emotional support animals come home to roost: WWYD?

[RollieStrummer]

snowcanyon wrote:

RollieStrummer wrote:

Ugh. I’ve been through the ESA fight.

We own a condo in a high rise in another city.  It has a very strict “no animals” policy.  It’s the type of place where everyone knows each other, and if you commit an HOA violation you are going to get a notice within 24 hours.

A couple of years ago one of the units is sold and a woman moves in with her 2 dogs.  She is immediately told “no animals”, and responds that they are ESAs. This is followed by a letter from her lawyer to the HOA board outlining her rights under the ADA.  HOA board hires a lawyer, and after several thousand dollars in fees, realizes unless they want a very expensive fight that they will probably lose, they are going to have to let her have the dogs.  HOA board reluctantly allows the dogs, but everyone is steamed.  The dogs are poorly behaved (because they’re pets, not trained service animals), and cause some problems around the building. The dog owner becomes a pariah and gets glares from everyone in the building.

A few months later, she “trips” on some “loose carpet” in the hallway, has a fall and suffers “soft tissue injury” to her chest and arm.  She then files suit against the building, the HOA and by proxy all the other owners.  Well.  Now the HSA mounts a vigorous defense, indicating that they won’t settle for nuisance value.  She is presented with a litany of documented HOA violations and also confronted with video of the alleged fall, which was nothing of the sort.  (She didn’t realize there were cameras in the hallway.)  This drags on for a few months, and eventually she drops the suit. (More likely her lawyer dropped her.)  She then moved out a year ago, and the saga came to an end.

It seems that many ESA owners “know their rights” and are prepared to enforce them, so skirting the law or hoping that they go away is probably not a good strategy.

I had my own fun experience about 3 months ago.  Woman comes into the hospital for her liver biopsy with her golden retriever.  He’s an ESA, and she demands to have him with her throughout the procedure.  I say no way.  I’m not doing a liver biopsy with a dog in the room.  She protests and I list all of the reasons why this is not going to happen:  It’s not safe for her, it’s not safe for me, it’s not sanitary for anyone using that room, etc.  After she realizes that she is not going to bully me into getting her way, we reach a compromise of the dog waiting outside the biopsy room in kind of a control area that’s not open to the general public.

Biopsy goes fine.  We leave the biopsy room and discover that the dog is gone.  Somehow the door was opened and the dog took off.  The patient loses it and starts screaming.  She’s yelling at us, wailing in despair, creating such a racket that staff come running from all over the department to see what’s going on.  A couple of staff stay with her, while everyone else goes searching for the dog.  It’s found fairly quickly wandering down a hospital hallway, dog and patient are reunited and all are relieved, except for the patient who is now threatening all of us with lawsuits, formal complaints, medical board inquiries, etc.  It’s been a few months, and I have not heard anything, so maybe nothing is coming, but the whole incident did make me take a closer look at my FIRE projections.

Should you sell the house?  I don’t know, but stuff like this is the exact reason I don’t own any SFH in the real estate arm of my portfolio.  If there is any legal way to avoid an ESA tenant, do it, but be prepared to be challenged.

 

Click to expand…

ESAs don’t have standing in the hospital. My system, much to my irritation, allows them, but the law says nothing. If they don’t have a caregiver for the animal, you are more than within your rights to say no and reschedule when dog caregiver is available, or you can just refuse to do the procedure. Given your experience, refusal is a much better choice. You were too nice. This is 100% a reason to cancel the procedure and reschedule. Psycho needs you more than you need her.

As to OP-

ESA lady has all the rights here, but she is liable for any and all damages caused by said dogs. You can, and I would suggest, consulting with a local attorney as to whether you can write fines and rules into the lease- if you find animal waste in the yard, $25, she must have renter’s insurance and umbrella that cover any and all liabilities (such as from her pet), if there are noise complaints she is liable, if the dog attacks, she is liable. She’s legally allowed to have an animal; she’s not legally allowed to be a nuisance.

Property manager (or you) need to inspect this place regularly if she rents.

Your rental is doing OK, but it doesn’t meet the 1% rule, so selling would be reasonable, although you will pay mighty and awful taxes. At least you can deduct the 7k in damages when you sell. It sounds like the headaches of landlording are not your thing, which is completely understandable. If it’s not an ESA, it will be something else. The ways tenants can destroy a property are endless.

Click to expand...

You are correct.  I admit I didn't know the hospital policy on ESAs, but she'd made it past the initial gatekeeper, so I followed the path of least resistance, which was to say "Your dog can wait there.  That's your only option."  As part of her ranting after the dog was found, she did mention that the competing hospital system across town has a special program for dogs, and has always been wonderful with her dog.  From now on I'm referring all ESAs to our competition.

[jfoxcpacfp]

RollieStrummer wrote:

From now on I’m referring all ESAs to our competition.

Click to expand...

Thumbs up - great solution!

[FIREshrink]

Re landlording, being disabled is a protected class just like being a religious or racial minority. And having an ESA is permitted. I would not condone many of the suggestions if they applied to a black or Muslim applicant and I'm not interested in skirting the law here. But I do want to know my rights. I think it's a good idea, if we don't sell, to outlining a list of costs for pet damages.

I suppose if we listed for sale and no offers after a month or two we could rerent. But that would not be the intent. We would legitimately be looking to sell, and that would probably be required anyway to protect us from any accusation of discrimination.

[ENT Doc]

Is this really the only and best prospective tenant? I’d be on a fast track to finding anyone else and going with them. The ESA lady can get her lawyer if she wants but no one is going to force me to take a pet into my home if I don’t want it there.

[snowcanyon]

Be sure to contact your insurer. If her dogs will violate your insurance policy (considered a dangerous breed, hx of bites etc), HUD has specifically ruled this is an undue burden on you as a landlord.

 

[ACN]

Can't you just tell them that "sorry, the apartment is no longer available for rent."  Are the applicants going to DEMAND you show them a signed lease or other agreement? No.

I'd tell them no and move on to the next applicant.

[FIREshrink]

I'm pretty sure that's literally the definition of illegal. I wouldn't do it if for a prospective tenant being black, or white, and I'm not going to do it for this reason. Is your suggestion just your gut response, or do you have some specific knowledge of the law?

[MPMD]

FIREshrink wrote:

I’m pretty sure that’s literally the definition of illegal. I wouldn’t do it if for a prospective tenant being black, or white, and I’m not going to do it for this reason. Is your suggestion just your gut response, or do you have some specific knowledge of the law?

Click to expand...

Man I really don't see it like this. Someone with an ESA is not necessarily disabled. I think we all know that this is heavily used by people who just want exceptions made for their pets.

It's nothing like refusing to rent to a person because of race. You are not discriminating against them you are saying you don't want to rent to people with dogs. I think from an ethical and moral standpoint the dog is a pretty important factor here. The crux is whether you think someone with an ESA qualifies as disabled.

I guess if someone were to sue you and you had to be deposed under oath you'd have to state that you were worried about the dog. But you could also answer truthfully that "there were multiple reasons why I was worried this tenant would not be a good fit for my property." I don't think it's going to get to that point, particularly if you don't create a bunch of discoverable emails etc. You can say that you found them unsuitable or that you were worried after talking to a reference. Like WCI said above is someone trying to railroad you on 2 ESA dogs likely to have sterling references?

The letter of the law is that your screening process has to be the same for all prospective tenants but come on, every landlord is doing their own internal vetting. If someone shows up with a swastika tattoo'ed on their forehead and a van emblazoned w/ white supremacy paraphernalia I think many prudent landlords would find a way to find an issue with their application.

[StarTrekDoc]

Landlording can be difficult; and new tenants during a flip is the most difficult part IMHO.  If you don't apply strenuous controls, you'll eventually get challenged by some class and sued for $$$ and then make you exit the whole RE because of the bad experience.

Disclose everything up front.   Pets allowed/not allowed;  credit check, background check ; application fee required upfront.   If it's a no pet community, state this in the listing.  If it's HOA, state it.  All these are flags for doesn't dissuade determined sue happy folk like above.

Our management team goes strictly by the book -- post listing like above,  and first in-first evaluation-first offer.  Literally.   If they qualify based on set criteria for rental, they get approved.   Avoids legal risks.   You definitely protect the financial behind it with all the above stated--- insurance, waivers, fees for calls/issues.

 

[Hank]

We have dogs (and had a highly opinionated cat).  If a tenant is upfront about wanting to have a pet dog at a house, I'm more than happy to consider it.  A golden retriever is almost certainly good to go.  A yappy little fluffy white dog is somewhat questionable, in part because of the risk of noise complaints from the neighbors.  A pit bull is a no-go.  It's as much about the sort of people who choose to have a pit bull (whether white, black, brown, green, or purple) as it is the propensity for pit bulls to attack other dogs and small children.  I also had an applicant who said that dogs are "filthy creatures" and wanted me to paint the (recently painted) condo and replace the clean, less than year-old carpet at my expense before he moved in.  I rather tersely said that we had other folks interested in the place and that the offered rental price didn't include several thousand dollars in unnecessary expenses prior to move-in.

The sort of scammers who want to avoid a $500 pet deposit and claim that their untrained house pet(s) are medically necessary support animals?  Sure, send me the prescription from your MD while I check your references.  The current trend with both employment and landlord references is to say nothing or to blandly confirm dates of employment or dates of tenancy.  That said, if none of your last three landlords will spontaneously say a single favorable thing about you, that's a fail on the background check.

Then again, on the very rare occasions that a prospective landlord has called me, I've been happy to volunteer favorable information if I have it.  "Oh yeah, she was a JAG at the Pentagon.  Nice tenant, never a single late payment.  I'd be more than happy to rent to her in the future."  "Oh, that was a physics teacher at the local high school and his wife.  Super nice people!"  I'm not vouchsafing that the tenant isn't (unbeknownst to me) an axe murderer or that they won't wait until they move into the new house to start cooking meth at home, but to the best of my knowledge it didn't happen under my roof.  At a minimum, neither the police nor the neighbors complained about it at the time.

Maybe it's a result of renting primarily to military and public servants, but I've gotten called about a lot more background investigations for security clearances than I've received calls from prospective landlords.  If there's something truthful and favorable that I can say about a former tenant, I'm willing to do so.  Terrible tenant who was late on the rent and we had to evict?  "Resided at my home from date X to date Y, that's all I can say" with as icy a tone as I can muster, but no actual unfavorable word.  (BTW, the former tenant who had trouble paying rent on time / at all?  Definitely not military, definitely not a civil servant.  Lied on the application too.  Take the time to do your due diligence, even if you're feeling desperate to get a tenant into a vacant place.)

[ENT Doc]

There’s a difference between assuming something about an individual based on group identity (something I’ve routinely opposed on this forum to either benefit an individual or hurt an individual) and knowing something about an individual, particularly one that comes with baggage that you don’t want (swastika guy, ESA girl). Agree with MPMD that I think you’re making this a bit complicated.

The benefit I had when renting out our condo is that I had options. I had multiple applications and let all parties know this. I called prior landlords and documented well. But in the end I selected the tenants that were chosen by rank order of least likely to mess up my place. It sounds like you need better options.

BTW, the difference between my situation and the OPs is that I never used a management company. They never put forth the effort of getting the best tenant. They are incentivized to get A tenant. I was the one who showed prospective tenants the place, looked them in the eye, screened their application, etc.

Luckily I closed on my place today and will NEVER have to deal with this garbage again, particularly in the era of ESA nonsense. I tolerated market crashes and jitters far easier than I tolerated the absurdity of being a landlord.

[jfoxcpacfp]

Hank wrote:

The sort of scammers who want to avoid a $500 pet deposit and claim that their untrained house pet(s) are medically necessary support animals?  S

Click to expand...

So - someone with an ESA animal doesn’t have to pay a pet deposit? What is the reasoning? They continue to be animals that don’t poop in a toilet, right?

[FIREshrink]

I appreciate the opinions. Understand where you all are coming from but think you need to read the law before weighing in. What you are proposing seems to me blatantly illegal. Definitely will ask for references as standard part of background check, and letter from doctor or therapist as required under law for ESA or service animal, but not permissible to ask about nature of disability or job dog is trained to perform.

[MPMD]

FIREshrink wrote:

I appreciate the opinions. Understand where you all are coming from but think you need to read the law before weighing in. What you are proposing seems to me blatantly illegal. Definitely will ask for references as standard part of background check, and letter from doctor or therapist as required under law for ESA or service animal, but not permissible to ask about nature of disability or job dog is trained to perform.

Click to expand...

For the sake of discussion (not trying to be nasty) can I push you on this?

You are willing to sell this house to avoid dealing with an ESA but you don't think looking for a reasonable reason to decline the application is appropriate?

If you are selling the house to avoid renting to them isn't that the same result with the same ethical valence just waaaay more trouble?

 

[FIREshrink]

Not interested in the ethics. Just the law. The law says I am allowed to sell instead of rent, and can also evict a tenant if I want to sell. In contrast choosing to decline a prospective tenant is fine, as long as the same standards are applied to all. In addition the existence of one or more ESAs or service animals cannot be a reason not to rent, just as if tenant were a protected Cass such as race, religion, etc. I agree most ESAs are BS but law does not address that.

If tenant provides a valid letter I am not allowed to challenge the existence of a protected disability or ask what Jon animal performs. Housing has higher protections than, say, your office, the grocery store, or an airplane.