Gotta share :)...

[cybele]

But there's deposit for general possible damage anyway, and if people live long enough, stuff would need to be replaced anyway.
But how come there is no extra deposit for smokers? When somebody smokes inside for a while, a place reeks. Plus fire hazard.
Also there could be an extra deposit for alcohol consumption, guests and parties. Very reasonable.
And what damage children can do to property i wouldn't even go into

As for animals, it is very depressing to see how many pets are abandoned and eventually destroyed when cash-strapped owners can't afford a pet-friendly property.

Now you're being silly.

You can specify non-smoking or outdoor smoking only and a breech is an evictable offense.
Alcohol does not damage anything that cannot be cleaned up.
Guests and children are responsibility of the tenant on the lease, any damage they do to property in excess of general wear and tear that exceeds the bond you can go to court over, as I said before, some people are pigs. Court is EXPENSIVE and that's why landlords have to cover their asses and charge a pet bond.

However indoor animals guarantee damage if you have carpet. 100% of the time. Except fish.
We allow pets in our rentals and we have only once, out of ~20 tenants given back the pet bond. But there was no carpet in that rental.

You can't charge a children bond because if you have kids they are not optional. Animals are.

From an application perspective, if a tenant applied for a property and argued the point of a pet bond there is no way they are getting the keys, it says two things to me
1. They don't think they will get it back
2. They are irresponsible pet owners therefore MORE likely to let their animals destroy things because responsible pet owners acknowledge the costs of having a pet

 

[Xero]

^^^ Yeah that.

M2M you say "then just go to court and sue" like it's that easy. Going to court is expensive and time consuming, and even then any money that is ordered to the landlord can be paid in as little as like $10 a month for long periods of time lol what is the point in that. It accomplishes nothing, it's not worth it. Why take the chance of having to take someone to court rather than charging a pet deposit to cover your butt like any smart owner of rental property would? It doesn't make sense.

 

[singledad]

Honestly, I’m with Cybele and Xero.

I love dogs. They’re awesome and if I had the time to look after one the way it would deserve, I would get one immediately. But let’s be honest – dogs damage stull. They pee on and dig into carpets. They shed. They chew on stuff (fortunately this is rarely the landlord’s problem!).

The standard deposit is there to cover damage caused by people. TO me, it makes sense that the pet deposit comes on top of that. After all, the pet won’t be living there on its own. All the standard things that need to be covered by the standard deposit still apply, its just that now you have an addition source of potential damage –the pet.

LOL. I would actually make sense to charge a kid deposit, or at least a toddler deposit, but that wouldn’t be legal (at least not here). Instead, many landlords simply skirt the law by not renting to people with little kids. Legal? Probably not. But to do anything about it, you will first have to prove that the kid was the main reason they were rejected and that is near impossible to do.

 

[cybele]

They chew on stuff (fortunately this is rarely the landlord’s problem!).

Unless the dog has a thing for wall corners... that one was a shock to find. At least, I really really hope it was the dog that did it.

Instead, many landlords simply skirt the law by not renting to people with little kids. Legal? Probably not. But to do anything about it, you will first have to prove that the kid was the main reason they were rejected and that is near impossible to do.

Very much impossible to do. Of all the applications we have been handed since we first started renting out in 1997, I would say 10% were actually filled in correctly with all relevant information included. That is reason enough to deny an applicant. It is all too easy to pick and choose under that guise. You just call up and get the information on the people you want and anyone who follows up on their application who we didn't want, our property manager tells them that they didn't submit a complete application, and that's the end of it.

Personally, we come from the perspective where we have a large family and a collection of animals, so we are bleeding hearts for these things, hence why we keep allowing animals after so many bad experiences. The wonderful chewed up wall (which cost us in excess of the pet bond PLUS regular bond to repair, but not enough over to take the court), we have had to pull up carpet in one because of cat urine that could not be steamed out (again, cost us the entire pet bond + regular bond, with no excess to replace carpet, but not a large enough excess to go to court, which dropped the rental value of the property, so we lost income), curtains shredded, screen doors chewed through.

The majority of the tenants are good, otherwise we would have to say no to pets, but with one exception (funnily enough, the house where we had to tear up the carpet, the next tenant was a dream, 18yr old single mother with a dog, no one would have picked that to be the ideal tenant), we have always had to use the pet bond, usually carpet cleaning or damages to screen doors and windows.

It works well for the tenants too though. At least, here it does. When you apply for another rental you are required to disclose what portion of your bond was returned to you from your previous rental, but you are not required to disclose information regarding any prior pet bonds. A lot of people would be out of housing simply because no one in their right mind rents to someone who hasn't received full bond back on their previous rental if a pet bond didn't exist.

Meanwhile, I can think of only one family that has done excessive damage due to children in one of our properties, and that whole family was one giant problem. They did more than enough damage for us to wear the court expenses.

 

[mom2many]

I'm not saying pet deposits are a bad thing, but if you are going to rent a house and allow the tenants to have pets then just make the deposit a little higher. There doesn't need to be two separate deposits.

Out here it's done a little different. When I was in Cali, you paid first, last, and a security. Out here they do one months rent, plus a deposit, if your credit is iffy, you've never rented before or have an eviction they do ask for first, last as added security.

Sam had to do one month, plus security and pet deposit, which she offered to pay double of. Since they were getting in early they also had to pay a prorated amount, which she did so she could secure the house.

And cybele, children are optional, we are not required to have them any more then we are required to have pet's. These are all choices we make. Some of us just chose to have more then others lol


I had a cat that liked to chew on the corners of walls, we couldn't figure it out for the longest time, until I caught him. We fixed the wall and put a plastic guard up. It was only that corner so problem solved, but it was weird.

As pup's my dogs were destructive as hell, but not to the property, only to our things. Thankfully they have outgrown that one, I thought I was going to loose my mind!

 

[cybele]

Well no, but you can't exacyly drop the kids off at a shelter when your living situation changes so they can be re-homed.

I guess technically you could, but it's a different situation.

Unless you can, to which I say why hasn't anyone told me about this place yet? TAKE THEM ALL!

 

[TabascoNatalie]

pets can cause some damage, however, they don't smash things up when drunk, don't set fires, don't write on walls, don't steal, don't hoard, don't let in illegal imigrants -- just some of the nasty surprises that PEOPLE can do -- and they do every now and then. Ok, that's a bit extreme.
But taking for example regular people without any vile intentions -- a family with a few kids -- i don't see how a small dog or a cat would be a significant difference in possible damage.
That's why i think blanket rules discriminating pet owners are not always reasonable. Moreover, it is one of the most common reasons so many healthy and beautiful pets are killed each year in those "shelters"

Ok, i won't write more on this thread, don't want it getting personal.

Ps. Do small furries also require a deposit?

 

[Xero]

Well no, but you can't exacyly drop the kids off at a shelter when your living situation changes so they can be re-homed.

I guess technically you could, but it's a different situation.

Unless you can, to which I say why hasn't anyone told me about this place yet? TAKE THEM ALL!

Haha my husband and I are always jokingly saying stuff like "Can't we just give them up for adoption?" or "Surely they must be worth something on Ebay?" lol

 

[cybele]

pets can cause some damage, however, they don't smash things up when drunk, don't set fires, don't write on walls, don't steal, don't hoard, don't let in illegal imigrants -- just some of the nasty surprises that PEOPLE can do -- and they do every now and then. Ok, that's a bit extreme.
But taking for example regular people without any vile intentions -- a family with a few kids -- i don't see how a small dog or a cat would be a significant difference in possible damage.
That's why i think blanket rules discriminating pet owners are not always reasonable. Moreover, it is one of the most common reasons so many healthy and beautiful pets are killed each year in those "shelters"

Ok, i won't write more on this thread, don't want it getting personal.

Ps. Do small furries also require a deposit?

Again, read above at my list of things that I have had to have repaired because of nice normal families with pets. Cats and little puffy dogs do as much damage as big dogs.

Caged animals do not require a deposit provided they stay in cages. If it is observed at an inspection that they have been let out, the lease is void and the family can be evicted.

Can't say we have had any illegal immigrant problems in our properties... that's a little farfetched. Yes, people can do those things, CAN. Hence the general deposit.
Animals WILL damage because animals don't understand that it's not their territory to scratch up/dig up/pee all over. Hence the addition deposit.

It's not rocket science.

 

[mom2many]

Well no, but you can't exacyly drop the kids off at a shelter when your living situation changes so they can be re-homed.

I guess technically you could, but it's a different situation.

Unless you can, to which I say why hasn't anyone told me about this place yet? TAKE THEM ALL!

Well we do have Safe Haven laws which allow an infant (possibly a child) to be dropped off at any hospital, fire station, police stations without any repercussions to the mom.

I mean, if you really want them gone...you could always send them here lol

 

[cybele]

Are they the ones with the little warm cribs in the wall you can put them in, or am I thinking of another country?

I wonder if I can fit a teenager in one of those...

 

[akmom]

But there's deposit for general possible damage anyway, and if people live long enough, stuff would need to be replaced anyway.
But how come there is no extra deposit for smokers? When somebody smokes inside for a while, a place reeks. Plus fire hazard.

I guess "deposit" was the wrong word. What my sister's landlord required was a down-payment for carpet replacement. It didn't matter how long you rented or what condition it was in. Carpet was always replaced after tenants with pets, so the expense for this was paid up-front. I assume this is because of allergens.

I've actually heard of landlords who require the walls to be repainted and the carpets replaced if tenants smoke. About the only way to guarantee this is an upfront downpayment.

Asking for a higher rent price is one solution for renting to pet owners, but then you run the risk of pricing tenants out of the market and missing out on a sale. If they don't live there long, the extra cost might not suffice. If they live there a very long time, you're probably collecting more than you'd need for pet-related damage (which might drive out your tenants sooner). I don't know; it seems fair to just ask them to replace the carpet. There is some very cheap carpet out there.

Where I live, you cannot discriminate against families with children or disabilities. (I believe this supports the social investment we have in these groups, whereas there is rarely a social benefit to another person's pets.) You also cannot charge a damage deposit that is more than two months' rent (it's the law), so that is why the pet downpayment might be necessary to cover the difference. It's nonrefundable so it doesn't fall under deposit rules.

 

[singledad]

<r><QUOTE author="TabascoNatalie"><s>

</s>pets can cause some damage, however, they don't smash things up when drunk, don't set fires, don't write on walls, don't steal, don't hoard, don't let in illegal imigrants -- just some of the nasty surprises that PEOPLE can do -- and they do every now and then. <e>

</e></QUOTE>

No, pets don’t do these things. But PET OWNERS do, which is why you can’t count on the general deposit to replace the carpet the dog peed on and the curtains the cat tore. As I’ve said before:<br/>

<QUOTE author="singledad"><s>

</s> The standard deposit is there to cover damage caused by people. TO me, it makes sense that the pet deposit comes on top of that. After all, the pet won’t be living there on its own. All the standard things that need to be covered by the standard deposit still apply, its just that now you have an addition source of potential damage –the pet.<e>

</e></QUOTE>

You seem to think that there is some kind of guarantee that if there are pets, the general deposit won’t be needed to repair any damage caused by the people, so it can be used to repair the damage done by pets &lt;E&gt;<EMOJI seq="1f615"></EMOJI>&lt;/E&gt;&lt;/r&gt;

 

[mom2many]

Are they the ones with the little warm cribs in the wall you can put them in, or am I thinking of another country?

I wonder if I can fit a teenager in one of those...

I'm sure if we pushed hard enough we could