After six years, carpet's nearly kaput

Q My 86-year-old mother-in-law is moving out of the apartment she has lived in for the last six years. The carpet has not been cleaned or replaced in that time and it is filthy and stained in places.

Can the apartment complex charge us for carpet cleaning or replacement, or because she has lived there for six years, should it be replaced anyway at no charge to us?

A Unfortunately, there is no hard and fast answer. Many times, the charges that a landlord can assess depend on what can be proven about the condition of the carpet at the time of the rental. For instance, if new carpet was installed the day before someone moved in, that is pretty good evidence that the carpet was in good condition.

The condition at move-in is also balanced by the useful life of the carpet. Many landlords write off their carpet over seven years (or less) for tax purposes. Most courts consider the length of the life of the carpet when assessing damages -- a six-year-old carpet just isn't worth as much as a brand-new carpet.

Assuming that the landlord withholds the value of a new carpet from your mother-in-law's damage deposit, your only option is to work something out with them or sue in conciliation court, arguing that the amount withheld doesn't reflect the actual value of the carpet. You should make sure to argue that the landlord has likely deducted most or all of the value of the carpet for tax purposes, and making your mother-in-law pay for a new carpet would be a windfall for the landlord.

If your mother-in-law did not pay a damage deposit, and the landlord sues for the entire value of the carpet, you can raise the actual value as a defense. In addition, if the landlord puts a collection agency on your mother-in-law, you may have to contact an attorney who is familiar with consumer rights.

Most landlords are reasonable and may take something out of her security deposit to repair the stains, but will not charge for new carpet.

In the previous two years of renewing our lease, I don't recall this 60-day notice ever being mentioned. When we renewed in the summer of 2007, we did so after our lease expired and we were temporarily on a month-to-month lease.

How can we be responsible for months of rent on a townhouse we didn't hold a lease to?

A Many landlords have written a 60-day notice requirement into their leases. Some landlords are declaring that this 60-day notice requirement survives the end of the lease, and that the tenant is required to pay rent during the notice period.

Some courts are buying it, and some are not. The law is unclear. First, there is a statute, Minnesota Statute 504B.145, that precludes leases that renew for periods of two months or more, unless the landlord strictly follows the notification requirements in the statute.

Some courts, but not all, have determined that this statute doesn't permit a landlord to hold a tenant to a 60-day notice. If your landlord is withholding your damage deposit, you should consider bringing an action in conciliation court, asking that the notice provision be overturned. While you are not guaranteed success, it might be worth your while.