tenant A loves dogs but the building policy prohibits pets. one day, tenant A notices thru the front window that tenant B moved in with 2 dogs (a pit bull mix and a german sheperd mix) with the PM present and no issue was apparently raised; landlord even pet and played with the dogs. tenant A feels betrayed and goes out and buys a yorkie. landlord finds out and issues notice of breach of contract and to vacate or restore the apt to its pet-free requirements.tenant A contronts landlord and demands explanation as to why tenant B has 2 big dogs but tenant A cant have 1 tiny one. landlord discloses tenant B provided proof that each of the 2 dogs are emotional support animals.tenant A asks tenant B why does she have 2 emotional support animals, and for a referral to a professional that could also recommend 2 or 3 dogs so he can keep his yorkie and get a playmate for his and maybe even the yorkie's 'emotional support' each.tenant B is insulted and files a HUD complaint that landlord shared that she needs emotional support (per Fair Housing Act, landlords may not divulge that a tenant has any disability to any third party).meanwhile, tenant C whose toddler was soon after mauled to death by tenant B's sheperd mix, has just won a case in California Supreme Court finding the landlord to be a statutory owner of the dog since it was accepted onto the premises simply based on a letter written by a 'pet therapist' without regard - and consequentially, with negligence - to the other tenants' safety and thus responsible for $2,000,000 in compensation to tenant C for the loss of precious human life, regardless of whether landlord was negligent or not, and regardless of whether animal was a service/support animal or pet.landlord, having lost his countersuit against tenant B for vicious 'support' animal's lethal actions, files claim for his homeowner's insurance to cover the $250 million he owes tenant C but claim is denied altogether on basis that building had a no pet policy and dogs were not declared and the pit bull mix, though recommended, was never even licensed.last but not least, landlord receives summons, subpoenas, etc from HUD and appears for trial in Federal Civil Court. judge finds landlord guilty of divulging that tenant has a disability and orders landlord to pay the statutory $16,000 for one county of housing discrimination,  plus 300,000 in actual damages for the complainant (and of course, her attorneys fees) for she is emotionally scarred for life!

With or without the humans.  

For all dwelling units intended for human occupancy for which a building permit is issued on or after January 1, 2014, for alterations, repairs, or additions exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), the permit issuer shall not sign off on the completion of work until the permittee demonstrates that all smoke alarms required for the dwelling unit are devices approved and listed by OSFM. 3.

Landlords forget that their business involves actual human beings sometimes.Would you be willing to rent a place that required 4 times the income? 

THE DECISION OF THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CASE REVIEW BOARD IS REVERSED, ENTERED.

Investors place themselves in a position of influencing and controlling basic aspects of human needs in society, the need for shelter.

So instead of your carbon footprint getting just slightly bigger from normal human use, you're giving your polluting "credits" to a professional polluter.  

I also plan to talk to a human realtor as well.

We like the humans, and it may have been an honest mistake (though stupid).

Just brainstorming with people in the profession as there has to be a better solution with todays tech.I don't like to put the address on my keys also because of liability issues and I'm human and could lose them.