Should I have to pay to replace all of the carpet in a rental home when just the living room was damaged?

[han]

I have recently moved out of a rental house after 3 years and was wondering about my security deposit and pet deposit. For any clarification needed, my dogs are housebroken and have done nothing to the house but sleep in it. The landlord said that the carpet had to be replaced mainly because the house smelled like dog and there was a large stain in the living room. When I left the house, I vacuumed the carpet 3 times and shampooed them as well. The only thing that didn't come out was a stain in the living room. The stain is fairly light as well, but I would understand replacing that piece of carpet. Also, no one in my three years at the place told me it smelled bad. The landlord also knew there was going to be dogs there as well. Doesn't that mean that he should have realized it might have a scent of dogs after 3 years of habitation? He wants to replace all of the carpet (2 bedrooms, a backroom, and the living room) and charge me for a larger portion than it would be just to replace the living room carpet. So my question is, does he have the right to do this? This problem comes from Austin, Texas if that makes a difference in laws. Thanks in advance for any help.

[jen]

You cannot replace sections of carpet; it will fray. Your landlord has to replace the entire carpet, everything that branches from the living room. If, say, the living room were carpeted, the hall was hardwood, then the rooms were carpeted but not adjoined to the living room, he could not charge their replacement unless they were also damaged.

You admit to damaging the carpet; to suggest your landlord shares the blame for allowing you to have a pet is ridiculous. However, your landlord cannot charge you the full replacement cost UNLESS the carpet was brand new when you moved in. All carpets have a life expectancy (not a hard-and-fast rule, but judge's opinion, typically 10 years). So, if the carpet was already 5 years old when you moved in, you could at most be held liable for half the cost. Of course, this means if the carpet was new, you pay for all of it.

You have to understand that having pets in a rental almost certainly means automatic carpet replacement. The smell does remain, and all pets WILL piss on the carpet at least once, I don't care how well-trained they are.

[madison86]

Offer to split the cost. Since they knew you had dogs, they took a willing risk. You do need to pay for the living room at the least. We went to court over this a few years ago and were told we knew the carpets may need to be replaced so couldn't get full replacement, but the tenant did end up owing part of the cost to do the full apartment.

[beacher]

You need to speak to an attorney ............................

[wendlesora]

That does not sound right to me, What did it say on your lease when you signed? read it again and see if there was a mention about any damage and if there was damage the tenant has to pay full for any replacement, if there is no such clause in the lease then he has no right to charge you. Although he has a right to take your security deposit but that is all.

Consult with a lawyer if you can afford to do so or go to a legal aide lawyer which is free and have them look into the case for you but I would not pay to replace all the carpets when then stain is only in one area.

[oz]

What does it say in your lease agreement? Normally the security deposit is used by the landlord for damages done to the property from the renter. You admit to the stain in the living room, so technically the landlord can charge you for it. If just the living room carpet is replaced, it might make the rest of the carpet look dingy, so it's just a matter of weather or not the landlord will consider that the carpet in the other rooms have just sustained normal wear and tear. Talk to your landlord and see if they are willing to charge you for just the cost of the living room. Again, see what it says in the lease.

[adaya]

A tenant is the only one responsible for the damages he (or in this case his pets) cause. The notion that a landlord shares responsibility because he allowed their tenant to have dogs is ridiculous, and won't get far in court.

The question is, was the carpet damaged. You say the living room was, and depending on the layout of the house, and whether he can match the carpet, one stain very well may mean a entire re-carpeting of the home. If the smell (which does exist to those who don't live there) is strong enough, he has the right to do what's necessary to get rid of it. You always have the option of disputing this before a judge.