Tenant suing in Small Claims Court

[Matt Hadley]

I was recently a tenant in California. I have sued my former landlord in Small Claims court for the entirety of my security deposit, plus interest. I am looking for an assessment of who's likely to win at trial and by how much.

The facts: I rented the landlord's home. The landlord texted me to arrange a walk-through on the day of vacancy. We did not clean the house before we vacated. There was a lot of trash, and we left some stickers that our kid placed on one of the walls. Our child also drew on the carpet with a dry-erase marker. In the pre-move in walk-through, the carpet was listed as worn or stained in three locations, and we both signed that pre-move in checklist. The landlord has no receipts for the carpet's purchase date or installation, but I have a photo that shows the carpet is a minimum of 8 years old.

The deductions: My security deposit was $6,000. I expected a deduction for cleaning and trash removal. On day 17 after my vacancy, the landlord emailed me a list of claimed deductions that totaled to slightly more than $6,000. The landlord did not provide receipts and did not claim the emailed list of deductions was preliminary. Of the over $6,000 in claimed deductions, about $5,000 was for a replacement of the carpet.

The demand letter & lawsuit: On day 22 after vacancy, I sent my landlord a demand letter via mail & email for about $5,000 of the security deposit back. I specified three reasons why: (i) for the pre-vacancy walk-through, he didn't notify me of my right to a pre-vacancy walk-through via hand delivery or mail; (ii) for the list of deductions, he didn't send it via mail or hand delivery and he didn't provide receipts or any other documentation; (iii) for the carpet, he had not established that the carpet had any remaining useful life and therefore failed to show it had any replacement value. 

     My landlord responded via email and declined to return any of the security deposit. He sent a packet of estimates for work, but no receipts. He said that he could have billed me for more, but was being nice. He also included photos of what he claimed were the pre- and post-vacancy photos, but the dates didn't line up with our move-in and move-out dates. The photos of the post-vacancy were date stamped 8 days after the end of tenancy. I filed in small claims court two days after his response.

Since then: I have been in an ongoing dialogue with my landlord about the value of the carpet, since that's the bulk of the case. He has said he doesn't have documentation on its age and acknowledged that it's likely over 10 years old, but has said the carpet's age doesn't matter. He did provide an assessment of the carpet's condition from a carpet cleaning expert, but I called this expert and she said she (a) talked with the landlord 28 days after the end of tenancy, after the landlord had already claimed a full replacement deduction; and (b) didn't inspect the carpet in person.

Summary: I think I'm going to win at trial because my landlord didn't follow California law on anything at the end of my tenancy. He didn't send notices via mail or hand delivery. His list of expenses didn't include receipts or any other documentation. He still hasn't provided receipts for most of the claimed deductions - only his personal write-up. Even if a judge didn't rule based on his failure to follow California law, I think I will win on a refund of the carpet replacement cost. The carpet was at least 10 years old, the landlord has no receipts, and therefore, it seems the carpet has zero useful life remaining. If he had attempted to clean it, I could understand a deduction, but he basically decided not to try to clean it on his own - the only expert he consulted didn't see the carpet in person, and he contacted that person only after my demand letter.

What is your opinion on how this case will go at trial?

[Ricardo P.]

In my personal opinion court can always go either way. It’s not always a certain win for either party. It does seem as if your playing your deck of cards the right way. But then again the landlord can also just be trolling you with receipts in hand ready for you to make the next move so he can counter sue you🤷🏽‍♂️  RealEstate is just an adult version  of Chess you win some you loose some but you always learn a valuable lesson at the end.  

[Russell Brazil]

Everyone who goes to court on this are always convinced they are going to win. They always have reasoning and logic to backup their positions. 50% of these people are wrong.

Any chance you have an arbitration clause in your lease? Arbitration is more likely to work out partially in your favor than the roll of the dice in small claims court.

[Theresa Harris]

Regardless if the carpet was old, your kids ruined any chance of him not having to replace it.  How big was the room and was the carpet only in that room or did it continue throughout the house-meaning it isn't as simple as replacing ti in one room.

If you didn't clean the place and left trash, it isn't just a matter of removing the trash, but also cleaning the place.  He should have given you a break down of the costs-go from there.

[Matt Hadley]

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

Regardless if the carpet was old, your kids ruined any chance of him not having to replace it.  How big was the room and was the carpet only in that room or did it continue throughout the house-meaning it isn't as simple as replacing ti in one room.

If you didn't clean the place and left trash, it isn't just a matter of removing the trash, but also cleaning the place.  He should have given you a break down of the costs-go from there.

Let's assume the entire carpet needed to be replaced. What is its replacement value?

[Kris L.]

@Theresa Harris

To a point. It really depends on what a judge or other established legal opinion on depreciation rates of carpet. If you have a 10 year old carpet in a rental where carpet life is commonly given as 8 years, the tenant could take the carpet with them when they move out and the judge says the landlord gets nothing. They will say the carpet of that age was worth $0. (Extreme example)

[Karl B.]

Any photos of the carpet to show the judge its condition? If it was garbage carpet that's old and worn then even if the landlord replaced it you shouldn't be paying the entire carpeting bill. 

Any photos or video of the condition of the apartment when you moved out? Judges like visual evidence. 

When I evict a tenant I show photos and videos to prove damage is valid without a doubt. If I was a renter I'd take a video of the property on move out day to show its condition - it's also a good idea to do the same on move-in day as well.

[Matt Hadley]

Originally posted by @Karl B.:

Any photos of the carpet to show the judge its condition? If it was garbage carpet that's old and worn then even if the landlord replaced it you shouldn't be paying the entire carpeting bill. 

Any photos or video of the condition of the apartment when you moved out? Judges like visual evidence. 

When I evict a tenant I show photos and videos to prove damage is valid without a doubt. If I was a renter I'd take a video of the property on move out day to show its condition - it's also a good idea to do the same on move-in day as well.

He has photos from 8 days after the end of tenancy that he sent me in his response to my demand letter. He subsequently modified the date on those photos and said they were from the move-out date. I would mention that inconsistency at trial.

In my demand letter, I accepted about $1000 in cleaning expenses, but did not accept the $5000 for the carpet replacement. In the pre-move in checklist, we both noted & signed that the carpet was worn/stained in three separate locations. Visually, the carpet looked very old. The landlord has no receipts from its installation date, but there's a photo from 8 years ago that shows the carpet, so it's at least 8 years old. 

I've offered to settle by accepting all cleaning costs even though his documentation is either inconsistent or missing. Even if the carpet were destroyed beyond repair (which I contest), it does not appear to have any remaining useful life, which makes its replacement value $0, I think. 

[Theresa Harris]

Originally posted by @Matt Hadley:

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

Regardless if the carpet was old, your kids ruined any chance of him not having to replace it.  How big was the room and was the carpet only in that room or did it continue throughout the house-meaning it isn't as simple as replacing ti in one room.

If you didn't clean the place and left trash, it isn't just a matter of removing the trash, but also cleaning the place.  He should have given you a break down of the costs-go from there.

Let's assume the entire carpet needed to be replaced. What is its replacement value?

Depends on how old it was and how many square feet. 

[Matt Hadley]

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

Originally posted by @Matt Hadley:

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

Regardless if the carpet was old, your kids ruined any chance of him not having to replace it.  How big was the room and was the carpet only in that room or did it continue throughout the house-meaning it isn't as simple as replacing ti in one room.

If you didn't clean the place and left trash, it isn't just a matter of removing the trash, but also cleaning the place.  He should have given you a break down of the costs-go from there.

Let's assume the entire carpet needed to be replaced. What is its replacement value?

Depends on how old it was and how many square feet. 

 The landlord has no receipts to show how old the carpet was. I believe it was a very old carpet. I have access to at least one photo that shows the carpet in the rental property 8 years ago. Based on my interpretation of how California treats a carpet of that age, I think he's going to have a challenge demonstrating it had any useful life left because he can't document the date he installed it, or even the type of carpet it was. I believe him that he doesn't know these things and I would be very surprised if he brought receipts showing its age at trial, since he's now set an email twice that he doesn't have any documentation.

[Marcello Di Gerlando]

I'm not and attorney and I don't give legal advise. But, I went through this in California some years ago. The nuances of law escape me now but I remember some of the larger moving parts. Bottom line, judge will want to see you tried to settle. And will probably split right down the middle to shoo you away if it's a close call. Judges don't like wasting time on this stuff, they see it to often. Carpets and messy children are boring. I recommend you try and settle and showing a record of your effort in this regard will work in your favor if the landlord doesn't budge. You could counter sue but 'wining' these types of cases can be a long shot even if your LL is completely in wrong. settle.

[Russell Brazil]

Originally posted by @Matt Hadley:

Originally posted by @Karl B.:

Any photos of the carpet to show the judge its condition? If it was garbage carpet that's old and worn then even if the landlord replaced it you shouldn't be paying the entire carpeting bill. 

Any photos or video of the condition of the apartment when you moved out? Judges like visual evidence. 

When I evict a tenant I show photos and videos to prove damage is valid without a doubt. If I was a renter I'd take a video of the property on move out day to show its condition - it's also a good idea to do the same on move-in day as well.

He has photos from 8 days after the end of tenancy that he sent me in his response to my demand letter. He subsequently modified the date on those photos and said they were from the move-out date. I would mention that inconsistency at trial.

In my demand letter, I accepted about $1000 in cleaning expenses, but did not accept the $5000 for the carpet replacement. In the pre-move in checklist, we both noted & signed that the carpet was worn/stained in three separate locations. Visually, the carpet looked very old. The landlord has no receipts from its installation date, but there's a photo from 8 years ago that shows the carpet, so it's at least 8 years old. 

I've offered to settle by accepting all cleaning costs even though his documentation is either inconsistent or missing. Even if the carpet were destroyed beyond repair (which I contest), it does not appear to have any remaining useful life, which makes its replacement value $0, I think. 

 Why would 8 days later matter? Did someone else move in for a week?

[Matt Hadley]

Originally posted by @Russell Brazil:

Originally posted by @Matt Hadley:

Originally posted by @Karl B.:

Any photos of the carpet to show the judge its condition? If it was garbage carpet that's old and worn then even if the landlord replaced it you shouldn't be paying the entire carpeting bill. 

Any photos or video of the condition of the apartment when you moved out? Judges like visual evidence. 

When I evict a tenant I show photos and videos to prove damage is valid without a doubt. If I was a renter I'd take a video of the property on move out day to show its condition - it's also a good idea to do the same on move-in day as well.

He has photos from 8 days after the end of tenancy that he sent me in his response to my demand letter. He subsequently modified the date on those photos and said they were from the move-out date. I would mention that inconsistency at trial.

In my demand letter, I accepted about $1000 in cleaning expenses, but did not accept the $5000 for the carpet replacement. In the pre-move in checklist, we both noted & signed that the carpet was worn/stained in three separate locations. Visually, the carpet looked very old. The landlord has no receipts from its installation date, but there's a photo from 8 years ago that shows the carpet, so it's at least 8 years old. 

I've offered to settle by accepting all cleaning costs even though his documentation is either inconsistent or missing. Even if the carpet were destroyed beyond repair (which I contest), it does not appear to have any remaining useful life, which makes its replacement value $0, I think. 

 Why would 8 days later matter? Did someone else move in for a week?

 He changed the date stamp on those photos in a subsequent message to indicate that the photos were from the date of move out. The date of the photos is probably relevant if he were to counter Sue, because I would stay accurately that they weren't actually from the move out date and that he manipulated them.

[Matt Hadley]

Originally posted by @Russell Brazil:

Everyone who goes to court on this are always convinced they are going to win. They always have reasoning and logic to backup their positions. 50% of these people are wrong.

Any chance you have an arbitration clause in your lease? Arbitration is more likely to work out partially in your favor than the roll of the dice in small claims court.

The lease requires we go through mediation, but not arbitration. I would prefer arbitration because I feel the landlord has not contacted a lawyer, and then if he were to do so, this would already be resolved. I have no issue paying for the cleaning costs that he itemized when he first told me costs, but I do think the carpet has no replacement value and I feel he is attempting to add on additional costs since my demand letter.

[Paul Enzinger]

I'm in a similar state - NY - and very tenant-friendly. I am in the process of evicting one of my longest-running tenants (she hasn't paid since January!) but our fearless leader Gov. Cuomo has determined in his infinite wisdom that we can't get rid of deadbeats. Everything has to be to a T with those cases. If one thing is missing, the case is thrown out and the landlord has to start over. Depends on the depth of his pocket and if he wants to make an example out of you or if he's principled. I'm attempting to add other income streams to supplement due to this new state of the economy in the meantime.

[Theresa Harris]

Originally posted by @Matt Hadley:

Originally posted by @Russell Brazil:

Originally posted by @Matt Hadley:

Originally posted by @Karl B.:

Any photos of the carpet to show the judge its condition? If it was garbage carpet that's old and worn then even if the landlord replaced it you shouldn't be paying the entire carpeting bill. 

Any photos or video of the condition of the apartment when you moved out? Judges like visual evidence. 

When I evict a tenant I show photos and videos to prove damage is valid without a doubt. If I was a renter I'd take a video of the property on move out day to show its condition - it's also a good idea to do the same on move-in day as well.

He has photos from 8 days after the end of tenancy that he sent me in his response to my demand letter. He subsequently modified the date on those photos and said they were from the move-out date. I would mention that inconsistency at trial.

In my demand letter, I accepted about $1000 in cleaning expenses, but did not accept the $5000 for the carpet replacement. In the pre-move in checklist, we both noted & signed that the carpet was worn/stained in three separate locations. Visually, the carpet looked very old. The landlord has no receipts from its installation date, but there's a photo from 8 years ago that shows the carpet, so it's at least 8 years old. 

I've offered to settle by accepting all cleaning costs even though his documentation is either inconsistent or missing. Even if the carpet were destroyed beyond repair (which I contest), it does not appear to have any remaining useful life, which makes its replacement value $0, I think. 

 Why would 8 days later matter? Did someone else move in for a week?

 He changed the date stamp on those photos in a subsequent message to indicate that the photos were from the date of move out. The date of the photos is probably relevant if he were to counter Sue, because I would stay accurately that they weren't actually from the move out date and that he manipulated them.

 If the photos are accurate, 8 days won't matter.  Try to settle rather than wasting the court's time.

[Adam Martin]

While I don't completely agree with you I believe you have a point, carpet does have a useful life and if it was beyond that technically it is worthless and it will be up to your landlord to prove age and move in pictures to show its condition.  With that said you openly admitted that you left it significantly worse than when you moved in with marker so you do have some responsibility here.  As others have said I would try to settle this one to make it easier however you are in CA which helps your case.  Hopefully you can both reach a happy middle ground however don't be surprised it the landlord let things slide originally that now they are going to try to claim to make up for more of that middle ground.  

[James Mc Ree]

The years-old receipt doesn't seem relevant. The old carpet is fully depreciated and documented as worn. The landlord might be able to claim it was still usable for the next tenant if it wasn't drawn upon, hence he had to replace it. Since you rented it with a few stains already, there might be some credibility to that argument.

The critical piece of evidence that seems to be missing is the landlord's receipt for the new carpet. He has a much stronger case if he can show a $5,000 receipt to remove and replace the carpet. That would establish his actual cost and is usually a requirement to charge the security deposit. It should also be very easy to get. The judge might throw out the entire claim for carpet without the receipt. Check your lease.

It seems to be a judgement call if he produces a $5,000 receipt. My guess is you would end up paying a little bit for the carpet if he has a receipt, based on your side of the story. We don't have the benefit of his side of the story.

[Andrew S.]

Your unwillingness to clean up "a lot of trash" and clean the place will probably give some benefit of the doubt to the landlord. I've seen that personally in court, regardless of the receipts, dates of communication, detailed receipts, etc. If you put in a good honest effort cleaning the place, then maybe you have a case. I respectfully hope the courts side with the landlord. If I had a tenant do nothing, leave a lot of trash, and destroy the carpets, then I tend to have less empathy than if they would have tried. Karma?

[Mike Cumbie]

Couple random points, take them at face value.

1) In CA are they required to provide an itemized list or receipts to the tenant? While they may be required to have them at court are they legally required to provide them to you?

2) The 8 days after vacancy does not mean much to me. I don't think that even in CA they would be required to do the final walk through within 24 hours or anything. Normally they have X days to return the deposit and an itemized list (But like I said I don't live or work in Cali)

3) If you are wrong on the age of the carpet install it may bite you quite a bit. If he bought a whole roll of carpet 15 years ago (Kept in storage and used as needed) and replaced it 6 months before you moved in. He may get a judgement from you on the additional things as well

4) If their are other factors like a lease break or only living there 6 months etc, it will most likely come out in court

5) If I was either party I would stop communicating. Once things hit a certain point let it play out in court. Saying too much always comes back to take a big old bite out of you (On either side). 

Just my 2 cents and good luck!