The Landlord Protection Agency  
Main Menu, Landlord Protection Agency homepage Membership With The Landlord Protection Agency Free Landlord Services Member Services  

Re: Carpet and paint - Landlord Forum thread 151008

Re: Carpet and paint by Anonymous on February 7, 2008 @19:22

                              
The point of the post is whether tenant is responsible for paint repairs and carpet replacement. The simple answer is the paint would be required anyway after five years under any circumstances. The carpet would not necessarily need to be replaced after five years of use. Often times, appliances and fixtures last longer than the "life span" depending on the user. Carpet that is not excessively used may not wear or tear and may last 15-20 years. Carpet that experiences high traffic may last only 5 years.

The point is whether the tenant is responsible for the excessive wear and tear. We had a ten year carpet that the tenant never cleaned for seven years. Lease specified bi-annual carpet cleaning. The tenant was responsible for partial replacement value. We charged 50% replacement of the new carpet. We, as LLs and tenants, can debate whether it should be 30% or 50% or any percentage at all. That's what courts are for.

[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: Carpet and paint by Anonymous on February 7, 2008 @20:37 [ Reply ]
You're lucky the tenant didn't know better and fight you in court. 50% of replacement cost for carpet that was 7 years old and has a 10 year life span is excessive.

Also, how you depreciate the carpeting does make a difference is assessing its value when you charge the tenant.

Re: Carpet and paint by Sara on February 7, 2008 @22:59 [ Reply ]
Yeah, that's ridiculous. I don't know of any carpets that are still of good quality after they have been used for 15-20 years. Usually by that point they are threadbare and dying to be replaced. As you are renting out a property, you need to keep the place nice, and replace the carpets at the very least, every ten years. on your own dime! That's ridiculous charging your tenants 50% of the cost of the carpet when they were already 10 years old.

My husband and I also rent out a property, and after five years our management company said, okay, carpets are wearing thin, it is time to replace them. So we did. We didn't charge the tenant for them even though the last tenant utterly destroyed everything in the house! Because the carpets were five-six years old by then so it was time for them to be replaced.

Although I do agree that the debating is what courts are for, but if landlords and tenants can work together, there is no need to go to court. Right now I'm in the process of writing a last letter to the landlord. I have all of my facts and laws that I need to have, and I know in a moral and legal sense that my husband and I are in the right, and the court case will most likely go our way. That doesn't mean that I want to go to court... if our landlord would just do the right thing, then we wouldn't be in this situation.

but anyway...

Re: Carpet and paint by an accountant (USA) on February 7, 2008 @23:50 [ Reply ]
Yes, you are really lucky the tenants didn't take you to court. You charged them 20% too much for the replacement if you used a 10 year depreciation. If the carpets were 7 yrs old / a 10 yr depreciation schedule = 70% of their useful life is gone. You could only have charged them with 30% of the replacement value. You committed fraud. If you were using a 5 yr depreciation schedule, you were not entitled to charge them anything since the useful life had already been used according to your own papaerwork with the government. There is no debate over this. When you fill out the IRS schedule, you set the schedule for valuing that carpet for its life. Even if the carpet still looks good, the useful life has already been used up if it is fully depreciated! I suggest you not do this again before you have to explain it to the IRS and a judge. Good thing you posted as anonymous.
Re: Carpet and paint by Anonymous on February 8, 2008 @00:13 [ Reply ]
We do not depreciate carpet or appliances because in the sense of real dollars the write-off is nominal. The reason for the 50% replacement is because the tenant NEVER (maybe once) cleaned the carpet for seven year and purposely ruined it! The tenant had majority use of the carpet from the 2nd to 8th years. The carpet would have remained in good condition with the exception of the high traffic areas that were matted and contained food particles. The same carpet in other units lasted 15 years.
We have a grade of carpet on the steps of the unit that looks brand new and it's 15 years old. Should this carpet be devalued simple because of the age or should quality not count for anything?
We do not depreciate appliances for the same reasons. We purchase quality major appliances and write-off the warranty (if any). Major appliances may have a life span of only ten years, but in actuality appliances can last for 20+ years with good maintenance and good tenants.
For the record, our tenants tend to know more about finances than most and never debate their misuse or neglect because of the quality and attention provided to the unit and their tenancy.
    Re: Carpet and paint by accountant (USA) on February 8, 2008 @01:14 [ Reply ]
    "We do not depreciate carpet or appliances because in the sense of real dollars the write-off is nominal."

    Nominal!!! You really haven't a clue. Between the depreciation, the repairs, and other deductions, I write off nearly all of my rental income. Last year I made many tens of thousands of dollars in rental profit, but I am paying tax on just a couple thousand because of these deductions! (Improvements made at strategic times can be made to help your tax situation.) Open a home office and with those added deductions you can show a negative income and pay no tax on this money. (Of course I do have to show a profit every few years for the IRS.) I suggest an appointment with a tax accountant. You are paying taxes on things you don't need to.

    And yes, the carpet can be devalued simply because of its age. If a tenant ever takes you to court and shows that you are attempting to charge them for 15 year old carpet or to charge them a disproportionate value, the judge may rule that you are acting in bad faith and fine you up to 3 x the damages withheld.


Check-Out
Log in

Look-up
Associations
Attorneys
Businesses
Rentals Available
Rentals Wanted
Realty Brokers
Landlord Articles
Tips & Advice
Tenant Histories

Other Areas
Q&A Forum
Free Forms
Essential Forms
Landlord Tenant Law
Join Now
Credit Reports
About Us
Site Help



Contact The LPA

© 2000-2023 The Landlord Protection Agency, Inc.

If you enjoy The LPA, Please
like us on Facebook The LPA on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter The LPA on Twitter
+1 us on Google