Security Deposit and Torn Carpet

[James M.]

What can I take out of a security deposit for dog-destroyed carpet that is 10-years old?

Tenants moved out after 4 years. On top of the normal security deposit, my tenant paid a $400 damage deposit to have a pet. The dog tore through some carpet in three rooms. The three rooms require replacement.

The carpet being replaced is over ten years old (6 years while I was there and 4 years with tenant). I would not have had to replace it if the dog had not destroyed it. I understand that depreciation of the carpet means that it has no value left and I cannot charge the tenant for the damage. 

However, this does not seem "fair" that a a tenant can destroy 400 sq ft. of carpet and walk away scot-free. Can I charge to have the carpet in those rooms replace simply because the excessive damage is the only reason I have to change the carpet?

Thanks for any counsel you can give.

[Richard C.]

Originally posted by @Max T.:

So where does the community stand on charging for installation only, and not charging for the cost of the new carpet?

I'm interested in those who said NO to charging for new carpet. Where do you stand on the labor cost?

 Personally I like the advice to just approach the tenant and see what he says.  If he says, "I know the dog tore up the carpet, use the security deposit to cover it" then great.  If he says, "I know my dog tore the carpet.  But you know, it seemed pretty old already..." I might say in return, "You know, the carpet was older, but I am going to need to pay to have it installed earlier than I would have, so how would you feel about something where I pay for the carpet and you pay for the install?"

But in reality, if I rented a place with 6-year-old carpet, and had a tenant stay 4 years on that same carpet, I would consider myself more than lucky.  I basically played with house money for four years.  I wouldn't charge at all.

PS:  Carpet sucks.