Posted by GH on December 19, 1999 at 19:42:44:
I recently was forced out of an apartment because my landlord did not want a cat in the apartment. Even though our lease did not prohibit us from having a pet, he only knew about our dog. We complied and moved out. Our pets did no damage to the apartment and we left it VERY CLEAN. However, he is claiming that stains made by urine were found with a "blaclight" capable of detecting urine. The LL kept all of our deposit claiming that the carpet needs to be replaced. My question is: what would be considered normal wear and tear when you have an animal on the premises? We have a video of what the place looked like when we moved out. We made it just in case this sort of problem arose. The LL was clearly upset about the cat and we feel that he kept our deposit in some sort of revenge. The carpet may have needed to be steam cleaned but not from pet damage, just from having lived there for a year and six months. In addition to the so called carpet damage, he is keeping part of the deposit to fill in nail holes and re paint the place. I was told that he could not charge for this and it would be considered normal wear and tear. Furthermore, we know that he is lying about the urine stains but he refused to do a walkthrough with us (so we did a video). By now, he could have done all kinds of sneaky things in that apartment in order to cheat us out of our deposit. He is living in the apartment now and we also feel that he just wants brand new carpet. He claims that he did not wants pets at all in the apartment and he allowed us to have a pet as a favor. When he found out about the cat,he claims we broke his trust. Let me emphasize that our lease did not mention that we had to clear it in order to have additional pets. Please help!!!!! This is such a frustrating problem because this man is attacking our character by telling bold face lies.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup