What is the ruling on the pledgee deriving benefit from the mortgaged property (Rahn)?

Primary text

If the pledgee utilizes the mortgaged property through use, riding, wearing, taking milk, exploiting its yield, residing in it, or similar means, the debt owed by the pledgor is reduced by the value of that benefit. Ahmad stated that the reduction should correspond to the value utilized because the usufruct belongs to the pledgor. Therefore, when the pledgee exhausts that usufruct, the equivalent value is due from them to the pledgor, resulting in a set-off (taqas) between the value and the debt, causing them to cancel each other out. This applies to yields such as the rent of a house or the service of a slave.