<p>“If we needed to install either elevators or those electric chairs when they no longer can manage the stairs, install easy access bath tubs, or larger showers (again, 1970’s building with small small small showers), it would be financially impossible.”</p>
<p>The point of the ADA is to make reasonable accommodations for those with disabilities. It is not to put the landlord in a bad position. Installing a railing is a reasonable accommodation, installing an elevator for a single unit is not. When a landlord cannot make reasonable accommodations it is expected that they will allow the disabled tennant to leave the lease.</p>
<p>Going back to the original issue, if I charge them 60% of the carpet replacement for the ruin area and the one adjacent room, that will be about $1400, leave me spending $2000+ for new carpet in two areas, but then having different carpet in the three adjoining rooms with doors.</p>
<p>Is it allowable to charge them, but not replace the carpet now, rather to hold the funds and then pre-sale, replace all the carpet at once so it matches?</p>
<p>somemom, again you’re focusing on “replacement cost.” That’s not the measure of damages. The measure of damages is “value” of the carpet that was ruined. Let’s say, for example, that they totally ruined a carpet in one room, are totally liable for the entire carpet and that you can replace only the carpet they ruined… You still couldn’t collect the replacement cost from the tenants. You could only collect the value of the carpet, which, as has been discussed, is based on the useful life and age of the carpet, as well as its condition when they moved in.</p>
<p>I think we agree on the policy behind ADA, 2red. But is Lafalum’s D disabled? Isn’t it likely her ankle will soon heal and she’ll be off crutches? Does such a temporary condition qualify a college girl as disabled? I’m not an atty, but I don’t think it qualifies by “blue book” guidelines.
If it’s not a disability, then of course the railings and ADA do not come into play at all.
And depending on the actual cost of railings compared to LL’s profit, railings might not be “reasonable”.</p>
<p>To add some fact about somemom’s dilemma, to clarify for those trying to help here:
The carpet was brand new when the tenants came in, they stayed 4 yrs, and new replacement tenants are now in the unit with the carpet unchanged.</p>
<p>Chevda- I believe the replacement cost matters in that if the carpet is a 10 year carpet and the damager lived there for 4 years, they owe for ruining the 60% remaining life of the carpet. So they would owe 60% of a reasonable replacement.</p>
<p>It was suggested I should make sure readers are aware, the place is already re-rented. The prior tenant moved out early with the understanding that if I could rerent sooner than the end of their lease I would refund the rent they paid for those days after new tenants moved in.</p>
<p>I owe them the security deposit AND a few days of rent refund.</p>
<p>The new tenants were told it would be ‘fixed’ but at that point everyone thought a $100-$200 patch would work.</p>
<p>Now I have to determine how to fix it or not and how to charge for it, in a way that is both legal and fair to all involved.</p>
<p>No somemom, they don’t. Not really. Based on your numbers, they’d owe for 60% of the value of the carpet lost. Not 60% of the value of new carpet.
An example: Suppose a basic refrigerator purchased for $500 in 2003 for rental unit was damaged beyond repair. To replace it, a comparable unit now sells for $800.
For this example let’s suppose also that it has life expectancy of 20 yrs. $500 X one half is $250 to charge tenant. Not half of $800.
Personally, that doesn’t seem fair to me; but this is how it has been done in courts in my experience.</p>
<p>Somemom is also considering the idea that the carpet put in now should ideally be exactly the same in all rooms for when the house sells. But it is not likely to be sold for years. Who is to say that exactly matching carpet installed now will still be good at the time of sale? Or that other carpets will still be good at time of sale?
To be “fair” to the new tenants that Op told would be fixed, how about a new carpet for just the 1 area that coordinates with the other area? Then Op’s word is honored and she has a lower cost at this time.
A LL should consider: what is fair, what is legal, and what can be proven. Sometimes one party gets less than what is fair simply because they cannot prove their argument.</p>
<p>If the new tenant expected it to be fixed, why would it not be fixed now? If it is not fixed, is the new tenant going to be given a discount? If you rent for the same price, without fixing the carpet, one could argue that the carpet doesn’t need to be fixed, and you have no reason to charge the old tenant.</p>
<p>agree with that, CTS!
The op has put herself in an awkward position wanting to collect for replacing ruined carpet yet hasn’t replaced any carpet though she has a new tenant in.
Unless, it’s in the new tenant’s contract that LL is required to soon replace the carpet.</p>
<p>“Who is to say that exactly matching carpet installed now will still be good at the time of sale? Or that other carpets will still be good at time of sale?”</p>
<p>Exactly. We bought our house 4 years ago after looking at at least 50 houses, of all ages in many parts of the city. We saw every type of flooring possible-but I can’t recall one with the exact same carpet in every single room. Of COURSE it’s possible to install coordinating colors and flooring, otherwise what would happen as carpet types and brands cease being made or wood ages, etc.</p>
<p>I’m sure the vendors are saying OP can only recarpet everything and that no flooring will match the hardwood. They’re in it to make money. The church I work for just did a remodel and every vendor initially suggested the most expensive option, no matter what we were asking for bids on-custom paint, custom carpet, entire redesign of rooms, when we were perfectly happy and ABLE to go with lower-cost options. But we had to know to ask, or we’d have believed them that they weren’t possible.</p>
<p>Maybe Op should ask WHY coordinating carpet isn’t possible and that new flooring can’t possibly match the old. Stain? Transition strips? NOTHING makes these an option? I don’t buy it. Vendors aren’t exactly looking to sell the lowest-cost options.</p>
<p>^^ This same thing happened when my Grandmother redid her house in the mid-90s. </p>
<p>Of course you can put coordinating floors in! It’s very simple to do, but contractors want the most money. I don’t see why someone can’t put down a hard floor option if carpet was an option to begin with unless there is rot/cement damage that occured under the carpet, in that case you shouldn’t put carpet there either.</p>
<p>The reason I am balking at installing a different flooring in the ‘hall’ only is that standing at the entry you would then see 4 different types of flooring, entry stone, dining laminate, hall carpet and living room carpet. The shared space is about 10’-15’ for the two areas, they would need to be done as one.</p>
<p>Oh, and my original thought was a patch, i am really trying to be fair. They ruined the carpet, they admit it, it’s just bad luck that it works out the way it does with patchability, layout, options, etc.</p>
<p>The flooring people came up with idea of doing the hall in laminate to match the kitchen, but the flooring used is discontinued and they have not found a same wood/ same finish option, it would be using two different woods adjoining each other.</p>
<p>I am not proposing to recarpet the entire house, just the area that is hall/living due to layout.</p>
<p>My thought was that it would really be better to recarpet the entire thing, all rooms, later before selling, 1-5 years, depending on the market. If so, I am thinking to negotiate with the prior tenant to settle on some agreed upon amount for the ruined areas and acknowledge I will not do it now.</p>
<p>“If the new tenant expected it to be fixed, why would it not be fixed now? If it is not fixed, is the new tenant going to be given a discount? If you rent for the same price, without fixing the carpet, one could argue that the carpet doesn’t need to be fixed, and you have no reason to charge the old tenant”</p>
<p>The connection between the cost of the carpet repair and the rent is not relevant.</p>
<p>Don’t know if this is possible, but a number of years ago, our neighbors actually had a carpet dyed. It was a hideous (and stained) yellow and they had it dyed a cocoa brown. It took a day and cost far less than new carpet. Maybe this could be done…and it all would match without replacing…while this is still a rental.</p>
<p>the relevance is that if the stain remains, and there is no reduction in rent, then the tenant that left might argue that he had not stained the carpet as badly as OP claims, or that the staining did not diminish the value, and thereby the LL suffered no [financial]damage.</p>
<p>Have your D go to a physical therapist. There are safe ways to maneuver stairs with crutches (I was instructed how after hip surgery) that are surprisingly easy and do not use railings. But not intuitive, so strongly recommend PT.</p>
<p>What does going to PT have to do with a situation that is clearly in violation of safety codes? Even WITH PT, this code violation should be FIXED.</p>
<p>Now back to the carpet issue.</p>
<p>The landlord is allowed to keep deposits for damages that the tenants do. And that is exactly what the OP should do.</p>
<p>It is a code violation in 2013 but was not a code violation when building was permitted. Therefore the LL has no legal obligation to bring this up to 2013 code standards - it is called ‘grandfathering’. Most likely the wiring, plumbing, pathway widths, stair tread heights, roofing insulation and even windows (non-energy efficient) are also not 2013 code compliant since the building was built in 1967. This railing is a WISH the tenant has…and from Lafalum’s input they have come to a resolution.</p>
<p>As far as the suggestion to go to PT to increase D’s safety…it’s just common sense. Chances are very very good D will encounter other non code compliant stairs…It would be a good idea to know how to manage the situation…or I guess they could just wait until a demanded non required upgrade is implemented for each instance.</p>