threatening to use this. Such BS.

If you want to win you have to use everything you have.

[Mister-A]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

If you want to win you have to use everything you have.

I wouldn't whip that one out, even if I thought it was true. If OP wanted to go that route (and I don't think he has to), he shouldn't mention it at all. If that's something that's happening, there's no reason to set off any alarms that might prevent the landlord from making incriminating statements.

One avenue that might be worth exploring is a review of the actual costs of remediation. I know that in some states - and apparently in Arizona - you're only supposed to deduct the depreciated value of the damaged property from a deposit: if OP's cooking smells permeated a brand new carpet that was installed prior to him moving in, he might be out of luck, but if not, the loss is the depreciated value of the old carpet, not the full cost of the new carpet. If it was due to be replaced anyway as part of normal maintenance, it is worth $0. Similarly, if they always repaint, there was no unplanned expense caused by the smell.

[Bungle]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

If you want to win you have to use everything you have.

Might as well throw in a false rape claim while they're at it.

/s

[asufan]

Originally Posted by Bungle

Might as well throw in a false rape claim while they're at it.

/s

Well, one would not have any proof. This would have some merit as the property manager named an "ethnic" spice and if there is nothing in the lease about smells, they need to bring that up. The landlord is obviously trying to be sneaky and do a cash grab and keep the money, the tenant has a right to go after it in a threatening/aggressive way. No need to be a pushover and lose the $1400

[JrzDefector]

The OP was cooking food. That's normal usage of one's kitchen in an apartment. If the kitchen has been properly cleaned and the smell has lingered, well, that's just the cost of doing business for the landlord. That's a risk you take when you rent to someone - that normal wear and tear can come with costs to the landlord. My father is a landlord, so I'm pretty familiar how this works.

I actually disagree that it's like the smell left over from a pet - there should be no smell left over from a pet, or from cigarettes, for that matter. From cooking and just the everyday acts of living though? Sorry - that's part of the deal from the landlord's end. Further, it's a highly subjective claim. You can't photograph a smell - how would they actually win a court case?

As for all the pearl-clutching from the anti-PC crowd, get a grip. It's not even about civility or basic respect. It's about sticking to facts rather than making assumptions as anyone who has worked in journalism or the law would know. Unless the landlord hired an expert in scents or showed up while the tenants were actually cooking curry, they don't really know exactly what the smell may be from. Curry is a blend of multiple spices and herbs - someone cooking with cumin or turmeric or another strong-smelling spice could possibly have ended up with a similarly strong odor in their house. Unless they've brought in experts, it's really just a "strong odor." And if that strong odor is from just cooking the daily meal, that's general wear and tear unless there was some kind of clause in the lease about maintaining the scent profile of the apartment, I'm not sure they'd have a case when it's based on tenants just going about their everyday lives. If the family was cooking meals to sell them, creating exceptional stress upon the property in terms of usage, then there might be a cause for complaint, but you can't very well fine people for living their lives if you're providing the place for them to do just that.