Do you have additional local laws?
john76cj7…you can not raise the rent but you are spot on about not making the issue the dog.
9 time in 10 the emotional support animal is only the tip of the iceberg with this type of tenant. Tenants that play this card to have a animal in violation of community rules are usually the type of tenant that resents rules and will generally ignore them. This makes it easy to target them for eviction.
Enforcing community rules is usually all that a owner needs to do to get rid of this type of undesirable tenant.
I’m assuming park owners can be held liable if an emotional support dog hurts someone - if so, if we are forced to allow them, can we force the tenant to have insurance on the dog? Or can the park owner pay for it and charge the dog owner?
Yes, there are some folks who take advantage…they bought the documentation online for $35.00 per year fee. There used to be a way to check on whether the person saw a local professional - regularly seen by the client -thus a true psychological assessment can be made as to true need of emotional support animal. Such a thing actually exists and is therapeutically life savingstrong text!
But now, more and more clinics and psych sessions are indeed done online. And one can “see their shrink” via Internet weekly, and it is indeed bona fide professional treatment.
Not sure why you do not understand that some people DO need true emotional support animals. They can range from a goldfish, to a dog, or cat, or hamster, snake…lizard, etc. To disregard all the people needing one, is to lesson your potential pool of tenants. I can’t say that because it’s a “pit bull” that is not a real emotional support animal, because I HAVE worked with clients who truly NEED an animal, (or they would be in an institution, or chronically suicidal) and the “pit bull mix” was the most available and affordable one around.
I am not saying the incident above be given a free pass. It sounds like this is a serious problem. I just wanted to say that many people DO actually have real reason for emotional support animals, and got them only by seeing licensed therapists, and suffering very real mental health issues. They still might be good tenants, and should not be discriminated against across the board.
I agree there may be some that can benefit from a support animal. What I disagree with is that any individual should be allowed to enter or remain in a community with a animal that is blatantly in violation of community rules. No one truly needs a “pit bull” as a emotional support animal. “Available and affordable” is not justification. Animal shelters are full of all types of animals in need of a owner.
When someone in need has a pit bull it is because they wanted a pit bull not because they needed a support animal. Mental health issues is not a free pass to ignore the rights of others.
A good tenant respects community rules otherwise they are not a good tenant. Enforcing of rules is not discrimination.
1 Like
I contacted my insurance company as this thread seems to be a passionate one. Their position is that you have to let emotional support animals in if the tenant will supply an affidavit that confirms the following:
-
The animal meets the definition of service animal or emotional support animal as defined by the ADA or FHSA.
-
Documentation is supplied by the mental health professional (and details of their qualifications) stating that this specific dog is prescribed for emotional support purposes.
-
Affirmation that the animal would not pose a threat to health and safety of others.
-
Affirmation that the animal will be under control of the owner at all times, and that if the animal is not in control (e.g. runs off without supervision and knocks a kid over needlessly) then the owner will remove the animal from the premises.
-
An understanding that in some states it is a criminal act to falsely claim an emotional support animal.
The definition of “control” is included in the template they provided, and you should speak with your insurance company on how to handle this for your specific policy to ensure you are operating in compliance with federal law and will have coverage in the event something happens.
1 Like
Bottom line is that each community owner must operate their business as they see fit. Their decisions must be made such that they are happy with the operations. The details regarding a owners rights are less important than their confidence in making decisions that best serve them and their community.
I have been very successful and therefor confident with my approach to dealings with tenants and situations such as this in maintaining my community rules. Community rules are not only in place for my benefit they are primarily there to protect the community as a whole.
If a community owner believes it is to their benefit to change or adapt their rules in situations such as this then they should do so.
How many lots do you operate?
I care more about risk/reward and legal liability than I do about being “happy”.
I realize you’re an operator in Canada, so perhaps subject to different rules and regulations, and perhaps you’re also an attorney.
The bottom line is really that your community rules must reflect the owner’s best interest and also reflect compliance with the law. If they are in conflict then the law should supersede your personal preferences for profit or discriminatory practices.
1 Like
I have a small community of 33 lots. It is a relatively high end retirement community. We are subject to the same/similar service and emotional support animals regulations as in the US. No difference.
As I clearly stated from the beginning I do not target the dog and certification to get rid of a tenant in this type of situation. Stupid is as stupid does, and that would be stupid. In any case I have dealt with regarding emotion support animals or any other situation where the tenant had “rights” I make no issue of it what so ever when they present me with it. They are never made aware of the true issue I am getting rid of them for.
In every case, after a initial pushback from the tenant, they eventually move on to where they will be happier.
My community rules are not in conflict with the law. Nor is how I achieve enforcement in violation of the law. The only issue in violation would be my personal underlying motivation in any individual case which only I ever know.
It is one thing to say I am targeting you because of your dog it is clearly another to say I don’t give a dam about your dog you are being served with a eviction for not maintaining your lot to the standard of the community as required by the rules.
One thing I have learned is that this type of tenant is far from being a perfect tenant. They are usually very easy to target. They are generally arrogant and resent having to follow any rules.
The overall welfare of my community supersedes all else. This type of tenant is a detriment and must go.
Am I a arrogant POS. Maybe but I can tell you any time I do get rid of this type of tenant the rest of my tenants are always let me know they are grateful.
The point is you can probably operate wrecklessly and without regard for the law and get away with it as you do with 33 lots. To do so with 1000+ lots is irresponsible and will catch up with you over time.
Separately, because you appear to be onsite/nearby, you seem to take things personally. I evaluate decisions and risk/reward without emotion.
I have done about all of the research on this issue. I won’t bore you with details but here is my advice:
- You missed the boat on this tenant, but get good legal advice on future tenants.
- The dog is no different than a dangerous wheelchair ramp on your property and treat it accordingly. The right to have an emotional assistance animal is not a license to have it behave improperly.
- For your next tenant make sure you have them provide certification from a medical/mental health professional that they need a certain breed of dog to treat their disability. They also need certification that they are disabled.
- Beware the emotional assistance animal vests and certifications. There is no official agency that certifies these animals, just for-profit websites that sell the regalia. As far as I can tell no service actually does any investigation of the need or of the animal.
- Yes, the people above are right in distinguishing between service and emotional assistance animal. Both types of animals are completely legitimate and may not be treated as pets by your agreement.
- There is no good caselaw yet on emotional assistance animals in the federal appellate courts and likely will never be because most of the courts have stated that each case is extremely fact dependent.
- If you start your analysis by treating a service/assistance animal no different than a wheelchair you will be well served. You don’t have to accept an emotional assistance pitbull if a smaller breed will suffice: make the applicant provide proof that they need a pitbull. Hint: it will never happen for emotional assistance needs.
- Don’t forget that the burden is on the applicant to provide the proof of need for a reasonable accommodation and you must make them provide that or be susceptible to future challenges if you asked for one customer to provide it but not another. The law sometimes forces you to forego enforcement of a rule that another law requires you to apply to everyone equally. CYA.
- I could go on for hours but in your case you must go see a lawyer who handles this issue and can align the federal laws with your local laws.
mhp
I agree there is absolutely no place in business for emotions. Emotions would be reckless and there is nothing reckless about my operations. I am cold and calculating when dealing with the legal system. Money and the law have no emotions.
If we were talking about ideal tenants it would be different but they are never ideal tenants. If they were there would be no issue in the first place over their choice of a emotional support animal.
My notices to tenants are 100% legitimate. Our legal system understands enforcement of rules without emotion.
The problem is the tenant, the dog is only a symptom of that problem. The tenant has to go.
I’d report the animal’s activity to the local dog pound. You have the legal right to ask the dog be removed as emotional support animals must be safe and in the control of their owners, else they lose their protected status. If the tenant fails to comply, you can then evict base on a failure to follow park rules.
2 Likes
MHP,
I have a space with 5 “emotional support animals” that all happen to be Pit Bulls. It’s lovely…
You are only required to make a “reasonable” accommodation. Case law has been establish as to what you can use to determine what is unreasonable. Google: Gill Terrace Retirement Apartments, INC vs Johnson (2017).
" In Gill Terrace Retirement Apartments, Inc. v. Johnson, (2017) the Court held that although the person was entitled to an Emotional Support Animal, the person was not entitled to the particular animal they sought, even though it had never attacked another person or pet, because:
- There were “single incidents of aggressive behavior”;
- The dog “exhibited aggressive tendencies;”
- The dog “regularly rears up on her back legs, lunges, or bares her teeth at people and other dogs when outside;”
- The dog “was trained as a guard dog” and was “people and dog aggressive;” and
- Some “residents deliberately stayed indoors to avoid” the dog.
Based on this case, an association looking to deny an emotional support animal should get as much background on the animal as possible before making any decision and be certain to ask others who have come across the animal for their observations. Finally, if your association does intend to deny a request for an emotional support animal, make sure that you have an attorney opinion letter supporting that conclusion so that you can reduce the risk of any successful suit against the Board."
Sounds like this Dog is aggressive. I’d hire an attorney, contact HUD, and start the process of disallowing this particular emotional support animal.
Anthony
1 Like
Ok, Greg, I did mention that pit bulls are often the easiest and most affordable dog that low income folks get their hands on. I personally would not pick one myself, but they are everywhere, and often given away for free. Shelters in my region charge adoption fees for cats and dogs regularly at $209 - $250 ! That’s not realistic for a lot of disabled people.
I agree, that is a pet is in volation, the first time there should be a warning and clear discussion from management, but not an eviction notice. Evicting a person just adds extreme stress into their disability. If the pet gets gets loose continually than that’s when to play harder ball.
I just worked with a case, where the client was placed in subsidized housing…,and his emotional support dog is a…hold your breath and please sit down…
…an 85 pound Rottweiler. Oh my! I love dogs and even I gasped when that thing jumped out of his car and ran at me to “play.” We shall see how this plays out.
1 Like
Money should never be a issue when dealing with conforming with rules. If someone is giving away free alligators I am confident you would not allow them in your community. Honestly they chose a pit bull because they want a pit bull not because of the cost. Truth be told average people would turn down a free pit bull. All of this is irrelevant to me, they are your rules not mine, therefor you can enforce them however you please.
As for the eviction giving a eviction notice is no more than a notice to comply, it is not a eviction by itself. Once they are in compliance you then withdraw the notice. As for adding stress that is the goal in convincing people to comply with rules they are intentionally ignoring.
Consistent enforcement of rules is not about “hard ball” it should be a standard business practice, no exceptions.
Keep in mind this is all based on my personal business practices of strict enforcement/zero tolerance. My residents expect it of me.
3 Likes
Kristin -
I’d like to touch base on a couple things SC related. Reach out when you have an opportunity
ross@sunstonerea.com
8658097328
Thank you