Your best bet will be to sue L arguing that L acted unreasonably in replacing all the carpet. Patching or repairing would have solved the problem. You can also argue that some of the carpet damage was *normal* pet wear & tear, which is covered by the pet rent. Ls can't charge a T for normal wear & tear: dirt in carpet after a year of walking on it, flaking paint, friction damage to doorknobs, etc. Here, since L charged pet rent, L can't also charge you for normal wear & tear. Just for exceptional pet damage.
You should also argue that the carpet was 8 years old when you moved in & L would have had to replace it after you moved *even if you had no pets at all*. Therefore, the costs of replacing the carpet are not attributable to your pet; they are a standard cost of doing business. (If the facts fit, of course.)
------------------
This is not legal advice and you are not my client. Double check everything with your own attorney and your state's laws. |