Security Deposit issues...

[wendys8861]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Hubby and I rented an apartment for 4.5 years. We had no children and no pets.

When we moved in, the complex said our carpet was new. When we moved out, there were a few stains in the front room but the remainder of the apartment carpet was in great shape with no stains, tears, etc..

The complex said they can't clean the carpet and need to replace it at a cost of $1200. They are using a life of 10 years and figuring a pro rated amount that we owe them, figuring over $600 in addition to our security deposit.

Now, here's the question: Shouldn't the pro-rata be on the cost of the ORIGINAL carpet (which was cheaper 5 years ago) and not the new carpet? or is my thinking distorted?

I mean, if I have a stereo that I have let someone use for 5 years that I paid $100 for and 5 years later they return it to me broken, wouldn't I just be entitled to the depreciated value and not the cost of a brand new stereo?

Please advise. I'd like to talk to my former landlord ASAP regarding this.

Thanks so much!

 

[angel222]

Here's what I found...

Hi,
I see no one has answered this question for you. I am currently going through a security deposit issue with my former landlord, so I've been on this website A LOT!

Here's the scoop from: California Tenants - California Department of Consumer Affairs

2. Carpets and drapes - "useful life" rule

Normal wear and tear to carpets, drapes and other furnishings cannot be charged against a tenant's security deposit.223 Normal wear and tear includes simple wearing down of carpet and drapes because of normal use or aging, and includes moderate dirt or spotting. In contrast, large rips or indelible stains justify a deduction from the tenant's security deposit for repairing the carpet or drapes, or replacing them if that is reasonably necessary.

One common method of calculating the deduction for replacement prorates the total cost of replacement so that the tenant pays only for the remaining useful life of the item that the tenant has damaged or destroyed. For example, suppose a tenant has damaged beyond repair an eight-year-old carpet that had a life expectancy of ten years, and that a replacement carpet of similar quality would cost $1,000. The landlord could properly charge only $200 for the two years' worth of life (use) that would have remained if the tenant had not damaged the carpet.


Hope that helps! But, it looks like they can charge it-did you try to have it cleaned yourself?? Sounds like they don't want to TRY to clean the carpet...they just want to replace it all together which isn't fair to you. I would say tell them to let you meet a carpet guy (of your choice) out there at the unit to access whether it can really be cleaned or not...if they say no, then they have the right to charge you for replacement I think.m


Angel

 

[ecmst12]

Depreciated value doesn't have anything to do with what they paid for it. It's current value, depreciated for wear and tear.

 

[Searchertwin]

You admitted that the carpets were stain. These were stains that could not be removed. This is where it has to be replace. Normally, the carpet in a house is all one shade and laid at once. So how can they replace only one room to match the rest without leaving a seam or mismatch colors. Would you move into a house like that? No, you pay for something you expect it to be right.


Your thinking is distorted. Like your stereo, would you really be happy if someone return something to you and it was broken and you would ACCEPT one of lesser value or keep it and say, "that's alright, it was only part broken rest looks good,?" I don't think so. You would want your full $100.00, that what you paid, that what you want back in return.