Can a landlord in California charge for replacing carpet after a tenant leaves after 4 yrs?

Question

The tenant has lived in the apartment for four years, and Supposedly the carpet could not be cleaned, as there were a few stains, on carpet that is minimally six years old. The landlord is claiming the 784 square foot apartment needs to have all new carpeting. Is this legal in California? Also, carpeting was not new, when tenant moved in four years prior.

Answer 1

Yes, this is legal.    He destroyed it, he replaces it.

Answer 2

Yes, if it is damaged beyond normal wear and tear, caused by the tenant or the tenant's guests.

A "few stains" is normal wear and tear. Take your landlord to small claims court.

Answer 3

YES

. . . .the question is whether during your 4 years of tenancy, you did more than normal wear and tear on carpeting. . . .for example stains are not normal wear and tear, nor are cigarette burns nor dog or cat urine, etc.

. . . .the carpet need not have been new, but it needs to have been in satisfactory condition when you rented. . .  

Answer 4

You might have a case if you can prove the carpet could not be cleaned.

The other issue  is the age, if you can prove that carpet of that quality has a life of 6 yrs with normal wear and tear, you might be able to pay for half the cost.  Ask for proof that it could not be cleaned, when it was installed, and the brand and type.

The depreciation range for carpet runs between 5 and 10 years. Most people either use 5 or 7 years. If the LL uses 7 years for depreciation, and the carpet is now 5 yrs old, you could only be charged 2/7 (approx 28.5%) the cost of a carpet that was ruined. If he uses 5 years, you would owe nothing.