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.
It was requested by the pediatrician to change the flooring to laminate or vinyl but they choose laminate.
Doesn't matter; you asked for the carpet to be removed so you get to pay for the replacement. The doctor could make requests all day long, but the burden of those requests, if granted, fall on you.
I suggest talking to your landlord/manager about setting up a payment plan
Doesn't matter; you asked for the carpet to be removed so you get to pay for the replacement. The doctor could make requests all day long, but the burden of those requests, if granted, fall on you.
I suggest talking to your landlord/manager about setting up a payment plan
Eh, I’m not sure. If the carpet is 40 years old and the floor is replaced, does 100% of the cost get to be pinned on the tenant? Even if the tenant requested it, the carpet was outside of its useful life, so the tenant may be able to argue in court they should be charged a reduced portion for a new floor.
The logic that the tenant requested so the LL gets off do free with a 40 year old rug makes no sense. So if the tenant just went in and ripped up and destroyed the rug, would he now get a pro rated replacement cost?
Eh, I’m not sure. If the carpet is 40 years old and the floor is replaced, does 100% of the cost get to be pinned on the tenant? Even if the tenant requested it, the carpet was outside of its useful life, so the tenant may be able to argue in court they should be charged a reduced portion for a new floor.
The logic that the tenant requested so the LL gets off do free with a 40 year old rug makes no sense. So if the tenant just went in and ripped up and destroyed the rug, would he now get a pro rated replacement cost?
You are confusing two different laws. When a tenant requests a reasonable accomodation because of a handicap, the tenant gets the accomodation but the tenant is the one to pay for it.
I rent from the housing authority in California. I had a similar thing happen but it was before I moved in my sons pediatrician requested the flooring be changed due to my sons asthma they sent me a bill after I moved in for 1688.88 the carpet was from 1979 how am I responsible for this.
And in response to these replies:
Quote:
Originally Posted by oregonwoodsmoke
Because you requested brand new carpet as a reasonable accomodation for a disability. Tenants can get a reasonable accomodation but the tenant is required to pay for it. That's entirely different from a carpet replacement because the tenant destroyed the carpet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim in FL
The tenant was asking for the carpet to be removed because of their son's medical condition, not because the carpet was well outside it's reasonable lifespan. There's no law, that I'm aware of, that states the landlord has to replace carpet at ten years. The tenant demands new flooring; the tenant gets to pay 100% of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrician4you
Because you’re asking for a specific medical accommodation for a handicap that’s beyond a reasonable accommodation. Since you couldn’t/didn’t pay for it they did the work and sent you the bill.
Landlords must allow disabled tenants to make reasonable modifications to their living unit or common areas at their expense, if needed for the person to comfortably and safely live in the unit. (42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A).) You have the right to modify your living space to the extent necessary to make the space safe and comfortable, as long as the modifications will not make the unit unacceptable to the next tenant, or if you agree and are financially able to undo the modification when you leave.
Examples of modifications undertaken by a disabled tenant include:
lowering countertops for a tenant who uses a wheelchair
installing special faucets or door handles for persons with limited hand use
modifying kitchen appliances to accommodate a blind tenant, and
installing a ramp to allow wheelchair access to a raised living room.
These modifications must be reasonable and made with prior approval. A landlord is entitled to ask for a description of the proposed modifications, proof that they will be done in a workman-like manner, and evidence that you are obtaining any necessary building permits. In addition, if you propose to modify the unit in a way that will require restoration when you leave (such as the re-positioning of lowered kitchen counters), the landlord may require you to pay into an interest-bearing escrow account the amount estimated for the restoration. (The interest will belong to you.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim in FL
Doesn't matter; you asked for the carpet to be removed so you get to pay for the replacement. The doctor could make requests all day long, but the burden of those requests, if granted, fall on you.
I suggest talking to your landlord/manager about setting up a payment plan
Quote:
Originally Posted by oregonwoodsmoke
You are confusing two different laws. When a tenant requests a reasonable accomodation because of a handicap, the tenant gets the accomodation but the tenant is the one to pay for it.
And I am going to completely disagree 100% with all of you here because in this case the carpet was completed aged out, and then some, and needed to be replaced long ago anyway. Who the hell lives with carpeting that is 40 years old especially when multiple people had use of that carpeting over that 40 years. That is just beyond gross and disgusting!
Not every case is going to be as cut and dry as all of you think it is. If the carpet needed to be replaced anyway then I don't believe that all, or even any in this situation, of the replacement cost should be on the tenant requesting the accommodation and I am sure that a judge would agree that no two cases are always going to be the same and there will be exceptions and extentuating circumstances that make them different.
If the tenant had asked for the carpet to be replaced just because it was old and disgusting and needed to be replaced then you would agree that the tenant should not have to pay for it? Of course you would agree hands down that the tenant should not have to pay for it. But just because the tenant asked for replacement as an "accommodation" on a 40 year old carpet that should have been replaced 30 years ago, then you feel they should pay for it? That's absolutely absurd and defies all logic and common sense. I am sure that any judge would agree that the tenant should not be charged in this case and the LL would get laughed out of court on this one.
Last edited by Corn-fused; 06-13-2018 at 01:07 AM..
And I am going to completely disagree 100% with all of you here because in this case the carpet was completed aged out, and then some, and needed to be replaced long ago anyway. Who the hell lives with carpeting that is 40 years old especially when multiple people had use of that carpeting over that 40 years. That is just beyond gross and disgusting!
Not every case is going to be as cut and dry as all of you think it is. If the carpet needed to be replaced anyway then I don't believe that all, or even any in this situation, of the replacement cost should be on the tenant requesting the accommodation and I am sure that a judge would agree that no two cases are always going to be the same and there will be exceptions and extentuating circumstances that make them different.
If the tenant had asked for the carpet to be replaced just because it was old and disgusting and needed to be replaced then you would agree that the tenant should not have to pay for it? Of course you would agree hands down that the tenant should not have to pay for it. But just because the tenant asked for replacement as an "accommodation" on a 40 year old carpet that should have been replaced 30 years ago, then you feel they should pay for it? That's absolutely absurd and defies all logic and common sense. I am sure that any judge would agree that the tenant should not be charged in this case and the LL would get laughed out of court on this one.
Ignoring the fact that I'd never allow carpet to last that long to begin with.
If a tenant ever asks for a replacement of anything at any time my response is always; here is the bill, it will get done as soon as the check clears. If I had 100 year old carpet and a tenant saw the flooring ad chose to still rent the place out and then asked for it to be replaced it would be the same thing.
The fact is the current law allows a LL to put the expense of an accommodation onto the tenant or deny the acckmidation if it creates a financial hardships so I wouldn't be so sure of anything if I were you, much less claiming it would be laughed out of court. It is right there in the law, give it a read sometime.
I rent from the housing authority in California. I had a similar thing happen but it was before I moved in my sons pediatrician requested the flooring be changed due to my sons asthma they sent me a bill after I moved in for 1688.88 the carpet was from 1979 how am I responsible for this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZ Manager
Ignoring the fact that I'd never allow carpet to last that long to begin with.
If a tenant ever asks for a replacement of anything at any time my response is always; here is the bill, it will get done as soon as the check clears. If I had 100 year old carpet and a tenant saw the flooring ad chose to still rent the place out and then asked for it to be replaced it would be the same thing.
The fact is the current law allows a LL to put the expense of an accommodation onto the tenant or deny the acckmidation if it creates a financial hardships so I wouldn't be so sure of anything if I were you, much less claiming it would be laughed out of court. It is right there in the law, give it a read sometime.
Nope, we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. I gave my opinion and I am sticking to it based on everything I stated in my previous post. In most cases I would agree but being that this is such an extreme case it is definitely worth the poster contacting an RE attorney for their advice.
Poster said: "The carpet I was told didn't exist before I seen the apartment and signed my lease." Which tells me they didn't even know the space had carpet at all. So they would have been within their right to request it was replaced no matter what. The fact that they ALSO have a medical reason shouldn't void the issue and get the landlord off the hook. I agree that a judge would have a hard time agreeing with a landlord who waited 40 years (is that actually accurate?) to pawn the cost of carpet replacement off on a tenant because they are too cheap to do basic maintenance in their units. No landlord should ever try to pawn crappy carpet off on a new tenant like that, and only tenants with no better options would be willing to tolerate such unreasonable expectations from a landlord. That is a scummy landlord who definitely deserves the cost of replacing flooring in one room.
I think the judge would ask if the tenant hadn't mentioned a medical issue and simply asked that the 40-year old carpet was replaced because he was not made aware of that before signing the lease, what would the landlord do. Then, if the landlord said not replace it, the judge would find against him, and if the landlord said charge the tenant, the judge would find against him. He wouldn't win no matter what.
This isn't a medical accommodation, this is a normal apartment issue of replacing 40-year old carpet. A medical accommodation would be doing something that is not needed by the average tenant. A wheelchair ramp, extra hand rails in the shower stall, etc. Those are all above and beyond normal occupancy needs. Flooring being replaced is normal occupancy needs.
I disagree that a judge would laugh the landlord out of the courtroom though, I think he would be agitated. If anything, he should charge the landlord with contempt of court for wasting his time and being so unreasonable.
Is the carpet causing the medical issue? That would completely change the ball game. Going to be tough for the LL in court to defend the cleanliness and health aspects of his 40 year old carpet.
Is the carpet causing the medical issue? That would completely change the ball game. Going to be tough for the LL in court to defend the cleanliness and health aspects of his 40 year old carpet.
Well, don't you think that any carpet that has been in place and used by multiple people/families and possibly pets for 40 years is bound to cause some kind of "medical" issues in most anyone? SMH, I frankly just can't even believe this is an issue because that LL has got to be one slimy and cheap slumlord to not have replaced that carpet 3 times over by now.
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.
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.
