PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Ex Landlord trying to make me pay for replacement carpets
Options
Comments
-
I think that some tenants might prefer to put up with old carpets rather than move in with brand new ones so they will avoid possible issues and disputes later with the LL claiming money for stains or damage. Particularly so if they've previously experienced someone like the OP's LL.
Absolutely,which backs up my thinking that this OP was wrong to pull up the carpets and dispose of them.
horses for courses,one mans treasure is another ones trash.
Just because the OP didn't like the carpet didn't give him the right to dispose of it without first confirming the consequencein S 38 T 2 F 50
out S 36 T 9 F 24 FF 4
2017-32 2018 -33 2019 -21 2020 -5 2021 -4 20220 -
Carpets atleast 7.5 years old, worthless.
Offer 5% of replacement and move on0 -
need_an_answer wrote: »Absolutely,which backs up my thinking that this OP was wrong to pull up the carpets and dispose of them.
horses for courses,one mans treasure is another ones trash.
Just because the OP didn't like the carpet didn't give him the right to dispose of it without first confirming the consequence
But it also does not make him liable to replace them for new ones.
They are OVER 7.5 years old. They have no value, as they were already in holes, with marks and in two pieces when he moved in.
The landlord no longer has a tatty worthless carpet, so he is entitled to have a tatty worthless carpet or the monetary equivalent, which is 0. It doesnt matter if another tenant would be happy with a tatty carpet.0 -
marliepanda wrote: »But it also does not make him liable to replace them for new ones.
my post never said it did make him liable.in S 38 T 2 F 50
out S 36 T 9 F 24 FF 4
2017-32 2018 -33 2019 -21 2020 -5 2021 -4 20220 -
What's the state of the carpet that you left down? Considering for the bedrooms the initial check-in description shows broadly the same state as for bedroom 1, it'd be fair to assume they have worn in the same way. LL can't really argue any value in a stairs carpet with a hole +7.5yrs!!!0
-
This is an interesting situation, as a landlord I do think the landlord is being totally unreasonable, and if I were in the situation I would not charge but then again I would have replaced the carpet before move in if it were as bad as the report says...
The issue here is if the carpet was in place then whatever condition it was in you could easily argue that there is no value and the tenant would pay nothing, the problem is the tenant as removed and destroyed the landlords possession, if a kitchen was 10-15yrs old and the tenant decided to remove all the doors and throw them away without permission this would be unacceptable....
It comes down to is this wear and tear or is this damage? You could argue that the carpet was unsafe but you would need evidence, especially in the bedrooms. So clearly this is damage.... In my opinion the landlord cannot claim for the carpet as if it were in place but damaged then it would have no value. However because the tenant removed the carpet without permission I suspect there is and argument that the landlord should be entitled to the cost of fitting the new carpet.
I think the amount for the carpet is possible, I replaced a large lounge, vinyl hallway/kitchen, carpet 2 staircases and landings (town house) and a large bedroom, it was not the cheapest carpet and included underlay (you can get felt backed) and was about £1000, so I can imagine really cheap felt backed carpet being this cost. How much of that is fitting, maybe £100..
You have I think two options try to as above argue the carpets had no value and offer £100 for the cost of fitting (stating the alternative is you will take it to arbitration where you will claim for the full amount to be returned)
Or go to arbitration anyway, you might get all your money back, its unlikely the landlord would get all his claim but its a risk, a lot of time and effort.
Personally I would try the compromise route, its a risk for the landlord also to go to arbitration so they might be willing to see sense plus they get some sort of moral victory and you can move on with your life, as said I do not agree with what the landlord has done and I would not act in this way myself as a tenant for 7.5yrs I would think of the amount of rent you have paid I'd be very lenient as I would likely redecorate etc anyway. The issue is you removing the carpets without permission you are at least part in the wrong.0 -
Even if you classify it as 'damage' it's still worth zero.This is an interesting situation, as a landlord I do think the landlord is being totally unreasonable, and if I were in the situation I would not charge but then again I would have replaced the carpet before move in if it were as bad as the report says...
The issue here is if the carpet was in place then whatever condition it was in you could easily argue that there is no value and the tenant would pay nothing, the problem is the tenant as removed and destroyed the landlords possession, if a kitchen was 10-15yrs old and the tenant decided to remove all the doors and throw them away without permission this would be unacceptable....
It comes down to is this wear and tear or is this damage? You could argue that the carpet was unsafe but you would need evidence, especially in the bedrooms. So clearly this is damage.... In my opinion the landlord cannot claim for the carpet as if it were in place but damaged then it would have no value. However because the tenant removed the carpet without permission I suspect there is and argument that the landlord should be entitled to the cost of fitting the new carpet.
I think the amount for the carpet is possible, I replaced a large lounge, vinyl hallway/kitchen, carpet 2 staircases and landings (town house) and a large bedroom, it was not the cheapest carpet and included underlay (you can get felt backed) and was about £1000, so I can imagine really cheap felt backed carpet being this cost. How much of that is fitting, maybe £100..
You have I think two options try to as above argue the carpets had no value and offer £100 for the cost of fitting (stating the alternative is you will take it to arbitration where you will claim for the full amount to be returned)
Or go to arbitration anyway, you might get all your money back, its unlikely the landlord would get all his claim but its a risk, a lot of time and effort.
Personally I would try the compromise route, its a risk for the landlord also to go to arbitration so they might be willing to see sense plus they get some sort of moral victory and you can move on with your life, as said I do not agree with what the landlord has done and I would not act in this way myself as a tenant for 7.5yrs I would think of the amount of rent you have paid I'd be very lenient as I would likely redecorate etc anyway. The issue is you removing the carpets without permission you are at least part in the wrong.0 -
Even if you classify it as 'damage' it's still worth zero.
Well it depends, you cant smash a window and then say the windows are 20yrs old and have no value... If the carpets were in place no matter what state they were in then yes, I don't know which way the deposit arbitration would go... I think if you can prove enough that the carpets were unsafe or were totally warn out then I would agree with you on the zero value, the issue is the tenant apart from the inventory at sign in does not have any other evidence to show the carpets were so bad the removing them was better... Of course it would be up to the landlord to prove when they were actually bought so it could go either way depending on how you look at it...
I would not say its an open and shut case, because of that the best way to avoid the hassle is to compromise if the landlord is willing to compromise, if not then yeah take it to arbitration cause its unlikely the landlord will get the full amount.
I would hope the landlord would get nothing but who knows, there is a risk the landlord could not agree the arbitration and go to small claims court, a judge might rule differently about a tenant removing the carpets without permission and if lost could award court costs hence I say its always better to compromise and move on.0 -
Take it to court. Rubbish landlord0
-
lookstraightahead wrote: »Take it to court. Rubbish landlord
Easy to say when its not your money on the line... I agree though its a !!!!!! landlord... It could be though if the OP provided some resistance they might back down as they might be trying it on...0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards