[Papa_lecki]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

An "emotional support animal" is not a Service Animal. They mean different things, and have to follow different rules. Someone was referring to a Service Animal. I responded to that post. You want to add more criteria or nitpick - okay.

So now let's talk about whether or not a renter is allowed to bring little red wagons into their rented living rooms.

Because - changing topics to prove a point that no one is challenging seems to be all the rage.

Someone who has an ESA can not be discriminated against for housing….

“The new rules in Florida are similar in many ways to Federal Fair Housing rules for emotional support animals and borrow many of the same concepts. An emotional support animal in Florida is an animal that provides assistance or therapeutic emotional support to its owner by its mere presence. An ESA does not need any special training to work or perform tasks for its owner.

Florida’s laws prohibit housing providers from discriminating against tenants with a need for an emotional support animal. ESA owners are allowed to live with their animal companions as “reasonable accommodation”, even in buildings that generally prohibit pets.”

[Papa_lecki]

Originally Posted by dougjb

I love this....reading all the non-lawyers giving legal advice (which, by the way, is a felony in the state of Florida).

All those who gave posters legal advice to not pay a contractor up front, before entering into a contract, apparently committed a felony.

[Ski Bum]

Lots of confusion here, mostly because the law and how it is applied is not entirely clear. First, if you actually ready the Statute, it applies to people who own three or more rental properties. ESA's are treated much the same way as service animals, and there is no documentation needed. Most importantly, the landlord has the right to make reasonable accommodations and has to be given the time to do so. If a renter shows up with a ESA llama, the landlord has the right to prepare the home for the llama. As in covering floors and furniture, removing breakable items, etc.

So on check in, the renter has this big hairy llama, and you to them that you will call them when you have the home ready. Then the renter does what? Sues you? They should have been up front about their fragile emotional state and their need for the llama.

Of course, it would be best if these people would just rent pet friendly accommodations. And more importantly, change the law to clearly protect property rights.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Ski Bum

Lots of confusion here, mostly because the law and how it is applied is not entirely clear. First, if you actually ready the Statute, it applies to people who own three or more rental properties. ESA's are treated much the same way as service animals, and there is no documentation needed. Most importantly, the landlord has the right to make reasonable accommodations and has to be given the time to do so. If a renter shows up with a ESA llama, the landlord has the right to prepare the home for the llama. As in covering floors and furniture, removing breakable items, etc.

So on check in, the renter has this big hairy llama, and you to them that you will call them when you have the home ready. Then the renter does what? Sues you? They should have been up front about their fragile emotional state and their need for the llama.

Of course, it would be best if these people would just rent pet friendly accommodations. And more importantly, change the law to clearly protect property rights.

I hope no unsuspecting Landlord reads that and believes it to be accurate.

[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by orangeblossombaby

actually that isn't entirely true. That is true if it's someone trying to go into a store with an animal, but not with regards to housing.

If someone wants to live in a building, with their animal - the landlord has the right to require that the person show evidence that he has an actual disability and that the animal is trained to perform a service in direct relation to that specific disability.

Such as a dog that is trained to detect the onset of an epileptic seizure - the person has to provide documentation showing that he actually suffers from epileptic seizures, and that the dog is specifically trained to detect the onset of them.

This is the only time that the right of the property owner outweighs a claim of the animal's handler.

and thats why all tenants are screened by your insured real estate agent and lawyer

[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by handygrandpap

in light of the recent (sad) dog attack on the historic side, as many of the folks on this site are also landlords and many of the short term and long term renters often do have pets.
What is the best approach for us to ensure a banned breed does not show up, other than simply saying no pet?
Any suggestions?
See recent forbes article linked, thank you

dog breeds banned by home insurance companies – forbes advisor

do the due diligences above but in the beginning, middle & end purchase a great umbrella ☔ policy. Now you can go to sleep

[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by ski bum

lots of confusion here, mostly because the law and how it is applied is not entirely clear. First, if you actually ready the statute, it applies to people who own three or more rental properties. Esa's are treated much the same way as service animals, and there is no documentation needed. Most importantly, the landlord has the right to make reasonable accommodations and has to be given the time to do so. If a renter shows up with a esa llama, the landlord has the right to prepare the home for the llama. As in covering floors and furniture, removing breakable items, etc.

So on check in, the renter has this big hairy llama, and you to them that you will call them when you have the home ready. Then the renter does what? Sues you? They should have been up front about their fragile emotional state and their need for the llama.

Of course, it would be best if these people would just rent pet friendly accommodations. And more importantly, change the law to clearly protect property rights.

got a place

[TCRSO]

As a general rule, you are not liable for the acts of a renter's dog unless you have reason to believe the dog is aggressive or otherwise dangerous. Our lease requires the renter to disclose (a) the dog's breed and weight; (b) whether the dog has ever behaved aggressively toward people or other animals; (c) whether the dog has accidentally caused injury to any person or animal (e.g. tripping a person or injuring another animal while playing). The lease also requires notification within 24 hours, if, during the lease period, the dog commits any of the act described in (b) or (c). A further condition is that we personally meet and interact with the dog. Typically, Homeowners Insurance Polices exclude coverage for injuries caused by animals. Accordingly, we require renters to have Rental Insurance and provide a copy of the policy (this policy should cover liability for the dog's acts). It is important to receive a copy of the policy to confirm that the renters disclosed the dog on the application and it is not a breed that the insurance company excludes from coverage.

[Dilligas]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

If the tenant says it's a service dog, you don't have a choice. You cannot ban service dogs.

You can require the service dog credentials, not just take their word. Service pets must go through extensive training.

[msilagy]

Dogs aside, renting a home with a golf cart boggles my mind. The liability falls back on the owner. My opinion, however many do it.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Dilligas

You can require the service dog credentials, not just take their word. Service pets must go through extensive training.

I would suggest reading the Federal ADA (Americans with Disabilities) law. You cannot ask for credentials, and the owner can do his/her own training. No extensive or third party training is required. You can only ask two questions:

1. Is the dog a service animal required because of a disability?
2. What work or task has the dog been trained to perform?

If you ask any other questions, you could be violating the Federal law.

[Rodneysblue]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

If the tenant says it's a service dog, you don't have a choice. You cannot ban service dogs.

Can you ask for certification?

[Joe C.]

IMHO, the property owner always seems to be the underdog ..... the one who has less rights than the renter.
If you own a motor vehicle, you are required by law to have adequate insurance. Maybe the animal owner should have insurance to cover any damage caused by the animal.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Rodneysblue

Can you ask for certification?

No. See Post No. 26.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by dougjb

I love this....reading all the non-lawyers giving legal advice (which, by the way, is a felony in the state of Florida).

I love those who say use an "iron clad" lease. No, thank about it. Who would want a lease that is full of holes. So, the expression "iron clad" is merely a wish...not a reality.

Then, there are those who cut and paste from a book meant for a different jurisdiction and come up with...voila...the lease to beat all leases. Perhaps a potential Florida landlord might want to review the substantial statutory provisions related to landlord/tenant law.

While there are legitimate methods for limiting risk, no method is foolproof! Moreover, some of it requires a potential landlord to lay out money, for the creation of legal entities, proper insurance coverage and proper evaluation of tenants. But, if one takes the cheepo method of attempting to limit risk and do it themselves to save money, one should recognize that the "legal" methods one comes up for free....is worth just about as much as one paid for it.

This whole thread makes me want to go and read a book on self-administered heart operations for my clogged arteries!

Wow, all critique and nothing helpful. Probably how you are IRL also. That means In Real Life, Boomer.