Carpets | The Tenants' Voice
Cookies must be enabled for this site to function properly

Topics / Deposits 

start a new discussion


0 helpful votes
This is the number of people who have indicated that they have found this discussion useful.
153 views 1 replies latest reply: 24 August 2017

I’m a live in landlord and recently a lodger vacated their room leaving the bedroom carpet looking very soiled. The carpet was 2 years old at the time of the lodgers start date and was in excellent condition. I hired a carpet cleaner to come in and restore the carpet to its previous condition however after cleaning the carpet they said the black marks are actually embedded sock fibres and will not come up, from the tenant not vacuuming regularly while walking on it with black socks.  Is this wear and tear or am I reasonable in deducting costs for replacing the carpet? 

Get up to £120 in discounts !

Save 10% on 25+ services for your home and garden when you book with Fantastic Services !

Book now and use promo code FTTV10* to receive 10% OFF the price of 25+ services for your home and garden !

Get 10% OFF the price of your service with our promocode:

  • 10% OFF End of tenancy cleaning
  • 10% OFF Removals
  • 10% OFF Handyman services
  • 10% OFF Garden Maintenance
  • 10% OFF Carpet cleaning
  • 10% OFF 25+ more services for your home and garden

*Use code: FTTV10 to get 10% OFF all services (Excluding Locksmith Services).

Minimum charges and T&C apply! Can not be combined with other offers and discounts. No expiry date.


As a tenant… I think I’d feel it was pretty unreasonable to be asked to pay for this, unless I had been explicitly forewarned to walk around in my bedroom only in bare feet or with shoes on.

After reading your post, I did a quick Google, and found this:

That’s a Carpet Clearners’ forum, and apparently the problem of sock fibres melding with carpet fibres is both well known and a pain to deal with. Best suggestion in that thread seems to be to use a wire brush or hacksaw blade to separate the fibres.

Not sure that the “not vacuuming regularly while walking on it with black socks” is a legitimate position… Because it seems like the sock/carpet-fibre fusion happens whenever the two fabrics come into contact with each other. And it wouldn’t matter if your tenant had walked backwards pulling a vacuum cleaner behind him, the fusing would still have taken place.

Chances are that any arbitrator would take the view that if *YOU* didn’t realise that walking on that carpet with black socks was a no-no, how could the tenant have been expected to know..?

Showing 1 - 1 of 1 Comments
start a new discussion

Post a reply