Landlord is asking for replacement of 15 year old countertop

Reno, Nevada
General Landlording & Rental Properties
3yFollow

Landlord is asking for replacement of 15 year old countertop

Aditya Vaishampayan
Member since 2022 · 5 posts · 0 votes

The apartment was under agreement and has been used for the last 6 years or more. replacement. These apartments are 2005 built and since then countertop hasn’t been replaced. We took over the lease from someone who has been living there since 2016. We stayed there for an year and moved out due steep increase in rent. The leasing company is asking for countertop replacement as it shows significant wear and tear. Are we entitled to pay for damages? Waiting for your reply.

0Reply
85 views

Most Popular Reply

Brian Bohrer
Real Estate Agent · Colorado Springs, CO · Member since 2021 · 279 posts · 121 votes
3y

Hello Aditya,

You would most likely have to confirm with the local housing authority to ensure what is "wear and tear" but generally in most states the landlord is responsible for wear and tear replacement.  If there was something significant that you damaged and the landlord has photos to prove the damage was not there before you moved in, then you would be liable.  But generally items like appliances, carpet, paint, cabinets etc would examples of items that the landlord is able to depreciate over time on their taxes and therefore is expected to replace when needed.

I hope this helps!  Good luck :)

2Reply
See this reply in the discussion

17 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Brian Bohrer
    Real Estate Agent · Colorado Springs, CO · Member since 2021 · 279 posts · 121 votes
    3y

    Hello Aditya,

    You would most likely have to confirm with the local housing authority to ensure what is "wear and tear" but generally in most states the landlord is responsible for wear and tear replacement.  If there was something significant that you damaged and the landlord has photos to prove the damage was not there before you moved in, then you would be liable.  But generally items like appliances, carpet, paint, cabinets etc would examples of items that the landlord is able to depreciate over time on their taxes and therefore is expected to replace when needed.

    I hope this helps!  Good luck :)

    2Reply
  • Aditya Vaishampayan
    OP
    Member since 2022 · 5 posts · 0 votes
    3y
    Quote from @Brian Bohrer:

    Hello Aditya,

    You would most likely have to confirm with the local housing authority to ensure what is "wear and tear" but generally in most states the landlord is responsible for wear and tear replacement.  If there was something significant that you damaged and the landlord has photos to prove the damage was not there before you moved in, then you would be liable.  But generally items like appliances, carpet, paint, cabinets etc would examples of items that the landlord is able to depreciate over time on their taxes and therefore is expected to replace when needed.

    I hope this helps!  Good luck :)


    Adding three photos shared by landlord on which basis they are charging us to replace the countertop 

    0Reply
  • Matt Devincenzo
    Investor · Clairemont, CA · Member since 2011 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    3y

    Those are clearly damage as the surface material on that formica counter is peeled or rubbed through. So if these counters weren't like that when you moved in then yes you are liable. If they can be repaired then that is what they charge you for, but I am not aware of any counter repair available except an epoxy overlay...and a new formica replacement top is probably the same price. If they replace it they should charge the depreciated value of the top. So assuming that counters have a 27.5 year service life, they should charge you ~38% of the cost (10.5 years remaining / 27.5 year original life)

    1Reply
  • Shiela R.
    Investor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2017 · 304 posts · 347 votes
    3y

    Uh, that seems aggressive on the landlord's part @Aditya Vaishampayan.  Did they give you an itemized receipt?  That is required where I am if I'm going to keep any part of the deposit. But even then, to echo what @Brian Bohrer said - landlords are typically responsible for "wear and tear".  

    Landlord law is city to city, however so get educated on what the rules are where you are.

    1Reply
  • Brian Bohrer
    Real Estate Agent · Colorado Springs, CO · Member since 2021 · 279 posts · 121 votes
    3y

    Hey Aditya,

    My personal opinion is that it most likely wear and tear.  But I am not a lawyer and the defense "the guy on biggerpockets forum said" is never a reputable defense! haha  

    I would not give in and accept responsibility for the damages here, if so, the landlord is going to get a new countertop that will not need to be replaced for another 15+ years for free!  If the landlord can prove there was no previous damage you may have to split the cost, but I doubt you would be held fully responsible.  

    My advice would be to talk with a local attorney.  It is hard to tell from photos what exactly is damaged, the fact the damage is hard to see could also be evidence that the damage is minor and would most likely be considered wear and tear....

    1Reply
  • Tim Herman
    Member since 2018 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    3y

    @Aditya Vaishampayan tell him you will see them in court. Let them justify 17 year old laminate countertops. Not a tax expert but I believe countertops would fall under the 7 year depreciation schedule and so have a zero basis at 17 years. If I am wrong and it is 27.5 years you would only owe 10.5/27.5 or 38%. They have to provide you with an itemized copy of all costs deducted from your security deposit. Check and see if they deduct the countertops or try to bill you. 

    1Reply
  • Kenneth GarrettPro Member
    Investor · Florida Panhandle/Illinois · Member since 2016 · 4k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    3y

    @Aditya Vaishampayan

    Laminate is the most inexpensive counter top. I think 15 years is about the life span of laminate. Unless you cut into them, I would say it’s wear and tear. Laminate will also fade over time. I don’t believe that should be on you unless there is other damage not shown.

    0Reply
  • Nathan GesnerBusiness Member
    Moderator
    Real Estate Broker · Cody, WY · Member since 2010 · 28k+ posts · 41k+ votes
    3y

    My thoughts:

    1. That's minimal damage and probably doesn't warrant full replacement;

    2. Even if it did warrant replacement, the Landlord must prove the damage was caused by you and not a previous occupant;

    3. Even if you are responsible, the Landlord should only charge a depreciated cost. The life expectancy is probably no more than 20 years, which means there are three years of remaining life. Divide replacement cost by the number of years, then multiply that by the number of years remaining. Example: a $6,000 counter with a 20-year life span would cost $300 for each year of remaining life.

    If what you told us is correct, I would fight the charges. Demand to see evidence of the condition before you occupied to prove this was done by you.

    The DIY Landlord Book4.7247 Reviews
    WebsiteView Page
    0Reply
  • Aaron Poling
    Realtor · WV · Member since 2018 · 454 posts · 310 votes
    3y

    If it is actual damage, that is different than wear and tear. I am guessing they are holding a Deposit, and can just withhold the amount from it, refund you the remaining amount and you would have to go to small claims court to fight it. I would try and strike a deal with the landlord, as fighting this in court may not be worth the trouble over the amount they are charging you. In my experience the landlord has the leverage in this situation. I have been on the tenant side of this a few times, and just took my loss to avoid the trouble. When I lease properties out now, I take tons of pictures so the move in condition can be shown and helps protects both parties. Good Luck! Aaron

    0Reply
  • Theresa HarrisPro Member
    Member since 2019 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes
    3y

    If there is excessive wear and tear, then yes the tenant should pay for it; but if the countertop is 15 years old and life expectancy is 25 years, then they should only be paying for the remaining lifespan.  I'm assuming they were not in this condition when you moved in.

    0Reply
  • Will Fraser
    Real Estate Broker · Salt Lake City & Oklahoma City · Member since 2018 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    3y

    I'll also add here that a lot of your defensibility depends on your leasing situation.  

    You mentioned "taking over" a lease, which can mean a few different things and can be really kaccha or pakka.

    If you have property move-in documentation and a property lease then this is a very easy situation.

    If you were off-the-books subletting from the original tenant then it's a lot murkier and I'm not sure why the LL would be trying to charge you instead of the original leaseholder.

    If it's something in between, then it's really going to come down to your local real estate norms.  

    0Reply
  • Rob Chiang
    Rental Property Investor · San Mateo, CA · Member since 2017 · 108 posts · 49 votes
    3y

    Is it obvious damage like a burn from a hot iron?  NO

    It it repeated cuts on the counter from your kitchen knives? NO

    The old, cheap countertop just chipped away.  It's not granite countertop, it's pressed wood.  In my 26 years of experience, any judge will probably go with the tenant on this claim.  Just my .02.  Hire a free tenant-rep lawyer to write the LL a letter.  It's very effective.

    0Reply
  • Aditya Vaishampayan
    OP
    Member since 2022 · 5 posts · 0 votes
    3y

    Thanks so much everyone for sharing their experiences and suggestions. The LL has come down to 25% of the cost of countertop replacement.

    0Reply
  • Aditya Vaishampayan
    OP
    Member since 2022 · 5 posts · 0 votes
    3y
    Quote from @Rob Chiang:

    Is it obvious damage like a burn from a hot iron?  NO

    It it repeated cuts on the counter from your kitchen knives? NO

    The old, cheap countertop just chipped away.  It's not granite countertop, it's pressed wood.  In my 26 years of experience, any judge will probably go with the tenant on this claim.  Just my .02.  Hire a free tenant-rep lawyer to write the LL a letter.  It's very effective.


    I agree that its laminated wood countertop. Yes these are burnt marks from the previous owner from whom we took over the lease. I understand that we took over the responsibility as well. But my question is that the current lease went from july 2016 till  September 2022. makes a total of 17+ years of the countertop. These marks started coming after its completion of its expected life of 15 years. Me and landlord have been exchanging emails they eventually come down to 25% of the cost which is $400. But I am still stating that anyways they would need to change it as its life been completed. They are ignoring this fact completely. What should I do ?

    0Reply
  • Aditya Vaishampayan
    OP
    Member since 2022 · 5 posts · 0 votes
    3y
    Quote from @Will Fraser:

    I'll also add here that a lot of your defensibility depends on your leasing situation.  

    You mentioned "taking over" a lease, which can mean a few different things and can be really kaccha or pakka.

    If you have property move-in documentation and a property lease then this is a very easy situation.

    If you were off-the-books subletting from the original tenant then it's a lot murkier and I'm not sure why the LL would be trying to charge you instead of the original leaseholder.

    If it's something in between, then it's really going to come down to your local real estate norms.  


    Its all pakka. We took over the lease from previous owner with all paperwork from landlord. It states that any damages to the apartment will be our responsibility. But my question is its just countertop which is obvious to have wear tear as it has been used whole day and holds a life of 15 years which has been completed and its a cheap laminated wood countertop. Does that make any difference to my case ?

    0Reply
  • Scott Mac
    Austin, TX · Member since 2019 · 5k+ posts · 5k+ votes
    3y

    HUD says Laminate counter tops are a 15 year service life.

    If your apartment owners follow that (they do not have to), they are at the end of service life. In any event I would assume a prorated amount would be the charge vs 100%.

    [1] How did you do that to them, because it looks like renter damage vs (wear and tear) to tops that will last longer then 15 years, (are these cigarette burns that you sanded down to try to blend into the busy pattern)?

    [2] Did you like living with the busy splotchy looking pattern or would you have preferred a solid or a more conservative pattern?

    0Reply
  • Bill SchrimpfBusiness Member
    Real Estate Agent · Reno, NV · Member since 2014 · 353 posts · 189 votes
    3y
    Quote from @Aditya Vaishampayan:

    The apartment was under agreement and has been used for the last 6 years or more. replacement. These apartments are 2005 built and since then countertop hasn’t been replaced. We took over the lease from someone who has been living there since 2016. We stayed there for an year and moved out due steep increase in rent. The leasing company is asking for countertop replacement as it shows significant wear and tear. Are we entitled to pay for damages? Waiting for your reply.


    Did you get an itemized list of deposit hold-back repairs in 30 days or less?  The landlord has 30 days to itemize repairs or must return the deposit.  If you moved in and did not notify management of the damage immediately after moving in, your position is weakened.  

    [email protected]775-741-2326
    ERA Realty Central - Bill Schrimpf58 Reviews
    WebsiteView Page
    0Reply
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.
Log InJoin for Free