Legal Question in Landlord & Tenant Law in California

What you consider 'wear and tear,' the landlord considers abuse and damage. What the 2 of you can't agree on is a court order for damages or refund.

You pretty much answered your own question when you said "minimal stains or damage." Damage vs dirt. If you have to re-stucco, then that is a little bit of damage and the whole room does not have to be redone, but spot repair and painted....repair is when there is more tear than wear.

You, the tenant, do not have to pay to have rugs cleaned unless they are stained or severely discolored by more that traffic dirt...but that is my opinion; and if the 2 of you can't settle it....tell it to the judge.

You are not responsible for what is normal wear and tear, but the definition is that of a reasonable person considering how long you have resided there, usual standards of living conduct, etc. Unless you were there only a 2-3 months, steam cleaning the rugs is usually an automatic requirement unless the carpet needs to be replaced. I have no idea what you consider to be minimal stains or damage, but the landlord has the problem that if there is any damage that may reduce the rental value or ease in re-renting the premises. Nail holes are not normal wear and tear, they are intentional but common damage done to the walls tha can only be remedied by putting a picture over them or filling the hole in and repainting the entire wall [spot painting only blends in if the rest of the paint is fairly new]. If the paint is several years old, then to avoid the effect of some walls looking much older than the newly painted ones, often all the wall must be repainted.

You need to take pictures to show what the condition is, but it appears that might be too late.