No Pets Rental Policy
We’ve been landlords for many years, and have always had a strict no pets policy. This has never been a problem in finding tenants. We keep nice apartments, rent a bit below market, and do our best to deal directly with tenants so they can afford a broker fee. However, our most recent vacancy is…
We’ve been landlords for many years, and have always had a strict no pets policy. This has never been a problem in finding tenants. We keep nice apartments, rent a bit below market, and do our best to deal directly with tenants so they can afford a broker fee.
However, our most recent vacancy is sitting open longer than usual, so we’ve signed on with a broker. Broker tells us they’ve had 4 applicants who wanted it at the price we’re listed, but all have pets. She is sure (and so are we) that the price is right. We are wondering if the no pets policy could really be getting in the way.
Note that this is a family sized apartment: 2 beds, 2 baths, washer/dryer, private yard.
Would appreciate thoughts of landlords and renters on three questions:
1. Is a no pets policy really that unusual?
2. If you do accept pets, what safeguards do you put in place to manage the possible problems (damage, disrupting other tenants, etc). Higher deposit? Case-by-case, so you meet the pet first?
3. Do that many people really have pets, or is this a function of the fact that this particular apartment is family-sized/near the park/etc?
Many thanks.
I’m sorry for your trouble, but as a pet person/animal activist and pet-lovin’ landlord, I’m kind of happy to hear this. Again, don’t take it personal. It’s just that, if more apartments were pet friendly, fewer animals would die in shelters or starve on the streets each year.
Personally, I think cats do more damage than dogs. Mine anyway. They can scratch molding and pee in the wrong places. Also, it’s been my experience that smaller dogs tend to be more neurotic than big ones. They are yappier than larger dogs, IMO.
I know all about every kind of damage pets can cause, because I have several. When renting to tenants, I add a rider in the lease that states the apartment is pet friendly but they will have to pay for any damage to floors, molding, etc. Yes, you can take an extra deposit and you can meet the pets first.
I’ve been a landlord (and pet owner) since 1999. Only once in that time have I ever broken my no-pet rule for a tenant…and paid very dearly for it. Someone commented that cats are a safe bet – not in my experience. Cats are clean animals by and large, but if owners don’t maintain their boxes, they will “go” someplace else. In less than two years, a family with a few cats did thousands and thousands of dollars worth of damage. Brand new carpeting was trashed, wooden floors had to be sanded, bleached and resealed. It was disgusting, and I actually felt bad that the cats lived in such squalor. This tenant swore his cats were clean, etc. He was probably right, but he was a slob who didn’t maintain the catbox, so cats just sh*t and p*ssed everywhere.
Every pet owner who has ever tried to convince me to rent to them has believed their pet is different/better/clean/quiet, etc. I’m sure many of them are right, but there is no way of knowing, and the risks are high. Sure, you can ask for a deposit, but you’re still left with a disgusting mess, a person angry about not getting their deposit back (the above referenced tenant is the only tenant of mine in 12yrs who didn’t get 100% of their deposit back), a missed month of rent while you do the repair/cleanup work, other tenants who want pets now that the precedent is set, etc. Plus, many potential tenants ask if pets have been in the apartment, as there are allergy issues.
I say you set the policy that you’re comfortable with, and stick with it. People will be upset it they choose to be, but they don’t own the house or pay the mortgage.
As a renter, it is frustrating how many places have a no-pets policy. I have a very clean, quiet, well-behaved cat, who is a loving member of the family, and I have a hard time understanding why some LL’s will not consider allowing this. As one person above notes, kids are often much bigger destroyers of property. I gladly pay an extra deposit, refundable if no damage, and even an extra cleaning fee (if potential allergies are an issue or whatever other reason the owner has).
I always think that buildings that do not allow pets are unfriendly and prickly buildings.
Thanks for the feedback everyone–much appreciated. Keep those comments coming!
NB: I meant, of course, “and do our best to deal directly with tenants so they can AVOID a broker fee.”
If you do decide to allow cats I would include a clause that states they must be spayed or neutered. I approved a cat for some tenants a few years ago and it didn’t enter my mind to ask if they’d had it neutered. Turn out it wasn’t. Also turns out the tenants were gone for long stretches of time and the poor cat, who got very bored and pissed off, took it on on various places around the unit that I then had to repair. It also sprayed…
I would only accept a tenant with a dog if the alternative is to have the apartment sitting empty. If you must do this then be very careful – see the dog and require en extra month’s deposit.
1. I don’t think it’s that unusual. We have a dog and found it hard to find a place that allowed pets (and our last two rentals were both supposedly no pets, but the LL’s allowed ours with a deposit.)
2. You can limit the # of pets, have a pet deposit (we’ve gladly paid this and have gotten it back in full since our dog is a dream inside, luckily), perhaps have a clause about lease ending if the pet is noisy beyond a determined limit (barks a certain # of hours per day). I would not have objected to having the LL or realtor meet the dog first or to letting them call our dog walker. Also, it might be good to make a plan with the tenant in case work might need to be done in the apartment (maybe boiler access is through their place)–that the dog will be fine with strangers and if not, they will take it to daycare when necessary, etc.
3. People with dogs like to be near the park so are possibly more willing than others to pay the higher rents near the park.
The size of the dog has very little to do with damage and noise, if all other factors are equal (exercise, time alone). I do find that people who get bigger dogs in the city tend to better understand and be willing to handle what any dogs needs in the way of exercise. These opinions come mostly from working in a shelter and in group dog training classes. There are breeds that tend to bark a lot more, though, so you could avoid those.
I know you can’t have a no kids policy, but our last LL made it clear that our dog was a far better tenant than the children their many other tenants had were. We spent the first month there having to take pictures of the broken appliance parts and things glued to things by the previous kids for the LL.
But it’s your place, so if you don’t want to allow pets, just be patient and surely you’ll find tenants eventually.
Is it a garden level apartment. I recently had the same experience with my garden apartment in Manhattan. All the people who offered to pay full ask had pets. I was not really opposed, but insisting not he following things. 1. meeting the pet – one I deemed too much of an outdoor dog (he came from the country) to leave my yard in good condition. 2. an additional 1 month deposit. 3. strict language about what the dog could and could not do in the yard, i.e., not left alone in yard, no digging, not using yard as a place to do its business, etc.
I ended up with tenants who have a very large dog that actually goes to doggie day care everyday. So it was perfect. I would not want a pet that was left alone all day. So, if the owner stayed home with it, fine. Hope this helps.