Forum
« is unglazed tile crazy?? Painted Brownstone »
March 29, 2009
Assessing Tenant Damages
I did a complete gut on a multi-family brownstone so the tenants moved into an apartment that was brand-new, with all the current amenities.
The first tenants are moving out and I'd like to get a sense of whether three issues exceed "normal wear and tear" and should be covered by their security deposit:
1) Floors...there were 2 girls in the apt. who ALWAYS wore high heels. The result is hundreds of tiny dings in the floor, which is primarily beech with cherry in the bedrooms...really hard woods! Whether I resand them now or not, I feel like this is excessive damage but would love the forum's input.
2) Painting...while the apartment is going to be repainted for new tenants, these people violated the lease by smoking in the apartment...not ALL the time, but bouts of days at a time throughout the past 18 months. Should they contribute at all to the cost of repainting?
3) Stainless steel fridge: They must have used some cheap magnets that left really, really bad scratches on the fridge door. I'm not even sure how to remedy that, but I think that's beyond normal wear and tear, right?
I want to be fair to both them and me, so thanks for your input.
Comments
sounds like normalwear and tear to me...i think you are reaching too far
Posted by: eman1234 at March 29, 2009 10:25 AM
Not seeing the damage or photos makes it hard to tell if the damage exceeds normal wear and tear. However, It's not reasonable to think the apartment will stay in fantastic condition. Perhaps the contrast feels great because you gave your tenants a brand new apartment. It could be like that familiar experience of buying a brand new car and getting your first ding or scratch. Could you be experiencing something like that? Do you think any of these damages will make your apartment difficult to rent?
Posted by: Rick at March 29, 2009 10:40 AM
Simple answer: no, normal wear and tear.
Btw, stainless steel is not magnetic so maybe they had difficulty sticking magnets on it and used super-glue?
If you're going to repaint anyway, what difference does the "bouts" of smoking make?
Posted by: cmu at March 29, 2009 10:48 AM
sounds like normal wear and tear (and yes i am a landlord).
btw. is it legal to rent a non smoking only apartment in NYC?
Dean
Posted by: deancollins at March 29, 2009 10:58 AM
OP here...Rick, I'm sure there some of that "no longer new" shock happening a little bit, but I think I'm primarily focused on the floors. I have had rental apartments before and have never seen anything like this, although those apartments have the standard 2 1/2" oak.
Again, there are literally hundreds of heel dings on what were gorgeous wood floors throughout the apartment. Typically, new floors wouldn't need resanding/restaining for a few years.
Thanks!
Posted by: BKRed at March 29, 2009 11:00 AM
You can specify non-smoking in an owner-occupied multi-family home.
Posted by: BKRed at March 29, 2009 11:30 AM
If the floor is really damaged that bad I would charge the tenants to have the floors sanded and finished. I think that's reasonable. Your tenants should have noticed the damage they were causing.
Posted by: Rick at March 29, 2009 12:27 PM
I'm curious: were you also living on premises, and if so, did you notice the noise and smoke while it was happening? If so, did you say anything at the time? And/or, were there complaints from any other tenants while it was happening? If you were aware of these issues while happening and said nothing, there's a bit of "gotcha" in your reaction now. If you're aware that a tenant is misusing an apartment while it's happening, that's the right time to address the issue and make your concerns, prohibitions and lease violations and costs clear. Wear and tear happens, and painting an apartment before a new tenant moves in is standard. Other damage... part of the answer includes figuring out and taking responsibility for where you were in the picture while it was happening.
Posted by: vinca at March 29, 2009 12:51 PM
i think you can charge them for a cleaning re: smoke. the other stuff is likely wear and tear.
Walking with shoes on sounds like normal wear and tear to me.
Posted by: slick at March 29, 2009 1:24 PM
OP again — Yes, we'd had several conversations about noise, adding carpets and the non-smoking policy throughout their lease. It would stop for a while and start again. But it seems like the general consensus is normal wear and tear, which is why I posted...just to get an objective sense of everything. I think I'm just surprised at what damage the high heels did, which I didn't know about until I began showing the apartment for rental. I'm an Aerosoles/Merrills girl!
Posted by: BKRed at March 29, 2009 1:43 PM
This is not a legal opinion:
I think the smoking is something you may have to deal with and because you'd need to repaint anyway, it's not really lasting or severe damage. As for the floor, I'd be inclined to make them pay for that if the damage is as pervasive as you describe.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at March 29, 2009 2:24 PM
This is normal wear and tear. Damage is things like burn holes in rugs, water damage on hardwood floors, holes in the wall, broken blinds.
BTW, your floors don't sound very hard. I have worn high heels indoors and I have never seen what you describe.
Posted by: mopar at March 29, 2009 3:07 PM
Yeah, this sounds like wear and tear to me--you're reaching.
Posted by: vanburenproud at March 29, 2009 3:29 PM
Sorry for been overly sarcastic, but
Why one would spend tons of money on gut renovation, cherry floors and SS fridge to rent it out after this?
from the NPV prospective: you will not get much more for such apartment. Definitely not the price of gut renovation.
From amortization point of view - the stuff will be ruined at the same rate.
Am I completely wrong? We just got two family. To rent the top floor, I cleaned, carpets, sanded and resealed hardwood, painted walls and this is pretty much it.
Posted by: bobjohn at March 29, 2009 6:27 PM
btw.. i think that it sounds like your contractor installed some cherry veneer engineered wood flooring..the stuff sold at discount flooring stores...it not the fault of your tenant, and if you get it sanded you may be looking at particle board
Posted by: eman1234 at March 29, 2009 7:23 PM
I think if you cant clean the SS refrigerator then it's damaged.
BJ, only in Manhattan can one charge top dollar for a 1-2 bedroom apt with vct tiles, yellow appliances and funky carpets.
Posted by: jack slade at March 29, 2009 9:53 PM
Another landlord placing her vote in the 'normal wear and tear' column.
Posted by: curiositykilledthecat at March 29, 2009 11:35 PM
wear and tear.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at March 30, 2009 2:45 AM
Nicks in the floor sounds like wear and tear. I'm a little skeptical that you really got the floors you think you did. I wear high heels indoors on my wood floors, and have never seen any damage like what you're describing. Unless these tenants weighed 400 lbs each I don't see how they could dent a real hardwood floor just with high heels.
Smoking in the apt, if the lease specified otherwise, is something they should compensate you for, including painting and cleaning.
If the scratches on the refrigerator can't be buffed out, that doesn't sound like normal wear and tear. I've had a s/s refrigerator for three years and it has not a scratch on it. I think you'd have to treat one pretty badly to get deep scratches in it.
Posted by: geekspice at March 30, 2009 3:21 PM
maybe normal wear and tear for a college dorm. did you get a higher rent for renting to roommates? if so, then it's normal wear and tear. if not, then live and learn.
Posted by: raphael9 at March 30, 2009 4:30 PM
Landlord here:
1. floors -- wear and tear
2. paint -- as you say, you have to repaint anyway. Moot point.
3. fridge -- hard to judge without seeing it. Will you need to replace the fridge?
Posted by: basementalist at March 31, 2009 11:48 AM
Actually I've heard stainless steel appliances scratch like crazy, which is why brushed stainless is a better bet.
Posted by: babs at March 31, 2009 3:08 PM
That stuff happens. It's all minor and cosmetic and will not affect the price of renting the apartment to any new tenants... so.... I think you're being a bit ocd.
Posted by: Heather at March 31, 2009 5:16 PM
I'm a landlord: I once charged a departing tenant because her daughter tap-danced with steel-tap tap-shoes on a newly installed oak hardwood floor. I have walked around my own identical floors with high heels and the floors suffered no damage whatsoever. Perhaps the heel marks you are seeing are from something other than high heels, in which case you should charge for sanding and refinishing. Or as others have posted, the floors are perhaps not actually hardwood. Don't charge for smoke-stained walls if you were honestly going to repaint regardless. If there is an inexpensive way to buff the scratches out of the refrigerator, don't charge. If you require a pro, pass the charge to the tenant. If scratches are inevitable and impossible to get out, then learn your lesson and don't buy trendy stainless steel again, but don't bother charging the tenant. Stainless is its way out of style anyway, since the affordable type is cheap, as in crappy and not durable.
Posted by: elizabethJane at March 31, 2009 6:38 PM
Normal wear and tear.
However, if you had a "carpet clause" in the lease that they did not follow then you might have a case regarding the floor. Of course this should have been addressed during the time that they were living there.
Posted by: WrathOfGates at March 31, 2009 10:23 PM
Make sure you rent to all men that don't smoke cook or wear high heals. Sounds like someone complaining about their ass wrinkling their just pressed shirt to me.
Posted by: hannible at March 31, 2009 10:27 PM
Occasional smoking for a year will not stain the walls.
Posted by: mopar at March 31, 2009 10:45 PM
We recently installed solid brazilian walnut floors, one of the hardest woods available, and the documentation specifically warned against wearing high heels. High heels can and will cause this type of damage.
Posted by: jodie1028 at April 1, 2009 9:37 AM
You must be joking. It completely defeats the purpose of the solid wood floor. You mean I cannot see women on high heels just because floor can be scratched?!?
Posted by: bobjohn at April 1, 2009 11:05 AM
No bobjohn only men in sneakers. Evedently you have never had to live with a nosey landlord that looks at every person that goes in and out of your appartment. You have more privacy in a prison.
Posted by: hannible at April 1, 2009 6:37 PM
I think something is wrong if your floors are that damaged from someone wearing high heels. It can't be hardwood. I can see the varnish damaged and scratching, but pit marks? I've worn heels all my life on hardwood floors and never saw that. Only a soft wood would pit. Maybe they lied and gave you engineered or even pine? Women wear heels- especially businesswomen so there isn't much you can do about that.
Everything sounds pretty much like normal wear and tear (I used to be the super for my apartment building when I lived in BH.)
Posted by: bxgrl at April 2, 2009 12:43 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.