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.
I would fight it. Most courts use the 10 year rule unless the owner can prove otherwise from the manufacturer or however the judge is feeling that day, there is no legal guideline on this. It also depends on how much carpet had to be replaced and the quality of the carpet. The broken rules mean nothing in this situation.
Hi everyone. I lived in a rental for 5.5 years, my rent was on time every month and there was never a time that my landlord came out to fix a single thing in those almost six years. There was one thing I did wrong. I found a dog one day who was almost dead. I love animals so I decided to take him in and nurse him to good health and then take him to the Humane Society.
The dog bounced back, and I fell in love with him and decided I wanted to keep him. I never told my landlord because he exceded the weight limit on the HOA rules, and so I made the concious wrong decision to keep him anyways.
I moved out 2 months ago and now the landlord is charging me for the full replacement of the carpet. The carpet was not new upon move in, it had stains, and a missing patch. We lived there for almost 6 years and he never once cleaned it. He is saying that we need to pay the full replacement cost because my dog was kept there ilegaly and when he went to replace the carpet there was a few pet stains (this happened when my dog was first brought home and was extremely ill and had accidents). Is this fair? Should I just pay the money ($1700) and move on? I dont think I should pay the full cost for carpet that is at least 8 years old, but he is hanging on to the fact that my dog was "ilegally" kept in the unit. What should I do?
Go to a carpet store, ask them to estimate what the depreciated value of an 8 year old carpet would be....Then send a letter to the LL and offer that amount, including your written estimate.
Save all these copies, and your delivery receipt. If he tries to sue you for the amount he wants, let him....This will all go your way with your evidence. Also, if you have pics of this carpet, include those in your evidence...and perhaps take one with you when you seek your written estimate from the carpet store.
Thanks for saving the dog. I believe that our pets find us.
No way is LL going to get away with charging you for the full replacement cost of that carpet that most likely has aged-out and needs replacing anyway. And it makes no sense for your LL to try and justify doing so just to penalize you for having the dog. He is basically shooting himself in the foot by doing so and he will never win. Now, as someone else mentioned, if any problems with the dog that ruined or caused repair to the floorboards or underlayment that is a different story. But the carpet itself, no.
You don't mention what state you are in so make sure to look up your state's tenant/landlord laws to make sure you follow the correct procedures and know the law but I suggest sending your LL a demand letter for whatever amount he is charging you for the full replacement of the carpet and then also cite your state law regarding security deposit deductions for depreciated carpet, if applicable. Give him 10 days to return or you will sue him in court. This is the quickest, cheapest way to make your first attempt.
If he does not comply then either seek legal assistance/guidance on how to proceed or just go ahead and file in small claims for the money. If you win, many states will award your judgment amount plus attorney fees and court costs. (Some states even award double or triple your judgment amount)
PLUS, if you moved a couple of months ago and he is just charging you now for the carpet, make sure when you check your state laws that you review the law on how and when landlords must return your deposit. If he slipped up on any laws that may apply for security deposit deductions, and/or return of such, you may possibly have even more for your defense. (if such laws apply in your state)
Last edited by Corn-fused; 07-15-2015 at 11:12 PM..
I moved out 2 months ago and now the landlord is charging me for the full replacement of the carpet.
Should I just pay the money ($1700) and move on?
What you do depends on the following:
1. Is the landlord deducting any of the money they are claiming for damages from your security deposit (if you had one)?
OR
2. Has your security deposit been returned (if you had one) and they are sending you a separate bill for the carpet damage?
Thank you for your replies everyone. He is keeping my security deposit, and I have to pay him the remaing balance for replacing the carpet $773.16. He sent me a receipt for the cost of carplet replacement/installation that is how I know I am paying for it all. I sent him the email saying that I did not believe that it was fair for me to pay the full cost and his reply to me was:
"Normal wear and tear on carpet is not something you're responsible for.
However, pet urine which soaked into the carpet and padding is not normal wear and tear (especially when considering you were never authorized to have a dog in the unit). Therefore, this makes it your responsibility to rectify. I'm not aware of any company that sells "slightly used carpet" which is cheaper than brand new carpet. In turn, this makes it a natural consequence that the carpet must be replaced with new carpet - it's the only option.
If you had never violated your lease agreement by keeping a dog in the unit then there would be no pet urine in the carpet and padding and I would have no grounds to charge you for new carpet.
It is well accepted and documented in Colorado landlord-tenant law cases that the homeowner can replace items which have been damaged with reasonable replacements. And in the case of carpet, it is reasonable to replace carpet that has been damaged thru negligence on the part of the tenant (i.e. Pet urine from a dog that was never authorized to be there) with brand new carpet."
I know I was in the wronk keeping the dog, and that is the only reason why I ended up moving because I did not want to break any rules. I have the money, and am considering paying him, but I do not feel it is right. I do have a document of our initial walk thru signed by our landlord that states that there are some stains, and a patch of missing carpet.
By the way I never suggested he get slightly used carpet, lol that was something he decided to include in his reply. Also It has been almost two months since we moved out, and Iam just now hearing about this.
The point is not directly based on whether you are trying to say that the the damage was from normal wear and tear or is considered normal wear and tear. The point you need to make to him is that you understand that the dog caused damage however, because the carpet was old(er) he can not charge you full replacement for old(er) carpet. Ask him when the carpet was originally installed. (He will have to prove this in court anyway)
http://blog.bradfordpublishing.com/l...and-tear/' Useful life Since the legal definition doesn’t offer much guidance, here’s another way to think of normal wear and tear: Consider it the reasonable amount of wear that a given appliance, household item, or piece of furnishing should incur for every year of its useful life. (A useful life is how long you can expect something to live or work.) So, if a carpet’s useful life is 10 years, then every year, it should deteriorate about 1/10th.
(there is a helpful chart on this website to give you the average age of items)
Don't let him try to sell you the line that he can't replace the carpet with something comparable. Of course he can't. But, he has been able to take depreciation of that carpet on his taxes every year since the carpet was installed and eventually carpet will lose what useful life it has left and will need to be replaced and no judge is ever going to put that full replacement cost burden onto a tenant. Nothing, or partial cost at most, but not the full cost to replace. They will only allow what life is left in that carpet to be charged to the tenant, if any.
Again, if it was damage to anything other than the carpet and padding, then yes, he can charge you. If he is trying to sucker-punch you into paying for full replacement cost of carpet he can't do that, damage or not.
Also, make sure he followed these security deposit return laws to a "T" or that would be more to add to your defense. 38-12-103.
Last edited by Corn-fused; 07-16-2015 at 01:15 AM..
By the way I never suggested he get slightly used carpet, lol that was something he decided to include in his reply. Also It has been almost two months since we moved out, and Iam just now hearing about this.
Wait its been two months? Nothing matters at that point then he owes you a full return of your deposit by now. Look up your state law it has a requirement for a landlord to return the deposit or an itemized list of deductions within so many days. If he doesn't you can sue for double or triple the deposit amount. He waited this long he screwed up royally.
That states Colorado landlords have 30 days unless it states longer in your lease (max 60 days) to return the deposit or an itemized list of deductions. If you were to sue and win you could recover three times your deposit from him and in that link there is a link to a threatening letter demanding your full deposit return. Also to note if there was previous damage before you moved in it was likely older carpet so it is easily out of its life and cannot be charged to you and you could sue him for that if he did give you the itemized deductions within the 60 days, assuming your lease allowed 60 days otherwise it is 30. Check your lease and determine if he added in any extra time and read through that link it has a ton of useful information for you.
Colorado Revised Statutes §§ 38-12-103 is the one that pertains to what I'm talking about and you should google that and read it too, at least the first 3 parts.
Last edited by AZ Manager; 07-16-2015 at 04:43 AM..
If carpet is still serviceable, it doesn't have to be replaced no matter what the age or how much it's been depreciated. The carpet in our rental was 35 years old.
Because the OP's dog made the carpet unusable, now it does have to be replaced. That's a simple fact brought on by the direct actions of the OP.
If carpet is still serviceable, it doesn't have to be replaced no matter what the age or how much it's been depreciated. The carpet in our rental was 35 years old.
Because the OP's dog made the carpet unusable, now it does have to be replaced. That's a simple fact brought on by the direct actions of the OP.
She owes for the new carpet.
Nope, you are wrong. She is responsible for replacement of the carpet AFTER deducting the condition it was in - i.e. depreciation.
Additionally, the landlord did not follow state law (according to above posts) and waited beyond the statutory requirements to submit a list of repairs. Entire deposit needs to be returned and the OP is justified in going to small claims court to ask for the full return of her deposit AND court costs and filing fees should the landlord not return the deposit after a letter requesting same.
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.
