I moved out of an apartment and was charged $569.06 to replace the carpet. There was one stain, approximately 12x12 that I agreed was damaged. When I moved out, the Apartment Manager alleged, in writing, that I had a pet. I did not have a pet. I am an 18 year Flight Attendant and literally lived in the apartment 14 days a month for a year. I had rugs on every floor and there was absolutely no other damage to the carpet. I believe that this is a personal grievance as I sent a letter to the apartment office after trying to get a lock changed after five requests, with no response. I carbon copied that letter to the Management Partner in California. I am at a loss for the next step. I did not damage the carpet and the Apartment Manager KNOWS it was not damaged. Please advise.

Did you do a walk through? Do you have pictures?

You will have to sue them for the charges they deducted. To be successful you will have to prove there were no damages. They will bring in their carpet person who will probably testify that they had to replace the carpet.

I'm confused. In the beginning of your post, you state that you agreed that there was a 12x12 area of carpet that was damaged but that there was "no other damage"; at the end of your post, you state that the carpet wasn't damaged. Which one is it? It can't be both damaged and undamaged.

You should have done a walk-through prior to signing your lease. If there was damage at the time of occupancy, it should have been noted in writing; this would have kept you from being held liable for any damage that the manager is claiming you put there.

As for pictures, Scott, they don't mean a hill of crap. I sued one of my tenants who completely trashed my apartment; she came into court claiming it looked like that when she moved in. I had pictures that proved the apartment was clean and orderly upon her occupancy. The stupid judge gave me a only partial judgment on my bill because she had 2 friends sign affidavits saying she was telling the truth. The only reason I got a judgment at all was because the defendant was stupid enough to admit in court that she was potty-training a dog inside of the house.

Better to have pictures than not. Did your pictures have a date stamp?

Absolutely. I even had notarized affidavits from the previous tenants stating that their security deposit was returned in full because the apartment was left in such good condition. There was no one in the apartment in between the previous tenants and the one I sued, so the damage was quite obviously done by the tenant that I sued. The judge claimed that my affidavits didn't overcome the defendant's statement that the apartment was damaged when she moved in, even though I had the photographic evidence proving otherwise. I even brought samples of the carpeting which showed it wouldn't have needed replacement if the defendant had bothered to take her dog outside.

This particular judge is such a complete joke. He doesn't pay attention in court and he doesn't account for evidence, like the pictures or the carpeting I supplied. I looked into filing an appeal but that's going to cost more than my bill is to begin with. I filed a complaint with the Judicial Commission but that was a complete waste of my time.