YAL(Landlord)T: What constitutes 'normal wear and tear'

[Skillet49]

My husband and I recently moved out of a rental property where we had lived for a year. We were model tenants and returned the condo in (my opinion at least) excellent condition. However during the walk through with the landlord she noticed a small ring-like stain on one of the bathroom counters (laminate). It's approximately the size of a drinking glass and some of the color has faded away leaving a whitish ring. (side note that we never used bleach or any harsh chemicals to clean the counter. I expect somehow a drinking glass bleached out some color.)

I tried to clean the spot with no avail, but since it was such a small cosmetic blemish I didn't think that it would be a huge deal (I expected we'd have to pay some form of damages for it). Yesterday I receive a call from our landlord explaining that she has tried 'everything' to get the discoloration off and she was going to replace the entire! countertop over this very small stain. She has since gotten quotes from Home Depot and the minimum charge for replacing the laminate counter was estimated at $350.

I've since emailed her and my husband is going to try and fix the spot, however, most websites that we have found pretty much say it's impossible to restore the color of laminate countertops once they've bleached.

I think that it is rather outrageous to demand that we pay for the entire cost of replacing the countertop (which is 7 years old), for a cosmetic blemish that does not impede the functionality of the countertop. I would like to think that this could be considered 'normal wear and tear', but I don't know the typical interpretation of that clause.

I don't mind paying for some damages, I just think that replacing the entire countertop is taking advantage of the fact that she can take it out of our security deposit.

Any thoughts or personal experiences in this matter?

Thanks.

Cliffs:
-Recently moved out of a condo
-Were model tenants (cleaned everything)
-One small ring discoloration on bathroom countertop
-Landlord wants to replace entire countertop and charge us for it
-Is the damage considered 'normal wear and tear'?

Also pic of the offending stain:

Edit: There are actually two separate matching pieces of laminate in the bathroom. She would like to replace just the side with the stain so they still match.

 

[Newbian]

Tell the landlord to place the soap there so you can't see it.

 

[NuclearNed]

Since at this point you may have nothing to lose...

Do you think you might get a very mild abrasive compound (like for a waxing/compounding a car) and see if you can gently "grind" off the the top layer of formica and the stain?

 

[Skillet49]

I've been looking at ways to rejuvenate color or polish out the stain. I'm going to try a few different methods that I found online (silver polish, lemon juice, etc.), unfortunately we've already moved out and given back our keys. So any attempts at fixing the spot would have to be coordinated with the landlord (she has agreed to let me back in at some point to try and fix it).

Also I found this (http://www.americantechnologyinc.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=4) product which while not made for this particular application at least should match the pattern of the laminate and maybe make it look better.

 

[Blieb]

Having to replace the whole countertop is a little extreme. It's friggin' laminate.

I'd have no problem paying $50 ... up to $100 just to make the LL go away.

As a landlord ... you have to realize that wear and tear happens. Things get dirty. Some things need to be replaced, some do not. This is the latter IMO.

 

[Skillet49]

Having to replace the whole countertop is a little extreme. It's friggin' laminate.

I'd have no problem paying $50 ... up to $100 just to make the LL go away.

As a landlord ... you have to realize that wear and tear happens. Things get dirty. Some things need to be replaced, some do not. This is the latter IMO.

I definitely agree, but the landlord considers the property to be an 'upscale' condo and since everything else looks so nice and is in great condition this mark is unacceptable.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Having to replace the whole countertop is a little extreme. It's friggin' laminate.

I'd have no problem paying $50 ... up to $100 just to make the LL go away.

As a landlord ... you have to realize that wear and tear happens. Things get dirty. Some things need to be replaced, some do not. This is the latter IMO.

As a landlord, I would definitely deduct from deposit for that type of stain. It's very obvious, and really not normal wear and tear.


Personally, I won't charge for wall gouges, small cleanable carpet stains, basically anything a paint or carpet cleaning crew can repair.

A stain like that would HAVE to be fixed in one of my properties. No one would leave that unless it's a slumlord style housing arrangement.

That being said, laminate can be dyed and repaired. I only put white laminate in since it's easy to bleach stuff out. If I were in your shoes I'd offer to pay for the replacement, but would DEFINITELY want to pay the repair person directly or have some proof that the full $350 was spent for the countertop.

A lot of scummy landlords would charge you $350 for a new countertop then pull some spare piece out of the garage and cut to fit for $50 in labor.

 

[Genx87]

I agree with sptiallyaware. This wouldnt fall under my normal wear and tear either. I cant rent a place with a ring like that and would need the whole thing replaced. Wear and tear for me is dirty carpets, stuff paint can cover ect.

 

[NoCreativity]

I definitely agree, but the landlord considers the property to be an 'upscale' condo and since everything else looks so nice and is in great condition this mark is unacceptable.

"Upscale" properties don't have laminate counters in the bathroom.

That said, that stain is a bit more than normal wear and tear. But the counter top is 7 years old. I'd offer to split the cost.

 

[NetWareHead]

I think that it is rather outrageous to demand that we pay for the entire cost of replacing the countertop (which is 7 years old), for a cosmetic blemish that does not impede the functionality of the countertop. I would like to think that this could be considered 'normal wear and tear', but I don't know the typical interpretation of that clause.

If there is no way to make the stain go away, then replacement is the only option. It would be the same if you had left a unremoveable stain in a carpet or a wall. Functionally, the countertop can still be used but the stain is hard to ignore. In my opinion, normal wear and tear is a countertop losing its shine, a traffic pattern developing on a wood floor or carpet, sink losing its luster or a stove slowly acquiring some hard to clean grime.

What you see there is actual damage, even if unintentional on your part, but it detracts from the value and look of the countertop.

Note: I'm a landlord.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

"Upscale" properties don't have laminate counters in the bathroom.

That said, that stain is a bit more than normal wear and tear. But the counter top is 7 years old. I'd offer to split the cost.

That is definitely not always the case. In a rental situation, laminate is by far the best option. Granite/solid mix countertops can be stained and/or broken, and NO WAY a deposit would cover the repair of stone or the solid mix stuff.

 

[JJ650]

Cosmetic at best and it's a small stain on a POS countertop.

The wive's business wouldn't ding someone for that and they manage over 500 homes with all sorts of "wear and tear" issues. Your landlord is being a dick and using you as the excuse to replace the counter.
Personally, I would tell him/her to go fuk themselves and have it repaired or prove beyond a doubt the counter requires replacement due to a minor cosmetic stain that is the size of a cup that makes it unuseable.

If they can't rent due to that stain, they have other problems. It's a rental. Not a new god damned house.

 

[NoCreativity]

That is definitely not always the case. In a rental situation, laminate is by far the best option. Granite/solid mix countertops can be stained and/or broken, and NO WAY a deposit would cover the repair of stone or the solid mix stuff.

Good point.

I still don't think OP is responsible for the full counter though. They have a life span and it was already 7 years into it. She shouldn't have to pay 100% replacement on it.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Good point.

I still don't think OP is responsible for the full counter though. They have a life span and it was already 7 years into it. She shouldn't have to pay 100% replacement on it.

I have places with laminate that is from ~1995 and it's fine.

If this were something like, moisture seeping into the seams causing it to expand, I would agree to split the cost.

However, if it weren't for that specific stain the countertop would easily last another 15-20 years in a rental situation.


If I were the landlord I'd charge the tenant ~$100 and pay $200 to replace it with white laminate, so it can be dyed/repaired in the future.

 

[Number1]

Why don't you replace the counter yourself? It would most likely be cheaper. Otherwise, say goodby to your $350. and move on.

 

[Number1]

Cosmetic at best and it's a small stain on a POS countertop.

The wive's business wouldn't ding someone for that and they manage over 500 homes with all sorts of "wear and tear" issues. Your landlord is being a dick and using you as the excuse to replace the counter.
Personally, I would tell him/her to go fuk themselves and have it repaired or prove beyond a doubt the counter requires replacement due to a minor cosmetic stain that is the size of a cup that makes it unuseable.

If they can't rent due to that stain, they have other problems. It's a rental. Not a new god damned house.

You seam to forget that the landlord already has their money. Telling the landlord to go fuck himself will only make him look harder for other defects and ding the tenant with more charges.

 

[NetWareHead]

Good point.

I still don't think OP is responsible for the full counter though. They have a life span and it was already 7 years into it. She shouldn't have to pay 100% replacement on it.

Since when is 7 years considered "old" for a counter top? My first rental house has the original laminate counter tops in the kitchen that were installed in the 80s when the house was built.

They will last another 20 years if taken care of properly. Tenant caused the stain by leaving a cup there. Yeah it sucks but it is what it is.

 

[Skillet49]

As a landlord, I would definitely deduct from deposit for that type of stain. It's very obvious, and really not normal wear and tear.


Personally, I won't charge for wall gouges, small cleanable carpet stains, basically anything a paint or carpet cleaning crew can repair.

A stain like that would HAVE to be fixed in one of my properties. No one would leave that unless it's a slumlord style housing arrangement.

That being said, laminate can be dyed and repaired. I only put white laminate in since it's easy to bleach stuff out. If I were in your shoes I'd offer to pay for the replacement, but would DEFINITELY want to pay the repair person directly or have some proof that the full $350 was spent for the countertop.

A lot of scummy landlords would charge you $350 for a new countertop then pull some spare piece out of the garage and cut to fit for $50 in labor.

Do you have any recommendations for products that can dye laminate and would be close to the particular color? My husband is going to go over to the property this weekend to see if there is any way we can prevent our landlord from having to replace it. He has already asked the landlord about the painting kits you can use for counter tops but she didn't seem like she wanted us to go that route.

And thanks for clarifying that it is beyond normal wear and tear. It was something we weren't sure about because the stain was unintentional on our part and we have taken very good care of the rest of the house.

 

[Skillet49]

Why don't you replace the counter yourself? It would most likely be cheaper. Otherwise, say goodby to your $350. and move on.

How easy or difficult is it to replace a counter for someone with no installation experience? Neither my husband or I have ever done a repair like this and I would really hate if we ended up causing more problems by replacing it. And to be honest, I don't really foresee the landlord being ok with us doing the installation.

 

[Skillet49]

If I were the landlord I'd charge the tenant ~$100 and pay $200 to replace it with white laminate, so it can be dyed/repaired in the future.

This is what we are hoping to be able to negotiate with her. I'm fine with her charging us some money as that was our mistake and it is noticeable. Any suggestions on how to go about discussing this with her in a way that doesn't make her more inclined to look for other problems with the place? We have never had an issue with a security deposit or landlord in the past. It would be worth noting that there are actually two separate pieces of laminate so she would have to replace both pieces if she changed the color. My brother who does a lot of repair work on homes had mentioned that she will be getting a superior product by replacing it, even if it's the same color. What do you think?

 

[Skillet49]

If there is no way to make the stain go away, then replacement is the only option. It would be the same if you had left a unremoveable stain in a carpet or a wall. Functionally, the countertop can still be used but the stain is hard to ignore. In my opinion, normal wear and tear is a countertop losing its shine, a traffic pattern developing on a wood floor or carpet, sink losing its luster or a stove slowly acquiring some hard to clean grime.

What you see there is actual damage, even if unintentional on your part, but it detracts from the value and look of the countertop.

Note: I'm a landlord.

Thanks for your input on the normal wear and tear issue. I see your point. I would say that in the past we have lived at fairly nice places. Not that we've caused any permanent stains in the past, but weren't not used to hearing of someone replacing carpet (for comparison) over a small stain, which is why it seems kind of ridiculous to replace it to us (from a tenant perspective). If it were say $100 to replace it and we had to pay for it, we wouldn't really care. Our concern was more that it is a more costly repair than that. We certainly expect that we'll be charged something for it. If you were in our landlord's position would you charge us for the whole thing or accept splitting the cost with us?

 

[NetWareHead]

Thanks for your input on the normal wear and tear issue. I see your point. I would say that in the past we have lived at fairly nice places. Not that we've caused any permanent stains in the past, but weren't not used to hearing of someone replacing carpet (for comparison) over a small stain, which is why it seems kind of ridiculous to replace it to us (from a tenant perspective). If it were say $100 to replace it and we had to pay for it, we wouldn't really care. Our concern was more that it is a more costly repair than that. We certainly expect that we'll be charged something for it. If you were in our landlord's position would you charge us for the whole thing or accept splitting the cost with us?

Forgetting about cost for the moment, my aim is to restore the countertop (minus wear and tear) to the condition it was prior to damage. Then I see what it would cost to do so. If replacement is what it needed then that's what the tenant is charged. I also determine if the counter had any useful life to it, which in your case, I assume the counter would have served its purpose for a few more years. If the counter is at the end of its life and there is a stain like that, depending on whether or not you were problem tenants, I may let the entire thing slide since I'd be replacing the counter anyway.

I would charge you for the entire thing since the damage forces me to replace the entire countertop.

 

[Linflas]

I am somewhat surprised that something that can be stained was used as a surface in a bathroom. This is the one room in the house you would expect to be subjected to lots of moisture and wet items being set down on the counter tops.

 

[Schfifty Five]

I'm no expert with this, but to me it seems unfair have to pay for the full cost of a brand new countertop.

What you should be responsible for is just the cost to replace the countertop with a similar item. The fair value of the current 7 yr old counter top is not the same value as a brand new one, thus you should only be responsible for paying for an equivalent valued one.

It's like if I drove a 20 yr old car worth $500 and you hit my car and total it, I can't make you pay $20K for a brand new car.

 

[edro]

Give him $100 for a new formica countertop.
Unfortunately, he is going to want to replace it with a nice version, probably stone.