Requiring advance disclosure of ESA in Lease?

[Jill F.]

Do any Fair Housing Experts know if a lease clause requiring tenants to agree that any animals they bring on premises without first supplying ESA documentation will be considered pets would be enforceable?

[Nathan Gesner]

Quote from @Jill F.:

I'm going to go with your policy. Thanks for the great idea. I don't have the money to be a test case but I still wonder though if a request made after a tenant explicitly agreed in writing to treat animals as a pet when the animal is brought on site before making a request for ESA has already been litigated. It said on the HUD website that is a 'guideline without the force of law.' Grrrrr. When a gov. agency purposely does 'clear as mud guidelines' it makes me think that they think they'd lose in court but know people don't want and/or can't afford the expense of a test case.

As usual, HUD policy is not completely clear and they continue to set up a system that is easy to defraud. In my mind, if someone is so sick that they can't live without a dog in the privacy of their own home, then they should be actively treated by a doctor for that illness. Meeting someone one time, writing a letter for an ESA, and then never seeing them again doesn't fix anyone's anxiety, stress, depression, etc. ESA prescriptions should be for no more than six months at a time to ensure they're being treated. If we implemented that one change, ESA animals would almost disappear.