Should I have to pay for my landlord's carpet?

rufusgizmo

Hi,
Never posted here before but have read plenty of useful things on this forum in the past, so thanks for all of those and I hope somebody can help with this

The problem I have is this: my wife and I are shortly moving out of an unfurnished rented house. The carpet in the living room before we moved in was a bit worn and not that attractive – it was functional, but we asked if it could be replaced. The landlord said no, so we asked if it could be removed prior to us arriving and replaced by one we bought ourselves. They agreed to this, so the day we moved in there was no carpet, only underlay, for a few weeks until we got our own carpet installed. Now we’re moving out, and the landlord is insisting that the room is carpeted when we leave – either by using the one that’s already there that we paid for, or by taking that to our new place and then getting them another carpet for the room. In the meantime, they’ve used the old carpet to furnish another property.

So it feels like, if we do agree to what they’re saying, we will have essentially bought them a carpet, as they’ll have the carpet in our rented house, plus the carpet in the other property. To add to our sense of disgruntlement, it is a very big room, about 50 sq m, so consequently it’s pretty expensive.

Are we being unreasonable in thinking that we only have to return the property in the state it was in on the day we moved in, regardless of whether we requested the carpet to be removed? Surely if we’d asked for say a sofa to be removed so that we could use our own, we wouldn’t then be expected to leave our sofa with them?

I hope this is clear and thank you in advance for your help....

phlash

Can kind of understand the sentiment on both sides, but I would bring my axe down on the LL.

If you've got areceipt for the carpet, you have the upper hand, since it sounds like no inventory was signed. This is proof that it is yours.

Is your deposit protected in one of the schemes?

Keep any communication of the original agreements about carpet?

I would stick to your guns on this one, it is the LL's responsibility. I am a LL, and really they should be grateful that you used your own and incurred wear and tear on your carpet and not theirs.

Return the house to the original state.

Fire_Fox

Did you make it crystal clear you intended to replace the carpet temporarily, and not replace the carpet full stop?

clutton_2

have you got any of this in writing and do you have a signed check-in inventory ?

rufusgizmo

Hi,

Thanks for the responses - in answer to a couple of the questions:

firefox - we didn't make it crystal clear that it was temporary in all honesty, although also we didn't suggest it was permanent. Basically we didn't commit either way.

phlash/clutton - we have never received an inventory, signed or unsigned. We have it in writing that they intended to use the old carpet for furnishing another property (whether they eventually did or not, I don't know for sure, but definitely they said they were going to). Also we have our request to have it removed, and confirmation that it would be before the move-in date, on email. And we have the receipt for the carpet.

Also we live in Scotland, so we don't have a deposit protection scheme as far as I understand it.

Fire_Fox

Morally I think you should leave the carpet as you wanted it changing and you didn't make it clear this was a temporary change - you were expecting the landlord to send someone out to remove the old carpet, find a winter-proof storage space AND then pay someone to refit the carpet at the end of the tenancy? If I was your landlord I would have taken the change as permanent, the fact that he said he might use the carpet elsewhere is a strong indication of that. Legally you did pay for the carpet and the landlord may have difficulty proving what was and was not in the property when you took occupancy as there is no dual signed inventory.

BitterAndTwisted

You could always consider taking your carpet with you, ask the landlord for the receipt for the original carpet so you know how old it was and then deduct a percentage for wear and tear for however many years it was in use for before you moved in and offer to pay them for the balance, if any.

OR buy a crappy old carpet second-hand, fit that one and leave it behind. Should be fine as long as the new crappy carpet was no crappier than the old crappy carpet they removed.

Hopejack

Even if you are liable for carpet or replacement or whatever as someone else here touched on, you are only liable for carpet less wear and tear - if it was tatty when you saw it then it's likely it was an old carpet. LLs do not get replacements on 'old for new' from tenants - they have to take into consideration fair wear and tear and not be seen to be 'bettering' the property by insisting a new one (or better quality one) is down/left.

ARLA have a bit on their website about fair wear and tear and costs for carpets as an example - might be worth having a look at it.

ETA - if there was no inventory at the beginning it really is your word against theirs that the carpet was past it's best though unfortunately. As others have said you could ask them to provide receipt to show the age of the first carpet but they may not be able to!

G_M

I agree with Firefox above.

Morally, you should leave the carpet. LL did you a favour removing the old one at your request. You knew (or would have known if you'd thought about it) that LL was not going to put his original carpet back.

Legally, you have a strong case - LL has no inventory proving presence of a carpet at the start. You have a receipt proving carpet is yours.

chappers

Agree with G_M and firefox with regards to the morality but if you want to play hardball then also in your favour is the fact that there is no inventory and you have it in writing that the LL was going to remove the carpet prior to your moving in, technically speaking you should leave the property as you found it, another LL might not like your tastye in carpet and might be charging you for it's disposal as you left it there.

From personal experience carpets rarely relay very well anyway, even if they fit.

mlz1413

I'm a bit confused on what you actually want.

Do you want to remove the carpet you purchased and use it else where and leave the LL with the underlay he provided?

Or do you just want to leave the LL with underlay as he has a carpet already - ignoring that it may or may not have been used else where? what will you do with the carpet you bought, freecycle it?

If I asked a LL to remove a carpet as I didn't like the one they had I would expect to leave the carpet I purchased as it was my request and choice. But as you both didn't discuss the detail then I guess its open to discussion now.

I guess the middle ground is that you pay for the old carpet to be refitted as the LL paid for it to be removed. If of course said carpet is still available, which it probably isn't because LL is asking you to provide carpeting.