Pet Policys Between Landlords and Tenants
A Landlord Pet Policy
Pet ownership is growing throughout the country. Market and consumer trends point to a continuing increase in the numbers of pet households. Pets have become a more important issue for landlords because more tenants wish to have them than was the case some years ago. While there are no available statistics on the ratio of pet owners who rent, a conservative estimate is that 50 percent of renters own pets. For a number of years now, pets have been increasingly regarded as family members and renters carefully search out living arrangements and amenities suitable for their entire family. A pet friendly atmosphere is a higher priority than a private parking space for many families.
Pet friendly housing is a growing niche market that is underserved in many areas. Renting to pet owners may make good business sense. Landlords may receive the benefits of additional rental income and potentially fewer vacancies, as studies have shown that renters with pets average a longer rental stay than those renters without pets.
Although one usually doesn’t consider all animals as possible pets, there are some people who do consider any animal to be a possible pet. Accordingly, a pet policy must take this fact into account.
A landlord’s simplest pet policy is probably a policy that prohibits all animals on the leased premises at all times. However, landlords who prohibit animals in their rental properties may be reducing the size of their pool of qualified potential tenants when filling vacancies and overlooking an opportunity to increase profitability of their investments.
Those landlords with a “No Pets” policy cite concerns about pet related damage, noise, liability for injury, and insurance restrictions. Landlords who welcome animal companions, advertising “Pet Friendly” living, address these concerns through the use of pet deposits, rent differentials, and written policies and rules.
Additional rent, a separate pet deposit, other pet related financial items, as allowed by state statute, can help offset costs to repair pet damage. Requiring that pets have been spayed or neutered, have successfully completed obedience training, have regular health examinations, are licensed, are current with required vaccinations, and kept under control at all times (leash or harness) can reduce unwanted behaviors and help with safety and security issues.
Any additional deposits, rents, or other fees based on the animal must be accordance with state law and landlords should not charge such amounts for service animals without being sure that doing so will not violate federal, state, or local fair housing laws. For example, pet security deposits may be in addition to the maximum usual security deposit in some states, but the maximum security deposit includes the amount of any pet deposit in other states. In those states not having a limit on a separate animal deposit, the maximum amount is limited by the rental market and the financial conditions of potential applicants.
Even if landlords don’t wish to have pet friendly rentals, they cannot prohibit service animals. However, fair housing laws do not usually prevent landlords from collecting for damages caused by service animals.
Understandably, pet friendly housing does carry some restrictions necessary to protect and preserve quality of life and property value. The most common restrictions are the number of pets allowed per household, the breed of animal, the size (weight and height) of the pet, and proof of required licensing and vaccinations.
Restrictions on types of animals as well as control requirements can be incorporated into the landlord’s rental policies and lease agreements. Most importantly, restrictions should take include those species and breeds of animals that the landlord’s insurance policy will not cover for liability.
Landlords should always prohibit any animals that are excluded from the liability coverage under their landlord insurance policy – e.g., dog breeds that are considered dangerous. If allowed by law where a rental property is located and if market conditions allow, landlords should consider requiring that tenants carry rental insurance that includes adequate liability coverages for tenant-owned animals, with the policy naming the landlord as additional insured.
Landlords should be aware of the fact that an increasing number of jurisdictions are making the landlord fully liable for injuries to others and for damages to the property of others caused by tenants’ animals. Landlords should keep up to date regarding such laws in the state or local jurisdiction where their rental properties are located. In jurisdictions where landlords are made explicitly liable for tenant-owned animals, landlords must take extra care to have adequate lease documentation, adamantly prohibit animals excluded from the landlord’s liability insurance, and always enforce all animal restrictions.
Lease agreements and/or separate “pet agreements” available from most legal document publishers will fail to adequately cover the animal issue or have the degree of detail that should be desired by all landlords. A landlord should create the necessary documentation based on issues mentioned in this article and on the landlord’s experience with tenants that had animals.
It is not possible to provide the text of an adequate animal agreement in this arena because the exact wording can depend on the specific policies desired by a particular landlord as well as by the type and location of the rental property. For example, the types and quantities of animals will be significantly different for a city condominium, where one is affected both by municipal zoning laws and owner association bylaws and rules, than for a house on large acreage located where there are no zoning issues and few nearby neighbors.
In general, a landlord can hold a tenant responsible for any damages caused by the tenant, by members of the tenant’s family, by guests of the tenant, by agents of the tenant, and by animals brought on to the leased premises. This includes damages to property of the landlord inside and outside the tenant’s particular rental unit, damages to property of other tenants, and damages to property of visitors to the property.
However, rather than depend on general principles of law, it is far better to utilize specific lease agreement clauses related to particular potential problems. Such clauses should include both rules/agreements regarding prohibition against tenant actions and penalties for violating those rules/agreements. Although many landlords resist creating long lease agreements, more detail is almost always better than less.
The desired clauses can be totally within the lease agreement itself or a separate “Animal Agreement” addendum can be utilized. Such a paragraph within the lease agreement is often titled “Pets” and a separate document is usually called a “Pet Agreement.” However, it is best to always use the term “animal” in either place in order to avoid arguments about whether or not a particular animal is a pet in the strictest sense if the word.
The animal clauses, wherever found, should include (1) types of animals allowed and/or not allowed, whether those of tenants or their guests; (2) procedures for obtaining approval for animals – e.g., advance written permission, proof of insurance covering risks associated with the type of animal, proof of any shots usually advised for the type of animal; (3) proof of licensing required by local law; (4) care and control of animals – e.g., prohibited areas, restraint, feed only inside unit, noise, care, cleanup, on leash outside of unit or fenced yard, etc.; (5) penalties for having unapproved animals (e.g., lease termination or removal of animal); (6) examples of types of damages (e.g., cleaning, flea treatment, and deodorizing); and (7) immediate remediation of damages discovered by landlord during regular inspections.
Tenants should also be made strictly liable for the entire amount of injury to the person or property of others caused by such animal and tenants shall indemnify the landlord for all costs of litigation and attorney’s fees resulting from same. No animal damage of any kind will be considered to be “normal wear and tear.” Such clauses must be written so as to apply also to any visiting animals brought onto the premises by the tenants, minor family members, and guests or agents of the tenants.
Obviously, different categories of animals potentially create vastly different potential problems and types of damages – for example, fish compared to hamsters compared to certain breeds of dogs. Accordingly, considering the number of issues that must be discussed and the number of different animal categories that must be covered, a good animal agreement will be lengthy. An adequate agreement, whether a section in the lease agreement or a separate document cross referenced with the lease, will likely be 2 or more pages in length. All tenants, whether or not they initially have an animal, should be required to sign the lease having an animal section or a separate animal agreement so that the tenants are aware of the rules and procedures if an animal is acquired after moving in. If the animal issue is not totally covered within the lease agreement, all occupants who sign the lease agreement should also sign the separate animal agreement.
Turning now to issues related to animals other than the typical cat or dog. While there are numerous examples, we will herein consider only fish. Fish, while not usually considered a problem, can be. Even minor aquarium leaks, when undetected for a significant period, can produce thousands of dollars in damages if flooring is ruined, drywall of ceilings and walls of multiple units require repair, and other tenants must be provided temporary housing while their units are being repaired. The agreement should limit the size of the tank to the amount of water which would not cause serious damage upon total collapse of the tank, perhaps at most a few gallons.
Water is heavy! So, for larger tanks specific approval of the landlord or his qualified contractor should be required and the tenant should be required to provide adequate insurance naming the landlord as additional insured. The tenant should be required to place the tank in a safe location within the unit, taking into account structure flooring and supporting framing, including use of weight distribution principles and materials to protect flooring, and to utilize a stand or table sufficient to stably support the weight of the filled tank. The insurance should cover both minor leaks and catastrophic events.
Since it usually impossible to collect a deposit high enough to cover all possible animal-related damages, the best protection is to set screening financial qualifications high enough to improve the chances of collecting for damages that exceed the available deposit. This includes applicants having enough income and assets to cover significant damages and a good credit record that indicates financial responsibility for obligations. Of course, the bar at which financial qualifications can be set depends greatly on the type of property and the location of the property, as well current rental market conditions.