What are the regulations and rules regarding emotional support animals such as cats State Specific Question About: PENNSYLVANIA (PA)

Amy,

David's humorous response is tempting at times, because unfortunately we've seen abuses of this "ESA" policy to get past pet policies, pet fees, pet deposits, and pet rent. Don't want to pay a deposit/rent for your kitty? Have your doctor say it's required for "mental health." It's vague, and in a lot of cases I'd say it's crap.

But, unfortunately, it's a very UNTESTED area of law...and so the default has been to go with the ADA which says "reasonable accommodations must be made" for tenants with "disabilities"...even vaguely defined disabilities.

There will be litigation on this in the coming years, no doubt and hopefully that will sort out some of the gray areas. My goal between today and then is to stay OUT of litigation. The bottom line is land lord's right are being trampled in the name of the perpetual victim class, in my view. And not much we can do about it until laws are clarified with getting into risky territory.

I will say this: applicants with pets disguised as ESAs often have numerous other perfectly legitimate problems I can use to deny their application. Bad credit, no/poor land lord references, insufficient documented income, criminal history, etc.

The other thing is when an existing tenant pulls a fast one and gets an ESA without my permission, I tend not to renew those leases.

Ha! David thinks that the court will let him use religion to override the FHA. That's cute. :)

Amy: See this recent thread for my interpretation of what you can legally ask:

bbs2.mrlandlord.com/display.php?id=14242671

[You can copy and paste that into your browser or use the search here to look for "big therapy dog."]

The part about it being big and them not wanting it don't necessarily apply to you, but there is some other good discussion there including what you can ask for as far as proper "proof" or documentation goes.

Long story short: If they can provide the required docs, then you likely have to take them.

- John...

Oh -- and what Sid says is good too! We were posting at the same time, so I didn't see his until after I posted too.

- John...

David: That's fine. I don't expect it will go well actually. And, as Sid says, for MOST of us, the goal should be to avoid litigation, not be the test case. But, of course, more power to you! We're all anxiously awaiting for test cases like that to come along.

Amy: So they have more than one? Well, as Ken said, if you would deny them even without the cats, then this isn't an issue and you should. If you can't do that, then see that other thread and ask them for the documentation -- they need it for EACH animal. Maybe you'll get lucky and they'll have trouble trying to get the required letters and/or will just switch to a LL that isn't as picky. :)

- John...

Here's another funny response...

Prospect: "I have three emotional support cats. That won't be a problem, will it?"

Me: "I completely understand! I have an emotional support animal too. He's a bull mastiff name Chopper, after my flight company back in the day when I was in Vietnam. He'll be with me when I stop by to inspect the premises on a monthly basis. He likes to play with cats, although sometimes he gets a bit carried away... That won't be a problem, will it?"

Then just go silent and see how quickly THEY hang up on YOU.

If you take the cat you will probably keep the tenant much longer. Insist that they have two litter boxes per cat.

As others said, this is a very gray area currently. If the person is currently a tenant, I'd tread carefully. Maybe contact a local landlord's group for advice. And - if she is at all late in paying, learn and follow the correct procedures for evicting for non-payment.

If the person is a prospect, I usually say some like, "Oh, yes, service animals are not pets." I then comb their application like crazy, and can usually find a legitimate reason to turn them down (insufficient income, employment at same place under 6 months, evictions, slow pays, difficulty reaching contacts, incomplete application...).

If I hear emotional support animal they drop to the bottom of my always abundant applicant pool.

It is interesting here the people that will opening admit to violating the federal Fair Housing Act... heh.

- John...

It's even more interesting that so many people try to use a law created to support truly disabled persons to get away with forcing landlords to let them have a pitbull!

I'm glad to learn that Florida has a new law as of July 2015 making it punishable by jail time for falsely representing an animal as a support animal. It's gotten very out of hand.

" if a tenant needs an ESA for depression and anxiety, isnt that tenant also depressed and anxious at work or the grocery store "

Lonely NJ that is quite shocking even for this outspoken group.

I've been married twice and, in what remains of this life I never want to deal with another man.

LisaFL: I agree with you about the cheaters, of course. That still doesn't mean that I'm going to ignore the law when it comes to applicants.

I'm even fine with the people that scrutinize an application more carefully and often find another reason to evict (provided that they ACTUALLY don't qualify for some other legit reason).

What I just find surprising is those that just assume that EVERY one of them is a cheater and just go "Oh, if they say they have one, I put them at the bottom of the pile and don't even consider them." That's just blatantly admitting illegal discrimination.

It's fine that you do that -- to each their own. I simply said that I was surprised that some people admit their illegal activities so obviously here sometimes. :)

- John...

I don't think it's illegal to chose the best applicant from a pool of many. If it's rented to one qualified tenant before another then it's no longer available.

I'd choose the no pet tenant qualified tenant over the one with pets. The higher income over the lower. The married over the classic "fiancé".

You see -- stating that you'd "take the no pet qualified tenant over the one with pets" is fine if you're talking about pets. We weren't. You say the same thing when it comes to someone with a ESA and you ARE illegally discriminating. We all might not LIKE it, but it is true.

Saying "I'd choose the qualified tenant without the emotional support animal over the one with the emotional support animal" is the same as saying "I'd choose the qualified tenant that wasn't black over the one that was" or "I'd choose the qualified tenant that didn't have children over the one that was."

Again, don't get me wrong -- we all hate the many lying ESA people out there. But the reality is that not ALL of them are liars and discriminating against people with them is illegal discrimination.

You are welcome to sell if you think that is the only solution.

- John...

Again, NO ONE here is saying that it hasn't become a problem -- but that's not the point.

There is a difference between civil disobedience when you are protesting a bad law -- and between just ignoring the law because it isn't convenient for you and you don't like it because there are some cheaters. You seem to be doing the latter there.

Again, as a LL, I agree with you that there is a problem. But that really isn't the point here. All I said was that I was surprised that some people here will blatantly state that they violate federal law when it comes to illegal discrimination. And I still stand behind that.

You can argue that you don't LIKE the law all you want -- that doesn't make my surprise it ignoring it (and announcing that publicly) any different.

On a side note, I can find people that don't LIKE that race and gender are protected classes too -- still doesn't make them ignoring the law any more acceptable or right.

Again, the short version is this: like it or not, they ARE a protected class and you taking someone else over them just because they have an ESA is illegal discrimination. Period.

- John...

P.S. Please find me just ONE legal case where a landlord's liability insurance was cancelled because the Fair Housing Act required them to to accept an animal on their insurer's not-allowed list. People TALK about this sort of thing all the time, but I've looked and can't find a single instance where that happened. Again, most of this is completely untested in court.

Well I guess I'm fortunate that I have a large pool of applicants to pick from then. I will always pick the best likely qualified tenant and then it doesn't matter because the property is no longer available for rent.

I allow pets so it's not likely I'm going to hear any discrimination complaints if I just happen to fill my vacancy with someone else who is well qualified.

Good article:

Again, Lisa, that is fine -- but what you keep saying still sounds like a clear violation of the law. You fully admit to picking applicants WITHOUT ESAs before ones that have them. You keep going "Well, as long as I have other qualified applicants, then I can take them instead."

You are discriminating based on someone having an ESA. That's illegal. Period.

Again, if you want to do it, so be it. All I said was that I was surprised that some people here admitted it so blatantly on an open forum. You're flat out stating that you pick OTHER qualified applicants over qualified applicants with ESAs. Again, that's illegal.

Now, you can try to justify it all you want -- we all seem to agree that lots of people cheat the system by using ESAs. I agree that that is true also. But just because SOME people cheat doesn't mean that we get to break the law and assume that ALL of them cheat. You can't (legally) just decide to discriminate against a protected class because you think that SOME of them are liars.

- John...

After a long days of making phone calls. Emotional support animals are named as "assistive animals: are under the Fair Housing Law as per the director at the office of fair housing and equal opportunity. You cannot charge an additional deposit, and can only ask for a script if the disability isn't noticeable. This is the information I have found out. I appreciate all the insight from all of you.

Amy: You can't ask for a "script" in any case. What you CAN ask for is a written document from a "health professional" stating that the person has a disability and that the animal helps with it to improve quality of life basically. Again, see my first post above for a link to exact text that I use and recommend. In any case, a "prescription" is certainly not required.

OMG: Yes, actually, they do have to be accepted. Again, this is under the Fair Housing Act which does not apply to your hotels. Your hotels fall under the ADA (I believe), but not the FHA.

- John...