Zillow's behavior is reckless. 

Example, the house is 16 years old and the ADU is one year old, the house is rent controlled under AB1482 and the ADU is not rent controlled under AB1482 for 14 more years.Senator Weinkowski implied that his intent in the ADU rules was to encourage housing development and that neither the house or the ADU was rent controlled unit 15 years after the property became a multi unit.I have not seen an HCD interpretation, but HCD has shown to be toothless to the municipalities so even if HCD goes with Senator Weinkowski's interpretation it is unlikely to change the behavior of the municipalities as long as there is even a trace of gray area. 

So, please excuse my rash demanding behavior thinking that demanding a little more effort out of new types will motivate them, I'm probably wrong. :) 

Also, I really don't know how wide spread this type of behavior is in the real estate business, but what the sellers and the listing agent tried to do was outright disgusting and really discredits the whole profession.

@Roy N.Yes, I know it's not the same scenario as an interview and I wouldn't turn someone down for doing this, but I still find this kind of behavior a bit lame.

Desperation often leads to logic-defying behavior, such as trying to market and unmarketable deal.

Whenever I might have to send out a notice for behavior or rent I send them the notice via email first, then later in the day serve the notice the required way.  

Now, this is unusual behavior on their part, they have been great in the past with the couple of issues we have had. 

It's hard to not find idiotic behavior everywhere.  

Alleviating depression (if depression is a symptom of the mental condition, or the condition itself) is a function of an emotional support animal and should satisfy the requirement.An animal with a history of dangerous behavior need not be accepted:[A] housing provider is not required to make a reasonable accommodation if the presence of the assistance animal would (1) result in substantial physical damage to the property of others unless the threat can be eliminated or significantly reduced by a reasonable accommodation; (2) pose an undue financial and administrative burden; or (3) fundamentally alter the nature of the provider’s operations.so they do point out that an animal with a dangerous history need not be accepted, but what good would that do as most of that 'history' would be after-the-fact (after the damage). afterall, that's what no-pet laws are in place for in the first place, to prevent physical damage, to prevent dog fights and dogs attacking and killing infants and the like. and there were already exceptions for disabled people such visually impaired, but now there are exceptions for any tenant that any physician, psychiatrist, social worker, OR other mental health professional says needs 'accomodation' for 'emotional support' in coping with disability 'symptoms'. wouldnt be suprised if medical 'pets' are the new medical 'mari-j' at this rate!