Welcome to the world of me. Time to start liking dogs.

Wish fewer landlords had no-pet policies. Such a slap in the face to renters, who are facing enough pain with rising rents.

It's not that landlords don't like dogs, it's that they don't like having to pay out of their pockets for the damage they and their irresponsible owners cause. Doesn't matter if they are for service or just pets.

I have found a better policy is to allow all tenants to bring one dog or cat (service or not) however I charge the highest security deposit allowed under law, which is 2x the rent for a non-furnished place. This is not a pet deposit, this is just a straight deposit to cover any damage to the property from pet or human, and I ask this of everyone. Tenants always tell me their pets are well behaved. Fine, prove it by putting your money where your mouth is. This way I have plenty of funds available to fix any damage done to the unit when tenants leave.

I get some complaints about the high deposit, and I'm sure some people have not rented with us because of this, but this is the only way I find to legally protect myself against pet damage and in the end I never have a problem finding good tenants so if a couple walk, no problem.

I have also noticed that pet owners seem to be more responsible with their pets if they have a lot of skin in the game (money they've put down for a deposit). Since doing this I haven't had pet problems and I am always able to give tenants back 90-95% of their deposits because there isn't much damage done.

The only negative I see is that it makes housing effectively more expensive for those who can't produce the high deposit, people who would likely still be great tenants. But no worries because you get to bring your pet!

Many landlords like myself love cats and dogs. We volunteer time and donate money to the humane society. We adopt all our pets. I have 4 cats and a dog in my own home, but I don't rent to people with them unless the law says I must do it.

Is it because of the people who claim they need a service pig due to some new condition, like anxiety? No, they're legally protected unfortunately.

Why? First, because they cause damage. Cat pee is hard to get rid of. It's your cat. You're used to it so you don't even smell that "slight odor" but other tenants will. Is that all? No. Because they add a legal liability when your nice behaved dog bites someone for reasons that you say are different than the person who was bitten. Maybe it was the mailman. Maybe my insurance company has to get involved and my premiums go up, but after a suitable time you move to the next home. My insurance company don't lower my premiums again.

As a landlord what I want is for you to take good care of my house. Return it clean and in the same condition that I gave it to you. Don't force me to fix things you should not have damaged. Wear and tear is fine, but pulling up flooring or carpet or anything that requires me to spend my personal time to repair damage and to keep it off the market for a week is very expensive. Sometimes a few weeks off the housing market is the difference between making a small profit and losing money that year. So pay on time and, if you feel inclined, smile and say hello when I (rarely) see you, like I do.

You're probably a good tenant yourself but there are as many horrible tenants as there are terrible landlords. It's certainly not limited to pet people and they're probably better than other tenants in some regards. It's not unusual for tenants to walk away and stick you with damages. Let's say it's $150. Are you going to take a day off to go to court? It's expensive to go to court to fight something stupid. It's stressful. They'll fight to get the full deposit back and claim you should shampoo the rug because the smell is hardly noticeable. Or, they'll say it smelled like cat before. This happens with other things, but pets make it harder. It's really the pet owners who are at fault not the pets.

So that's it in a nutshell. I am happy there are people who'll rent to pet owners but it's not a wise decision sometimes. Ask your landlord if any of her tenants have moved out and abandoned their cats. It seems insane that someone would do this, yet it happens all the time.

The above answer is misleading since there is a distinction between a service dog and (companion, therapy, or comfort ) dog. The latter distinction does not have the same rights as a service dog. Many people have therapy dogs and act as if they are service dogs with all the same rights. You can tell a dog is not a service dog if the owner allows you to pet or touch it. Many non service dog owners simply buy the blue cover and try to pass the dog of as a service dog. You have the right to ask the owner of the dog if it is is a service dog and for what specific purposes is it trained for. People caught passing a dog off as a service dog can be charged w a misdemeanor.

The above question refers to the animal as an assistance dog and not a service dog. It may be that the landlord has the right to not allow therapy dogs that are not trained like service dogs and protected by the ADA.

That has literally nothing to do with my comments.

My point is it's often hard for landlords who love animals to rent to people with pets (not service animals), because of property damage, insurance and liability. It's just more work and more risk. There are as many bad tenants as there are bad landlords.