Check out some similar questions!

stevetcg · Sep 23, 2008, 08:13 AM

I recently moved out of an apartment in MA. At the time I moved in the carpet was new, the screens were new and most everything else was cleanish.

I got a letter today telling me that I owe them $850 for new carpet. Now let me explain... this was the cheapest carpet in the history of carpet. If something touched it, it stained. Having a 2 year old made keeping it spotless impossible. We tried literally every cleaning product on the market and even bought a steam cleaner, all to no avail. We had no cleaning deposit and paid all bills/rent on time and completely for 2 1/2 years until we moved out of state.

As for the screens, 2 of them were in the same condition as they were when we moved in. The third broke during a wind storm (reported to the apartments).

The letter we got threatened to simply contact a credit reporting agency to have this added to our credit. AS well, they told us that they contacted the board of health (we kept the place as clean as possible having a 2 year old) regarding the conditions. I just didn't vacuum when we moved out.

Is the apartment complex just posturing to get money from us or do they have a legit case that they can just report to a credit agency?

Thanks in advance.

ScottGem · Sep 23, 2008, 08:16 AM

They will have a professional carpet cleaner testify as to the cost of cleaning. If you did not do a walk through or document the condtion when you left, then they have a good chance of winning in court.

stevetcg · Sep 23, 2008, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by ScottGem

They will have a professional carpet cleaner testify as to the cost of cleaning. If you did not do a walk through or document the condtion when you left, then they have a good chance of winning in court.

Will this be compounded by the fact that I am now 1500 miles away and a lawyer will cost more than the carpet bill?

ballengerb1 · Sep 23, 2008, 08:38 AM

I think you pointed us to a key issue. With all the cleaning you tried you obviously knew there were stains that could not be removed. That in itself constitutes more than noprmal wear and tear. I do not know the sq/ft but $850 isn't outragious. With no walk through I'd say you may be better off to take your lumps and let it go. A lawyermight get this figure lower but then there is the mater of his billable hours.

rockinmommy · Sep 23, 2008, 08:39 AM

If the carpet was new when you moved in and it is now stained in such a way that it can't be cleaned well enough to attract a full-price renter, then yes, they can hold you responsible for new carpet. $850 for even a 1 bedroom apartment is cheap carpet. So if it's any consolation to you they are replacing the cheap carpet with cheap carpet.

The fact that you have a 2 year old isn't the landlord's problem. Any damage that your child does is your responsibility. It's part of the cost of having kids.

They may be bluffing - just hoping you'll cough up some money, or they may actually follow through with taking you to small claims court. As far as them reporting it on your credit... They can report that you owe them money and it would be up to you to dispute the debt. If they have a judgement, then it would be a valid debt. If there's no judgement and they're just trying to collect based on the lease agreement terms then I don't believe they could make it stick on your credit report. But it would still be a pain for you to get it removed, most likely.

stevetcg · Sep 23, 2008, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by rockinmommy

If the carpet was new when you moved in and it is now stained in such a way that it can't be cleaned well enough to attract a full-price renter, then yes, they can hold you responsible for new carpet. $850 for even a 1 bedroom apartment is cheap carpet. So if it's any consolation to you they are replacing the cheap carpet with cheap carpet.

The fact that you have a 2 year old isn't the landlord's problem. Any damage that your child does is your responsibility. It's part of the cost of having kids.

They may be bluffing - just hoping you'll cough up some money, or they may actually follow through with taking you to small claims court. As far as them reporting it on your credit... They can report that you owe them money and it would be up to you to dispute the debt. If they have a judgement, then it would be a valid debt. If there's no judgement and they're just trying to collect based on the lease agreement terms then I don't believe they could make it stick on your credit report. But it would still be a pain for you to get it removed, most likely.

Thanks for the info. Your opinion please: would it be best to sit and wait to see if they file a claim and then pay them or just pay them now? (I know this is just an opinion - basically just wondering if there is harm in waiting)

ballengerb1 · Sep 23, 2008, 08:58 AM

Did you not have a security deposit? I know you said no cleaning deposit but I just want to be sure. They can sue you just as easily if you where there or a 1000 miles away. Forcing a judgement on you is difficult but if they get one you could have a blemished credit rating. The honest thing to do is send them a check, the carpet was damaged.

stevetcg · Sep 23, 2008, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by ballengerb1

Did you not have a security deposit? I know you said no cleaning deposit but I just want to be sure. They can sue you just as easily if you where there or a 1000 miles away. Forcing a judgement on you is difficult but if they get one you could have a blemished credit rating. The honest thing to do is send them a check, the carpet was damaged.

My issue isn't the fact that the carpet was damaged - my issue is that the fact that the carpet was so cheap as it couldn't realistically be properly maintained. I don't suppose a court would care.

No - we had no deposits. Last months rent held in escrow - that's all. As far as I was concerned, when I handed them the keys (11 days early), we were even.

rockinmommy · Sep 23, 2008, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by stevetcg

Thanks for the info. Your opinion please: would it be best to sit and wait to see if they file a claim and then pay them or just pay them now? (I know this is just an opinion - basically just wondering if there is harm in waiting)

Well, do you want the landlord answer, the mom answer, or the legal answer?

Like ballener said, you damaged the carpet... pay them. If you were at a friend's house and your kid went in the other room and ruined something wouldn't you make it right? If you couldn't clean it, wouldn't you replace it? Yes, it was cheap carpet which stains easily. You can also look at that as being glad it was cheap carpet. You could easily have a $2000 carpet bill if it had been pricier carpet...

Legally, they should have to prove damages. Did they send you a bill/receipt, or just their own statement for the $850?

I guess the possible harm in waiting is that 1) if they report it to your credit it will be a pain in the butt to get it removed (if they don't have an actual judgement I believe you could get it removed.) 2) If they take you to court (either in order to be able to report the debt or in response to you getting it removed from your credit report) they will most likely get a judgement against you. Then you'll be sitting where you are now, only with a judgement saying you should pay them - not just them saying it.

I think ultimately you would be found responsible for this by a judge. It's just really up to you if it's worth it to take your chances or not. You dealt with them during the time you lived there... are they pretty on top of stuff and organized, or are they fairly lazy, easy going, likely to let it go by the wayside?

rockinmommy · Sep 23, 2008, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by stevetcg

My issue isnt the fact that the carpet was damaged - my issue is that the fact that the carpet was so cheap as it couldn't realistically be properly maintained. I dont suppose a court would care.

So, do you honestly maintain that if it had been a more expensive grade of carpet that it would have looked better when you moved out? If so, that's your defense if they take you to court. I would just be prepared to have some kind of evidence of this. I don't disagree with you in theory... I've replaced and cleaned a lot of carpet over the years. In reality, the more expensive stuff almost never looks better when people move out than the cheap stuff does.

I believe the landlord's argument about this would be that yes, it was cheap stuff - that's why you're only being stuck with a $850 bill. If it had been a higher grade of carpet that you ruined you'd be looking at double that, at least!

Fr_Chuck · Sep 23, 2008, 10:17 AM

And to be honest, if now you try to reach an agreement, offer them 600 or something as full payment.

ballengerb1 · Sep 23, 2008, 10:24 AM

I certainly like Fr_Chucks idea. They are entitled to own 1 year old used carpet so why should you pay the whole cost of replacement. That gives them new instead of used. The idea is to make them whole but not necssarily better.

stevetcg · Sep 23, 2008, 11:12 AM

I do maintain, and will to the day that I die, that if the carpet would have been able to be cleaned, it would have been. We diligently tried to clean the carpet every spill for the first 2 months we were there to no avail. At that point we gave up figuring it was just bad carpet.

I like the idea of offering partial repayment - I hate that place and those people, but honestly, if I were to have to go to court, there is no way I would avoid paying at least a portion of what they want, considering I would have to fly back for it.

Im also fairly convinced that this is their standard business practice. The complex deals with middle to low income mostly foreign speaking families. It is just a shade off from a slum - which I ended up in for reasons of necessity and stayed at for reasons of hating moving with a passion.

ballengerb1 · Sep 23, 2008, 01:10 PM

Wisest choice, make a settlement ofer. Fr_ said 4600 which I think is good but to get there start by offering half the new carpet cost. Tell them there is depreciation for the first year and they likely depreciate all their property at tax time, I always tried to.