Why you SHOULD allow animals

[Nathan Gesner]

This is probably the best study I've found on the benefits of renting to pet owners. Too many Landlords believe pets cause too many problems and result in a loss of revenue. This study found the opposite to be true. Based on my personal experience with approximately 10,000 leases, I can verify animals are a money-making machine, not a detriment to your business.

Pet-Friendly Housing Study

I hope you actually take 10 minutes to read the article because it has some great information. For those that can't find the time, here are some key findings:

• Approximately 50% of housing studied was pet-friendly to some degree. Only 9% allowed animals without restriction, half allowed cats, and 11% allowed large dogs.
• 82% of renters reported problems finding housing that would accept their pet.
• Pet-friendly rentals earned about 20% more in rent.
• Annual net benefit to the Landlord was $2,949.
• Tenants with animals stayed 3x longer.
• Vacancy was shorter and marketing costs were lower for pet-friendly rentals.
• The average damage reported by each Landlord was $430
• Pet owners did not cause more damage than Tenants without pets, whereas Tenants with children averaged $150 more in damages
• 20% of the tenants surveyed admitted to keeping an animal illegally
• Proper screening significantly reduced the risk. Only 3.7% of the Landlords required pet references, only 7.4% required a pet resume, 11% required health records, and only 18.5% required Tenants sign a pet agreement.

The bottom line: renters with animals are no more dangerous to your property (on average) than renters without animals. The increase in damages is negligible and the financial benefits are absolutely staggering. 

The best thing you can do as a Landlord is:

• educate yourself on how to screen animals properly
• develop rules and be prepared to enforce them
• charge reasonable fee for the benefit of allowing animals.

You'll rent places quicker and easier, you'll make more money, and your tenants will stay longer.

Landlords, join the conversation:

• Does your personal experience match the findings?
• How do you screen animals?
• Do you charge for animals? Deposit, fees, or rent? Or all three?
• Do pet owners leave more damage or cause more problems than people without pets?
• Do pet owners stay longer?
• What's the biggest difficulty you have with animals?

[Mike D.]

I've got no problem with pets if the tenant can pay the extra damage deposit (most won't). 

I will NOT allow dogs in an apartment. I've had to kick more than one tenant out because Fido barked all day long while the owner was at work. Not worth the hassle!

[Nancy P.]

We allow pets,  we are dog lovers ourselves.  (I'm sad to say I'm allergic to cats).  We do find tenants with pets stay longer.    But 9 of our 13 properties are condos and have pet size and count restrictions.  That works out well because the breeds my insurance guy won't cover are all over the 20-30 lb. weight limit they impose. That way we aren't the bad guys.  We ask for proof of spaying/neutering,  shots,  and charge $300 security deposit per pet.  That is refundable.  We don't charge pet rent.   Our leases make clear that if there are noise complaints,  the animal must go if the noise cannot be removed.  Never happened yet.  The only damage was caused by a Section 8 tenant whose little dog would close the door to a room and then destroy the carpet trying to claw his way back out.  Because she was Section 8,  lived there for 5 years, AND because the condo was a crappy federal remodel of a foreclosure (NO padding under the cheap carpet),  we didn't ding her at all for the carpet.  Legally probably couldn't have anyway.  Replaced with LVP.  We will probably start charging $25 per month pet rent soon since everyone else does.

[James R Crady III]

Had a tenant once that literally tore a huge hole in the exterior brick in order to install a large doggy door. Install was a mess, not sealed correctly and totally done without any discussion with me or my property manager. Those folks were crazy. But, there are bad apples in every bucket.

Overall, I agree with the analysis. 4 legged critters make money. Little 2 legged critters cost money! ;)

[Rachel C.]

Relevant news article!

Landlord must pay tenant whose allergies were triggered by neighbor's support dog, court rules

DES MOINES — An Iowa City tenant with a severe allergy to pet dander will receive damages of one month’s rent from a landlord who allowed another tenant to have an emotional support dog in a building with a no-pet policy, according to an Iowa Supreme Court ruling Tuesday.

In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned a district court ruling that concluded the landlord, 2800-1 LLC, shouldn’t have allowed the tenant to have a dog because of the other tenant’s pet allergies, but then dismissed the case because the law governing accommodations for emotional support animals wasn’t clear.

Chief Justice Susan Christensen, who wrote for the majority, said the two tenants — Karen Cohen, who had severe allergies, and David Clark, who had the dog — had the landlord in a “pickle” trying to accommodate both of them. However, the landlord, who isn’t identified by name in the ruling, should have denied the dog request because Cohen lived there first and the dog posed a direct threat to her health.

The court concluded that Cohen, who suffered allergic attacks, was entitled to her claims of breach of lease and breach of the “covenant of quiet enjoyment.”

The ruling shows Cohen has a “medically documented severe allergy” to pet dander that causes nasal congestion, swollen sinuses and excess coughing. Her allergic reaction is more severe when exposed to cats, requiring her to carry an epinephrine auto-injectable device to protect against anaphylactic shock.

She needed an apartment that didn’t allow pets and signed a lease from 2800-1 LLC on Nov. 11, 2015 for the term of July 2016 to July 2017. Cohen relied on the lease that stated no pets were allowed in the building.

On Jan. 18, 2016, Clark signed a lease to rent an apartment down the hall from Cohen during the same lease period, according to the ruling. Clark’s lease also included the no-pet provision.

I guess you can get sued if you do allow ESAs and sued if you don't.

[Anna Swartz-Lopez]

Considering how easy it is to get a pet certified as an "emotional support animal," I think it is better for a landlord to allow pets and put rules in place. Get in front of the pet question, rather than playing catch up when a tenant shows you a document that will force you to allow their pet on your property. 

If you as a landlord allow pets, you can collect a deposit for pet damage, and you can usually charge an additional amount per month. You can also exclude certain breeds. It's always better to stay in front of the situation, rather than try to play catch up later. 

[Lisa Tiedgen]

Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:

Originally posted by @Lisa Tiedgen:

How do you protect from liability to the landlord in the event the pet bites a neighbor or neighbors dog etc...? Wouldn't the landlord take the risk here?

Excellent question! First, you should have proper insurance. Second, you can require the tenant to purchase renters insurance, which will normally cover their animal. I recommend the Tenant include the Landlord or Property Manager as "additional insured" or "additional interest" on the liability policy. If the animal bites someone, the injured party may sue the Tenant and the Landlord. IF you're labeled on the insurance policy, the renter's insurance will cover you without taking a ding on your own insurance policy. The other benefit is that the insurance company will send you a declaration page showing proof of coverage. If the tenant attempts to cancel their policy or allows it to lapse, you'll be notified of that, as well.

Another recommendation: consider requiring the tenant to pay up front for renters insurance for the full term of the lease. This is another method of preventing them from letting the policy lapse. However, it's expensive and isn't fool-proof.

Thanks Nathan!

That is great advice! And I recently found out that some breeds are excluded all together, so you should probably not accept those at all. 

thanks again!