A l t e r E g o 9 Posted November 21, 2003 There is a primer product called KILZ which, when properly applied (spray gun) will cover up the thickest coating of smoke and it's odors, I've seen (and smelled) it work on walls that were nearly black with smoke deposits. I think landlords paranoid for property damage should adjust the security deposit to reflect ALL possible damage done by the renters moving in. They got pets? Add the cost of potential repairs to the deposit. Smokers? Same. Once all those details are worked out if the renter doesn't want to pay it, fine they go somewhere else. If the renters are willing to pay the higher deposit based on all the things they do which could lead to costly repairs then fine, they do pay and buy the right for the Landlord to leave them alone! Thats how I would handle things if I were a property owner looking to rent it out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bearded ape 0 Posted November 21, 2003 yeah, but we are not talking about covering the smell, we want it gone for good! and as a smoker of twenty years, sirus, maybe your nose is a little more use to the smell than my lungs are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1 Posted November 21, 2003 Well,as a smoker of 20-years I have some experience with this subject as well,Captain.The smell of smoke can be removed without great difficulty.Pet dander and the smell of pet urine and poo,now that's something else altogether... The smell can't be removed, but rather, covered up. Like I said, I've had experrience fighting odors of all kinds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A l t e r E g o 9 Posted November 21, 2003 The smell can't be removed, but rather, covered up. Like I said, I've had experrience fighting odors of all kinds. I just got through telling you they can be removed Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 8 Posted November 21, 2003 Perhaps they can be removed to the normal person's satisfaction. However, If a person's health is compromised by a progressive lung disease and is extremely sensitive to odors and residues, I don't think any measures are sufficient to take that risk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sirius 0 Posted November 21, 2003 Perhaps they can be removed to the normal person's satisfaction. However, If a person's health is compromised by a progressive lung disease and is extremely sensitive to odors and residues, I don't think any measures are sufficient to take that risk. Oh,okay...so smokers aren't "normal"?Thanks for clearing that up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 8 Posted November 22, 2003 Perhaps they can be removed to the normal person's satisfaction. However, If a person's health is compromised by a progressive lung disease and is extremely sensitive to odors and residues, I don't think any measures are sufficient to take that risk. Oh,okay...so smokers aren't "normal"?Thanks for clearing that up. I meant someone who's health isn't compromised. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Theunicornhunter 2 Posted November 22, 2003 (edited) Oh,okay...so smokers aren't "normal"?Thanks for clearing that up. That's not what she said - she said a person with a weakened respiratory system is not a "normal" as in average - typical person. I too have become extremely sensitive to scents. I avoid the cleaning detergent aisles -in the supermarket because they send me into a coughing frenzy. And renting a car, I don't care what they spray it with...I get headaches from the smoke. I think Alterego offered an excellent and well reasoned solution. Edited November 22, 2003 by TheUnicornHunter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 8 Posted November 22, 2003 (edited) Maybe I should expand further on what I meant. I was referring to someone who is not only sensitive to the smell in that it causes discomfort in breathing and perhaps coughing, but exposure could also result in the worsening of an already-present life-threatening medical condition. "Normal" then would be those individuals whose lung function and capacity is not compromised and would not be at serious risk if exposed. I hope that clears that up, I had no intention to insult anybody just because they smoke. I thought we were talking about the smell, not the people who smoke. Sorry. Edited November 22, 2003 by Indy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sirius 0 Posted November 22, 2003 No apology,necessary.I misread your post and would have replied sooner had I been here.I apologize to you,very sincerely. Click for Spoiler: I'm afraid I've been in a bit of a snit all day,but that's no reason for me to act like an *buttocks* here amongst my friends.I am sorry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 8 Posted November 22, 2003 No problem. I'm just glad we got that little misunderstanding all cleared up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites