Landlord Deducted $1,500 for 'Carpet Replacement' After 5 Years - Is This Legal?

Just moved out of my apartment in Los Angeles after living there for 5 years. I kept the place in great condition - cleaned thoroughly before move-out, no holes in walls, everything normal.

My landlord just sent me an itemized deduction statement. He's keeping $1,500 of my $2,400 security deposit for "carpet replacement." The carpet wasn't new when I moved in either - it looked like it was already a few years old.

The carpet had normal wear - some fading, a few matted areas from furniture. No stains, no burns, no pet damage. Just... lived-in carpet after 5 years.

Is this legal? Can landlords really charge you for normal wear and tear? The full replacement cost seems insane when I didn't actually damage anything.

Short answer: No, this is almost certainly not legal in California.

California Civil Code Section 1950.5 is very clear that landlords can ONLY deduct for damage beyond "ordinary wear and tear." What you're describing - fading, matting from furniture after 5 years of normal use - is textbook normal wear and tear.

Here's the key legal concept your landlord is ignoring: depreciation.

Even IF there was actual damage (which it doesn't sound like there was), landlords cannot charge you the full replacement cost. They can only charge you for the remaining useful life of the item that was damaged.

Carpet depreciation example:

• Carpet typically has a useful life of 8-10 years under California case law
• If carpet was already 2 years old when you moved in + 5 years of your tenancy = 7 years total
• At 7 years into a 10-year lifespan, the carpet only has 30% of its value remaining
• Even with ACTUAL damage, max they could charge is 30% of replacement cost

But again - normal wear after 5 years isn't damage at all. You shouldn't owe anything for the carpet.

I'd recommend sending a demand letter for your security deposit citing CC 1950.5 and the depreciation principle. You can also use a security deposit calculator to figure out the maximum they could legally charge even if there was damage.

I manage 200+ units in SoCal. Let me give you the property management perspective and the depreciation schedules we actually use:

Standard Useful Life Schedules (California):

• Carpet: 8-10 years (we use 10 for quality carpet, 8 for builder-grade)
• Paint: 2-3 years (this is the big one people don't know about)
• Blinds/Window coverings: 5-7 years
• Vinyl flooring: 10-15 years
• Appliances: 10-15 years
• Countertops: 20-25 years

After 5 years, even if you completely destroyed the carpet (which you didn't), we could only charge you about 50% of replacement cost. If the carpet was already used when you moved in, even less.

Your landlord either doesn't understand the law or is hoping you don't. Unfortunately this happens a lot. Many small landlords think "carpet looks worn = tenant pays for new carpet" and that's just not how it works.

The matting from furniture you described? That's literally in the definition of normal wear. Same with fading.

The paint thing @PropertyMgmt_Dave mentioned is HUGE. I see so many tenants get scammed on this.

Paint depreciation schedule breakdown:

• Paint useful life: 2-3 years in California
• After 2 years of tenancy, you owe ZERO for paint - even if you painted murals on every wall
• Landlords cannot charge for repainting if you lived there 2+ years
• Small nail holes for hanging pictures? Normal wear and tear at ANY length of tenancy

I had a landlord try to charge me $800 for "repainting" after I lived there for 4 years. Sent one letter citing the depreciation schedule and got the full amount back within a week.

What counts as normal wear vs. damage:

Normal wear (landlord CANNOT charge):

• Faded paint or carpet
• Small nail holes from hanging pictures
• Worn carpet in high-traffic areas
• Furniture impressions in carpet
• Minor scuffs on walls
• Loose door handles from normal use
• Worn keys

Actual damage (landlord CAN charge, but only depreciated value):

• Pet stains or odors in carpet
• Cigarette burns
• Large holes in walls
• Broken windows
• Missing fixtures
• Crayon/marker on walls

I just won a small claims case in Orange County last month with almost the exact same situation. Here's what happened:

My situation:

• Lived in apartment 4 years
• Landlord kept $2,100 for "carpet and paint"
• Sent demand letter, landlord ignored it
• Filed in small claims (cost me $75)

What I brought to court:

1. Move-in inspection report (showing carpet wasn't new)
2. Move-out photos (timestamped)
3. Printed copy of CC 1950.5
4. Depreciation schedule chart from a tenant rights website
5. Receipts showing carpet was 6 years old total

Result: Judge awarded me full $2,100 PLUS the 2x bad faith penalty under 1950.5(l). Total judgment: $4,200.

The judge specifically said landlord charging for carpet at end of useful life was "textbook bad faith." Landlord tried arguing the carpet "looked new" when I moved in but couldn't produce any receipts proving installation date.

Document everything. Take timestamped photos. If they won't return your money after a demand letter, small claims is very tenant-friendly in California for these cases.

@SmallClaimsVictor great example. Want to expand on the bad faith penalty since that's a powerful tool:

California Civil Code 1950.5(l) Bad Faith Penalty:

If a landlord retains your security deposit in "bad faith," you can recover up to 2x the amount wrongfully withheld, PLUS actual damages.

What constitutes bad faith:

• Charging for normal wear and tear
• Failing to provide itemized statement within 21 days
• Charging full replacement cost without depreciation
• Making deductions for pre-existing damage
• Not returning any portion of deposit without explanation

In @FrustratedTenant_LA's case, if the landlord is charging $1,500 for carpet that was already 7+ years into its useful life with only normal wear, that's potentially bad faith on two counts: (1) charging for normal wear and (2) not applying depreciation.

Recommended steps:

1. Send written demand letter via certified mail
2. Cite CC 1950.5, depreciation principle, and normal wear doctrine
3. Give them 14 days to respond
4. If no response or refusal, file small claims
5. Request 2x penalty for bad faith retention

Most landlords settle after receiving a well-written demand letter that shows you know the law. They know judges side with tenants on these cases.

One more thing to add - make sure you're calculating depreciation correctly. A lot of people get confused by this.

Depreciation calculation formula:

Remaining Value = Replacement Cost x (Remaining Useful Life / Total Useful Life)

Example with OP's carpet:

• Carpet replacement cost: $1,500
• Total useful life: 10 years
• Age when OP moved in: ~2 years (estimated)
• OP's tenancy: 5 years
• Total age at move-out: 7 years
• Remaining useful life: 3 years
• Remaining value: $1,500 x (3/10) = $450

So even IF the carpet was completely destroyed (which it wasn't), maximum charge would be $450, not $1,500.

But since there was only normal wear and no actual damage, the correct charge is $0.

The security deposit calculator on this site does this math for you automatically if you enter the item age and replacement cost. Super helpful for demand letters.

UPDATE: You all were right!

I sent a demand letter citing California Civil Code 1950.5, included the depreciation schedule, and mentioned the 2x bad faith penalty. Used the security deposit demand letter template and customized it with the specific details about the carpet age.

Landlord called me within 3 days of receiving the letter. Suddenly changed his tune completely - said there was a "misunderstanding" and that his property manager "made an error."

Got a check for the full $1,500 this week. No small claims needed.

Lessons learned:

• Landlords count on tenants not knowing the law
• A demand letter that cites specific statutes gets results
• Depreciation is your friend - even with real damage, you rarely owe full replacement cost
• Take photos at move-in AND move-out
• The threat of 2x bad faith penalty is powerful motivation

Thanks everyone for the help. This forum literally saved me $1,500!