TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Landlords Evict Dog Owners After TV Report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Landlords Evict Dog Owners After TV Report

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
http://www.nbc10.com/news/5101609/detail.html

post #2 of 19
Unless the media wrote the article wrong, the residents signed a lease with a "no pet" clause included. Whether it was strictly enforced or not is beside the point, as is the change in ownership of the property.
They knew they weren't supposed to have pets, and yet they chose to bring pets in anyway.
I think it's irresponsible of them to have done that. Now it's come to bite them in the behind.
post #3 of 19
Technically speaking, Kai Bengals is right. However, I think the kinder and more humane thing for the management to have done would have been to exclude from the rule enforcement those dogs already living in the apartments, while making it clear that once they passed away, no more dogs would be permitted.

Sadly, too often these days, people show no compassion for each other, far less animals.
post #4 of 19
That's rotten. There should at least be some sort of "grandfather clause" arrangement made, i.e., no new dogs, but allow those already there to remain. Interestingly enough, the law is quite different in my area. If a landlord ignores the "no pets" or "no dogs" clause, it becomes ineffective. So if he makes an exception in one case, all the other tenants in the building/complex can also keep pets/dogs, and anybody buying or inheriting the property has to tolerate existing pets. My in-laws went to court against tenants who got a dog after moving in, and lost, because tenants that had been living in the same house for years had a dog, which my in-laws had chosen to "overlook", because he was small. The judge cited a slew of like court decisions. When they signed the house over to my brother-in-law, he tried to enforce a "no dogs" policy, and lost in court, too. "No cats" usually doesn't work, either, if there are up to two indoor cats.
post #5 of 19
Yes, very sad but true..they did say no pets. I myself though have had pets many times in buidlings where they were not permitted and I just dealt with the possible consequences. I would have moved out before ever "getting rid of" my pet.
post #6 of 19
I have lived in an apartment that specified "no pets" before and I had two cats at the time. I know someone else in the building had two large dogs. I think many landlords put "no pet" policies to make it easier to get rid of those whose pets cause a problem.
It can cause issues when there's a change in ownership. The new owners should really have asked how the pet policy was applied before taking over the building.
post #7 of 19
I am allowed to have one pet in my apartment. I have 7 cats and 3 snakes. I used to have 2 birds and a bunch of rats and hamsters and gerbils too.

My landlord came in about a year ago when I thought I would be moving out to do an inspection and I put all the cats "away" except for two and she said oh you are only allowed to have one pet here. She had forgotten at that time that I filled out paperwork for my "one" cat and paid a security deposit on her so she was thinking I just brought in some cats recently. She was like "oh well as long as you dont have 10 foot long snakes I guess its ok because I am so scared of snakes..." She said that as she was standing right in front of my snake tank that had a tablecloth over it and some candles on top to look like a little table.

But I will sit on my back patio with 5 of the cats sitting and chomping on grass all around me and the kids in the area will come up to see them. The maintenance guy even comes by and says "how's the crew?" He doesn't tell on people, he is cool. So I guess I lucked out.
post #8 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTLynn
Technically speaking, Kai Bengals is right. However, I think the kinder and more humane thing for the management to have done would have been to exclude from the rule enforcement those dogs already living in the apartments, while making it clear that once they passed away, no more dogs would be permitted.

Sadly, too often these days, people show no compassion for each other, far less animals.
Well said.
post #9 of 19
Here in Ontario it's actually illegal to discriminate against people with pets. However, we see ads all the time that say "no pets" as well as "no smokers". Haven't seen a "no kids" one yet, but wouldn't be surprised. People just get away with things until challenged, and who has the money for legal challenges anyway?
On the flip side, it's very hard to get rid of problem tenants. And often dogs & apartments aren't a great mix because people just aren't responsible enough-they don't exercise them enough, don't care about the damage they cause. Landlords are entitled to look after their property.
I would've thought that a grandfather law existed to protect tenants in the event of an ownership change. In which case, they'd have to evict everyone, then re-lease the apartments in order not to be seen discriminating against particular tenants.
post #10 of 19
I also see both sides. In this particular case, they could have worked together to mediate some solution other than eviction as I am sure that some of these animals will be surrendered to the local shelter ...

However, I agree that many dog owners give the rest a bad name , unfortunately, especially if they saw the No Pets clause and went ahead and took in animals anyway.
I couldn't do this as I would be terrified of being found out and put out on the street.
Its a pretty selfish move. And one of the biggest and saddest reasons you see on any dog's card at the shetler "owner surrendered due to move"... Ugh. I just hate that.

Oh, and I see "No Kids" all the time. Its just cleverly worded as "Adults Complex".
post #11 of 19
I would hope that the landlords could compromise; since they are allowing cats to stay, perhaps they could create a "nuisance dog clause" that would allow small, indoor dogs to stay as well but weed out the dogs that are causing problems. It seems that there were complaints of unrestrained dogs chasing children. Although it seems unfair to make a distinction between the types of dogs, it is true that an indoor-dog such as a dachshund is far less likely to be a nuisance than a Rottweiler. And apartment/condo living isn't the best idea for the large dog breeds, either. It makes me wonder if the owners considered that issue when they got the dog; I frequently visit humane shelters when I travel, and over & over again, I see that it's mostly the large breeds being relinquished. due to the owner being unable to handle the dog and "not having enough time". And it's not the dog's fault; their breed was usu. developed with a specific purpose in mind (i.e. working dogs) and the stamina that was sought after equals a high need for exercise. I once read in an adoption leaflet that a large, working breed dog takes the same amount of daily exercise & attention as a racehorse, to be kept in optimum health & spirit.
post #12 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsknowme
And apartment/condo living isn't the best idea for the large dog breeds, either. It makes me wonder if the owners considered that issue when they got the dog; I frequently visit humane shelters when I travel, and over & over again, I see that it's mostly the large breeds being relinquished. due to the owner being unable to handle the dog and "not having enough time". And it's not the dog's fault; their breed was usu. developed with a specific purpose in mind (i.e. working dogs) and the stamina that was sought after equals a high need for exercise. I once read in an adoption leaflet that a large, working breed dog takes the same amount of daily exercise & attention as a racehorse, to be kept in optimum health & spirit.
I have to agree with you and disagree with you...
For a GREAT owner, a large breed can do well even in a one bedroom apt.
Trust someone who has only had large breeds (dobermans) and lived in small houses or apts. a Great Dane, a Greyhound and/or a Rotti can do just fine in a smaller house or apartment if they are exercised as they should be and trained as they should be. IMO, any dog, no matter the size, should be trained. Its due to the size of the dachshund that they simply get away with more trouble ..Sad really as its not fair to the dog and no humans seem to like an ill mannered dog, other than the owners...

Any size of dog (For the most part) should not be left outside to exercise on its own nor should it be tied out on its own.

If you have a large working breed, you can take it out 2-3 times a day for walks/runs/throws of the ball/dog parking/training...So, its not the size of your house or apt. that really matters. Its your effort, time and devotion as an owner. And bad owners can live in palatial mansions.

Mind you, the part where I really sadly agree with you is with what doesn't happen. Owners get the cute puppy...the novelty wears off, they didn't know it ack...actually had needs like attention and exercise and training.
Thus, dog starts to act up. Owner then relinquishes dog to shelter.


Sad.

(so, essentially my point when it comes to dogs once again, is TRAIN THE d*mn owners)
post #13 of 19
I'd want to know if the old landlord actually aknowledged the fact that these people had dogs and didn't do anything about it.

If so, then a grandfather clause seems the most approriate. Can't change the rules mid-game. Have th eold landlord make a statement saying that this rule was not enforced and that he was aware of and had aknowledged the presence of the dogs and go from there.

If they did this truly behind the last landlord's back or just ASSUMED he didn't care...well, then, you've sort of taken your dog's life in your hands. Which isn't fair to the dog and puts both you and the landlord in a truly tough spot. In which case, the best thing to do is take your pooch and move to a dog friendly apartment, which would have been the most responsible choice in teh first place.

Irresponsible owners really get under my skin
post #14 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveysmummy
(so, essentially my point when it comes to dogs once again, is TRAIN THE d*mn owners)

Yes, I had a Border Collie in a one-bedroom apt., and I had to get him exercise everyday. My daughter had a wonderful Queensland Heeler that she exercised every day, she'd have to drive the car down a dirt road to give him enough running. It wasn't until she was in a divorce situation, moving from place to place that she placed the dog with my grandson's other grandparents (I didn't have the time to devote to keeping Scooby exercised) who are retired, and very active, & already had a Aussie/Border Collie mix that gets to go along with their long, country bike rides in the morning and long jogs in the afternoon. My daughter sometimes cries about having to give up her best friend at such a rough time, but the dog was chewing his nails because he wasn't get the attention & exercise that he needed, and she loves him enough to put the dog's needs first. It does help that my grandson has the dog there when he stays with that set of grandparents.
post #15 of 19
A similar thing happened to me. In my old apartment, the owner allowed me to have a cat. I lived there for about 4 years with Snoopy and everything was fine. Then the owner passed away, and his son took over ownership of the building. When the son took over, he decided to make the building "no pets", and he told me that I would have to get rid of Snoopy or move. I tried to explain that Snoopy was a senior cat, at the time he was about 16 years old, and that I couldn't just "get rid of him". He said, then you'll have to move, and he gave me an eviction notice saying I had 1 month to get rid of the cat or move. I moved.
post #16 of 19
They were told they were going to enfore the no-pets clause. It is in the lease. The land lords have the right to that. not that I agree with it. That's why you read the lease before you sign it!
post #17 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker
A similar thing happened to me. In my old apartment, the owner allowed me to have a cat. I lived there for about 4 years with Snoopy and everything was fine. Then the owner passed away, and his son took over ownership of the building. When the son took over, he decided to make the building "no pets", and he told me that I would have to get rid of Snoopy or move. I tried to explain that Snoopy was a senior cat, at the time he was about 16 years old, and that I couldn't just "get rid of him". He said, then you'll have to move, and he gave me an eviction notice saying I had 1 month to get rid of the cat or move. I moved.
See, that's sketchy. I would have had an attorney look into the legality of not making a grandfather clause in your case. But my question is...was this the case with the dog people in this story?
post #18 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker
A similar thing happened to me. In my old apartment, the owner allowed me to have a cat. I lived there for about 4 years with Snoopy and everything was fine. Then the owner passed away, and his son took over ownership of the building. When the son took over, he decided to make the building "no pets", and he told me that I would have to get rid of Snoopy or move. I tried to explain that Snoopy was a senior cat, at the time he was about 16 years old, and that I couldn't just "get rid of him". He said, then you'll have to move, and he gave me an eviction notice saying I had 1 month to get rid of the cat or move. I moved.
Good for you! Unfortunately for too many others, though, housing is difficult to come by, and moving is often financially impossible. My heart goes out to all those in these difficult situations.
post #19 of 19
I would have never gotten rid of my Snoopy, even if it would have meant living in my car temporarily. I feel the same way about my babies now. Believe me, rent is very expensive here in Los Angeles. I ended up moving into an apartment that cost twice as much per month as my old apartment. It's not easy, but I can't live without my babies. Life is not worth living without them.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Landlords Evict Dog Owners After TV Report