Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

It shoud be illegal for a landlord to deny a pet owner from renting a property.

mikischo
June 22nd, 2009, 06:33 PM
Recently Bill 12 which would have made it illegal for landlords to deny pet owners from renting properties was put forth in the Province of Manitoba. Unfortunately it was not passed.:sad::frustrated: The results were as follows:

http://winnipeghumanesociety.ca/ExecDirector/?p=12

Although I am not personally affected by this as I live in my own home, I am all for ending discrimination against pet owners by landlords and it would certainly help to prevent a lot of heartache and reduce the number of homeless pets, and healthy pets that have to be euthanized in the City of Winnipeg. I am greatly saddened that our MLA's in Manitoba did not pass this bill. I will be writing some strong emails to them:loser::loser: as well as an email applauding Jon Gerrard for attempting to have the Bill passed. I am also looking into starting petitions to see if this would help to reinact the Bill if that is possible.

How do others feel about this and how many people in other provinces and states are affected by the lack of laws preventing landlords from discriminating against pet owners? Apparently, pet owners who live in Ontario are among the lucky ones who do not face this discrimination.

TacoGrl
June 22nd, 2009, 07:35 PM
What I hate is that landlords are allowed to charge a non-refundable pet deposit that can be as high as they want...there are no limits set! :eek: The law states that damage deposit cannot be higher than one month's rent, yet these non-refundable deposits are allowed ON TOP of the regular DD??? To top it off, landlords say the fees go towards recarpeting and painting??? I'd like to see at least one of these places EVER recarpeted much less painted? Last time I checked painting a rental unit is part of "normal wear and tear" and should be done after every tenant (if tentant has been there longer than 2 years). As for carpeting, it should be replaced every five years or so too...people just "living" on the cheap carpet landlords put down warrants this :rolleyes:

As for legislation, here in Alberta, there was a law passed that people aren't allowed to discriminate against children in rental properties (unless they are condos being rented in an adult only building), but they can still discriminate against pets. When was the last time you had a pet running screaming down the halls, breaking windows, cussing you out, or throwing a temper tantrum? The way some people are bringing their spawn up now days, I CHOOSE to be as far away from them as possible!

I see the other side of it too...I have looked at apartments where iresponsible pet owners have lived and OMG! :yuck: I think the solution is to have inspections say ever six months to make sure things are being taken care of and if not, eviction...make sure it is VERY clear in the lease that this will take place and have a witness sign. This way no one even has to charge a damamge deposit, much less these cash grab non-refundable ones and hopefully if people know they will be evicted, then they will either go elsewhere to rent or respect the property they are renting.

Melinda
June 22nd, 2009, 07:36 PM
talk to a few landlords, my cousin allowed (you aren't really allowed to say no, to tenants in ontario) this nice clean young couple to keep their two dogs, they showed proof that they were fixed, long haired shepherds.....even showed vet papers, too bad they weren't for those two dogs, anyways, about a year later he got a complaint from a neighbour about all the noise coming from that part of the duplex....so he went to see the "clean" young neighbours, and was greeted at the door by the two adult dogs and 8-9 month old pups...the new carpets were ruined,walls were chewed through, doors were all gouged out, they said they would replace/repair everything for my cousin to get a contractor over, with in 24 hours they moved out and skipped town............so you have to see both sides of the pictures, responsible pet owners do quite well in apartments with pets......others...well..:wall:

ownedbycats
June 22nd, 2009, 07:49 PM
Ontario landlords aren't allowed to discriminate against pet owners, but they are allowed to have rules about number and size of animals. Some landlords might refuse to rent an apartment to you if, say, you had 3 cats instaed of 2.

ancientgirl
June 23rd, 2009, 07:27 AM
I've always wondered, why so many landlords have a problem with pets, and not small children. Nothing against small kids, but I know they can be far more destructive than pets. If I was a landlord, I'd have less of a problem with pets.:shrug:

BenMax
June 23rd, 2009, 07:45 AM
Don't ask - I live in Quebec and of course people are discriminated for having pets! Moving season is here and just today while I was at the garage a beautiful older mastif X was tied to their gate. He was terrified. This is just one of many 'stories' to be seen in this province.

I remember when I was appartment searching. Having a rott was almost impossible to find a place that would accept us both - as a result I was fortunate enough to buy a place. (unfortunately he died before we moved in together....:sad:).

Another area of concern is homes for the elderly that are FORCED to give up their beloved pets really during their time of compassion and need. This to me is if not just as bad - worse.

Melinda
June 23rd, 2009, 07:52 AM
I would definately rent to people with animals, but Benmax, (I do do work in seniors home) we are soooo understaffed as it is, as for volunteers to do things with the residents, there are 4....yep, only 4 in our retirement home(two are over 70 which one is my mom) to try to help plan/do stuff for 46 residents, as much as I love animals there is no way I'd have time to walk them, groom them, feed them, clean up after them or go on vet visits, all our residents have families....you'd be surprised how little visitors they do get, in our home they have to be able to look after themselves, its retirement, not nursing. I bring Brina by to visit, some will have nothing to do with her or any wild critters I bring in for them to see, I also borrow a friends cat to take for visits, a handful do enjoy this. Its such a hard thing to see. Our retirement apartments in cornwall do allow renters pets

BenMax
June 23rd, 2009, 07:58 AM
I would definately rent to people with animals, but Benmax, (I do do work in seniors home) we are soooo understaffed as it is, as for volunteers to do things with the residents, there are 4....yep, only 4 in our retirement home(two are over 70 which one is my mom) to try to help plan/do stuff for 46 residents, as much as I love animals there is no way I'd have time to walk them, groom them, feed them, clean up after them or go on vet visits, all our residents have families....you'd be surprised how little visitors they do get, in our home they have to be able to look after themselves, its retirement, not nursing. I bring Brina by to visit, some will have nothing to do with her or any wild critters I bring in for them to see, I also borrow a friends cat to take for visits, a handful do enjoy this. Its such a hard thing to see. Our retirement apartments in cornwall do allow renters pets

I hear you - but I still find it very sad. What if they (the resident) paid for a service to help where required? There are private facilities I am certain that could do this..no?

Golden Girls
June 23rd, 2009, 08:15 AM
Don't ask - I live in Quebec and of course people are discriminated for having pets! Moving season is here and just today while I was at the garage a beautiful older mastif X was tied to their gate. He was terrified. This is just one of many 'stories' to be seen in this provinceIn Quebec you are not allowed to discriminate when owning a pet. That being said if a landlord doesn't want pets he'll just use another excuse not to rent to you. The way around this would be to agree on the no pet clause then bring them in anyways :shrug: The only time the landlord can evict you because of your pets is if you've been called on by Animal Control for not controlling your pets ie barking, picking up after them etc

I've offered $1,000 as a down deposit and welcomed him in to see they do not destroy - both were refused. Everyone in my neighbourhood loves them but him :loser: his prob is that he allows his cats to roam into my yard and my pup's chase them away, really fair :confused:

Another area of concern is homes for the elderly that are FORCED to give up their beloved pets really during their time of compassion and need. This to me is if not just as bad - worse.This is such a sad part but I don't see how they could allow them to live with them. Family members should take them in and bring them along in their visits but that doesn't happen often I susptect I'm sure many received that email about Stanley, Dixie & Maybelle :sad:

Golden Girls
June 23rd, 2009, 08:20 AM
I've always wondered, why so many landlords have a problem with pets, and not small children. Nothing against small kids, but I know they can be far more destructive than pets. If I was a landlord, I'd have less of a problem with pets.:shrug:I totally agree with your post. The bad thing is the irresponsible pet owners ruin it for the rest of us

Melinda
June 23rd, 2009, 08:24 AM
this is cornwall, unfortunately we don't have any services like that except for dog walking, which most of them can't afford, it would also limit the patients that could live in the retirement home, some have breathing problems, allergies etc, insurance is another huge disadvantage for having pets in the building, I have insurance on Brina through my house insurance in case "god forbid" she trips a resident, bites them etc. I show proof that she's been through courses for obedience and all vet bills. She has to be bathed before I take her and brushed out.

BenMax
June 23rd, 2009, 09:22 AM
In Quebec you are not allowed to discriminate when owning a pet. That being said if a landlord doesn't want pets he'll just use another excuse not to rent to you.

This is such a sad part but I don't see how they could allow them to live with them. Family members should take them in and bring them along in their visits but that doesn't happen often I susptect I'm sure many received that email about Stanley, Dixie & Maybelle :sad:

Well I think that many landlords are then playing this card because there are ALOT of animals now in the shelter and rescues.

No - I did not get this e-mail.

Golden Girls
June 23rd, 2009, 10:52 AM
[QUOTE]Well I think that many landlords are then playing this card because there are ALOT of animals now in the shelter and rescuesRenting in Quebec: Regie du Logement and the Civil Code of Quebec http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/co/reho/yogureho/fash/fash_011.cfm

Pets and smoking:

If a no pet and no smoking clause is written into a lease or a by-law and the landlord discovers that the tennant has a pet or smokes in the rental unit, is this grounds for the landlord to evict the tenant?

YES but ONLY if the landlord can prove that this act by the tenant has resulted in a serious injury

No - I did not get this e-mail.I'll forward it to you

lUvMyLaB<3
June 23rd, 2009, 09:09 PM
Seriously in Brandon this is a HUGE HUGE problem, just look on ebrandon how many people are giving up their pets ( not to mention giving them away..)

There is an incredibly LOW vacancy rate in Brandon, thanks to Maple leaf importing more than 2000 people from developing countries to work in the plant they built here, and no one here will work there.. and this city is WAY too small.. the housing prices are very high for this size of city, and there are many that have to rent. with a below 1% vancancy rate in rentals the landlords have become VERY picky, there are very very very few that will allow pets, something we once faced..

we remted a place and were told that we could keep our dog, then they sold to their son in law, one day he shows up and says he found dog poo it must be my dog and my dog had to go in 7 days ( my lab..) YEAH RIGHT! I went to landlord tenancies and they called him at work and said my dog had to be grandfathered in.. When we moved there it was a NO PETS place, but I think us saying we would rather have no home than give up the dog convinced him we were serious dog owners.. and we gace him $1000 deposit, we were the only ones that were allowed to have a dog, although others did try, one other place got a large dog and tied it up outside..

My hubby had a tumour on his spine and we had to move closer to the city, so we had to rent while we sold our house that was in the middle of nowhere..

I wish more people would be better pet owners, part of me does not blame some for not wanting pets in their units ( ours was a 4BR mobile though not an apt.) seriously there are bad owners.. But if someone is serious about it they should have some that will be willing to listen, have a trail period of say 3 months to look for issues and if you are a good pet owner you will have no prob giving up $1000 deposit so your pet can stay. I will never ever give up my dogs.

Winnipeg is not so bad, although there are issues there too, brandon with maple leaf and this huge influx CRAZY house prices in comparasion to how much people canmake in such a small place and less than 1% vacancy rate in rentals... makes it very tough, very though indeed

Etown_Chick
June 23rd, 2009, 10:11 PM
Challenges with renting to pet owners:
- damage to floors, carpeting, walls, grass and gardens that is expensive to fix
- animal hair is darn near impossible to completely remove from carpeting, which is an issue for the landlord and could be a significant issue for the next tenant if they have allergies
- hassle of complaints (if there are any) about barking dogs in apts or yards, cats roaming loose and doing whatever, etc.
That said, on his wildest days, Scruffy could never out-do the damage that my friends' kids have done to their respective places. I'd rent to a pet owner long before I'd rent to a young family, if I had a choice.

Luvmypitgirls
June 25th, 2009, 02:19 PM
I'm becoming a landlord myself, my son has decided to move with us to High River, so now I have to rent the house to someone else.

I will be a pet friendly landlord. However, I am charging a one time non refundable pet deposit of 150 dollars.
The reason I am doing this, is because no matter how responsible someone is, accidents can happen. It will also help with the cost of having professional carpet cleaners and such to clean if the tenant vacates.

I have a neighbor, who just aquired her daughters dog, she can't have him at the house she rents now. To help her out I've dropped the rent to 1400 including water from 1600.

I figure if she will put herself at risk of being evicted to save a dogs life, her daughter was going to "euth" him because the place she rented won't allow pets either, then she is exactly the type of tenant I want. She also has 2 cats.
She has no issue paying the pet fee of 150, and said she would do the same if she were in the position.

ancientgirl
June 25th, 2009, 02:34 PM
I agree in that $150 isn't much to ask. It's nice to know she's a pet lover and risked losing a home because of her pets. Even if you aren't going to make much on her renting, at least your home will be rented, cared for and you won't be losing money.

My landlord is actually losing money on me. I rent from him for less than what the place is, but as his wife told me a couple of weeks ago when I saw her, "You have a place for as long as you want it. Having you there at least I know my place is taken care of, and it's not empty, which is more than I can say for some of my other friends who have apartments they are trying to rent."

TacoGrl
June 25th, 2009, 03:11 PM
I'm becoming a landlord myself, my son has decided to move with us to High River, so now I have to rent the house to someone else.

I will be a pet friendly landlord. However, I am charging a one time non refundable pet deposit of 150 dollars.
The reason I am doing this, is because no matter how responsible someone is, accidents can happen. It will also help with the cost of having professional carpet cleaners and such to clean if the tenant vacates.

I have a neighbor, who just aquired her daughters dog, she can't have him at the house she rents now. To help her out I've dropped the rent to 1400 including water from 1600.

I figure if she will put herself at risk of being evicted to save a dogs life, her daughter was going to "euth" him because the place she rented won't allow pets either, then she is exactly the type of tenant I want. She also has 2 cats.
She has no issue paying the pet fee of 150, and said she would do the same if she were in the position.


Just as a heads up, in Alberta, carpet cleaning is under "normal wear and tear" as in carpets should be cleaned in between tenants and that cost should be built into the rent as an operating cost. If you charge a tenant for it directly, they can go through the Advisory Board and you will have to give it back to them...been there. ;) Unfortunately, in Alberta these non-refundable deposits are legal though, but if you say it's because you are charging for carpet cleaning, a tenant does have some rights because the law supercedes any agreement between landlord and tenant.

Difference of opinion here I guess...I would not rent from a landlord who charges the deposit because I see it as a cash grab. As a business person, a landlord needs to figure out his/her expenses and factor them into the rent over the long run. Damage to a suite is covered under the regular Damage Deposit and if more damage is done, that is what the court is for. $150 or $2000...neither one is fair nor justified.

Etown_Chick
June 25th, 2009, 06:37 PM
TacoGrl
you've obviously never tried to collect money after the tenants are gone and left you with a huge mess and expense. I don't think $150 is excessive. Beats giving up a pet. Pet hair is NOT going to come out of a carpet easily.
Carpet cleaning IS normal wear and tear (I wish more tenants knew that). What Scruff did to my lino isn't..sigh..good thing I own..lol

14+kitties
June 25th, 2009, 07:07 PM
Just gotta say - I rented a few apartments when I was a young, single mom and had a cat. I kept the litter box cleaned all the time. Never had an issue with kitty or landlords in any of the apartments I rented. After I got married we always owned our homes.
When I met my new hubby I moved down here from my home town three hours away. I hired a manager to collect rent from my house and to keep an eye on the place. I met all renters and stipulated that yes, they could have a dog or two cats. Up till the last renter it was no problem.

The last one did it for me. But it was not the dog that messed up the place. True, it sure didn't help. These people had three children who urinated every where. And I mean every where!! Of course when they got a pup for the kids for Christmas the pup smelled it and followed suit. I also had issues with them not paying rent so started eviction proceedings. Followed the law to the letter. Did everything I had to to get them out.
When we finally succeeded we went in and basically had to gut the place. Carpets were pulled. Walls had to replaced or patched. Every wall in my house. Seems this couple liked to fight and the walls took the punishment from knives being thrown. Appliances had to be thrown out - unusable. Hardwood floors had to be sanded down to try to get rid of the smell. We took away countless truckloads of garbage/clothing/broken furniture/you name it. In all of that I couldn't blame the poor pup. That was the least of my worries. I figure I probably am out about 20,000 dollars with all the repairs that had to be done plus rent not being paid. They skipped town. After repairs were done I sold the house. No more tenants for me!! Pets or no pets.

Golden Girls
June 25th, 2009, 07:07 PM
I wish more people would be better pet owners, part of me does not blame some for not wanting pets in their units ( ours was a 4BR mobile though not an apt.) seriously there are bad owners.. But if someone is serious about it they should have some that will be willing to listen, have a trail period of say 3 months to look for issues and if you are a good pet owner you will have no prob giving up $1000 deposit so your pet can stay. I will never ever give up my dogsThis should be in a lease exactly word for word. At least this would be giving responsible pet owners a chance to prove their pets will not destroy their property.

Maybe I'll sound cold (I cannot speak for other Provinces or in the States that won't allow that chance) but I would never give up my pets for no one or nothing, I'd sleep on a park bench if needed with them. Quebec is known for dumping on moving day ... which is right around the corner July 1st but I feel at least 95% use it as an excuse to dump their pets onto the SPCA, rescues and pounds.

Mia101
June 25th, 2009, 07:09 PM
Business owners have rights too. If they don't want pets or smoking or whatever that is their right. Plenty of others to offer what you are looking for and the market will always fill in the gaps.

I am not a fan of more government restriction. In fact, although emotionally I disagree with it, I think landlords should be able to 'discriminate' based on children too.

When I was leasing apartments a long time ago, there were adult communities and there are a lot of benefits.

You don't have youngish adults partying at the pool for instance, colliding with kids.

I own my home and may rent it out. I should be able to 'discriminate' on anything I want to - it's my house!

I have a problem even owning b/c I have an HOA. They restrict the size of dogs, but I got a waiver.

Mia101
June 25th, 2009, 07:16 PM
I'm becoming a landlord myself, my son has decided to move with us to High River, so now I have to rent the house to someone else.

I will be a pet friendly landlord. However, I am charging a one time non refundable pet deposit of 150 dollars.
The reason I am doing this, is because no matter how responsible someone is, accidents can happen. It will also help with the cost of having professional carpet cleaners and such to clean if the tenant vacates.

I have a neighbor, who just aquired her daughters dog, she can't have him at the house she rents now. To help her out I've dropped the rent to 1400 including water from 1600.

I figure if she will put herself at risk of being evicted to save a dogs life, her daughter was going to "euth" him because the place she rented won't allow pets either, then she is exactly the type of tenant I want. She also has 2 cats.
She has no issue paying the pet fee of 150, and said she would do the same if she were in the position.

$150 is a small pet fee. I would want a huge (refundable) deposit because carpets/padding and even walls can be completely ruined.

I think I had to pay $500 refundable for my cat when I rented, before the days of non-refundable became the norm. It annoyed me b/c my cat never even has a small accident, but I understood they could not trust me on that.

They kept it - saying there were urine stains in the carpet/padding. LIE! Grrrrrrr.

I think the new non-refundables are like insurance. The ones that cause no damage balance out with the ones that cause a lot of damage.

Golden Girls
June 25th, 2009, 07:17 PM
I own my home and may rent it out. I should be able to 'discriminate' on anything I want to - it's my house!Then don't rent it out ... it'll then be all YOUR's otherwise if you take money from someone it's no longer yours during the period of that lease. Simple really.

Mia101
June 25th, 2009, 07:48 PM
Then don't rent it out ... it'll then be all YOUR's otherwise if you take money from someone it's no longer yours during the period of that lease. Simple really.

Of course it is still mine! What are you talking about?

TacoGrl
June 25th, 2009, 08:09 PM
If you go to Service Alberta's website, more arguments surround Damage Deposits and the giving of them back...there is a movement to do away with them all together because too many landlords abuse them...in most legit cases, they don't cover the cost of repairs and in illegit cases, the landlord feels entitled and simply lies to keep the money...either scenerio, the DD system really isn't working. These new non-refundable deposits are just another way of abusing the system. For those who have had rotten tenants, hate to say it, but it goes with being a landlord...you take the good with the bad, chalk it up to operating expense or find another business to be in. :shrug: I lived in the same suite for 7 years...did my own repairs, paid my rent, kept quiet, took care of things (shampooed, painted, fixed leaking taps, etc.) and the company MADE money off me...the next tenant might not have been so good...it's a crap shoot, but a lot of businesses are like that.

It all boils down to good people or bad...pets don't dictate how a person is going to treat a rental property and to charge extra just in case seems unfare...especially if you don't give it back (with interest) when the person moves out.

lia12
June 25th, 2009, 09:06 PM
I have to agree with Melinda , I've witnessed too many of these pet owners who can completely ruin an apartment in a few monhs. Also not all of Ontario allow pets, and many places that do know you have a pet will find another reason to not rent to people owning pets. As long as they don't say no because they have a pet they're off the hook. Saying this , if I was a landlord I would screen the people carefully and probably take a chance on renting to people with pets as I'm an animal lover and feel sorry for the responsible owners who don't get a fair shake because of a few bad apples.

Luvmypitgirls
June 26th, 2009, 02:38 AM
$150 is a small pet fee. I would want a huge (refundable) deposit because carpets/padding and even walls can be completely ruined.

I think I had to pay $500 refundable for my cat when I rented, before the days of non-refundable became the norm. It annoyed me b/c my cat never even has a small accident, but I understood they could not trust me on that.

They kept it - saying there were urine stains in the carpet/padding. LIE! Grrrrrrr.

I think the new non-refundables are like insurance. The ones that cause no damage balance out with the ones that cause a lot of damage.

I am leaving behind area rugs, very nice ones, because I did our house in laminate and her recently aquired dog is fairly old (Golden Ret/HuskyX)I don't want him slipping and sliding and hurting himself, but he sheds like crazy, plus her two cats. I explained that it is not refundable, as I will use it to have my area carpets cleaned, whether they urinate on them or not is irrellevant, the carpets will still need to be cleaned of dog and cat hair and odors left behind.
Her regular damage deposit, which I reduced to 700 dollars instead of a full months rent which is the norm, is completely refundable provided there isn't extensive damage done to my property. I'm not expecting any issues really since she is 63 and her two adult sons are 34 &40 something. The house they rent now is spotless, obviously they take pride in their surroundings, so I'm not worried, and she doesn't mind paying the pet fee.
I've seen some that charge 100-150 non refundable pet fee PER pet, so I don't think I'm being unreasonable.

Luvmypitgirls
June 26th, 2009, 02:51 AM
Just as a heads up, in Alberta, carpet cleaning is under "normal wear and tear" as in carpets should be cleaned in between tenants and that cost should be built into the rent as an operating cost. If you charge a tenant for it directly, they can go through the Advisory Board and you will have to give it back to them...been there. ;) Unfortunately, in Alberta these non-refundable deposits are legal though, but if you say it's because you are charging for carpet cleaning, a tenant does have some rights because the law supercedes any agreement between landlord and tenant.

Difference of opinion here I guess...I would not rent from a landlord who charges the deposit because I see it as a cash grab. As a business person, a landlord needs to figure out his/her expenses and factor them into the rent over the long run. Damage to a suite is covered under the regular Damage Deposit and if more damage is done, that is what the court is for. $150 or $2000...neither one is fair nor justified.

I disagree completely, I believe it is fair and justified. I am leaving behind several area rugs for the comfort and safety of her dog, who is old and has some hip issues. The runners and area rugs will help him move around a little safer. If I weren't leaving them behind for her I wouldn't ask for the deposit.
She informed me that she was worried about him slipping and sliding and getting hurt, that she didn't have area rugs and runners, that is when I made the agreement that I would leave them, but I would want a pet fee to have them cleaned after they vacate.
Trust me, it is not a cash grab on my part whatsoever, infact I will be losing money renting to these folks, but it's a small price to pay to have someone I know and respect renting, then strangers, who may or may not have respect for my house.
I feel if I leave my own personal property for her to borrow, then asking for a cleaning fee is both fair and justified. Not to mention, I'm only charging them 1/2 a months rent for a damage deposit, I don't know how much more accomodating and fair I can be.:shrug:

Luvmypitgirls
June 26th, 2009, 03:02 AM
If you go to Service Alberta's website, more arguments surround Damage Deposits and the giving of them back...there is a movement to do away with them all together because too many landlords abuse them...in most legit cases, they don't cover the cost of repairs and in illegit cases, the landlord feels entitled and simply lies to keep the money...either scenerio, the DD system really isn't working. These new non-refundable deposits are just another way of abusing the system. For those who have had rotten tenants, hate to say it, but it goes with being a landlord...you take the good with the bad, chalk it up to operating expense or find another business to be in. :shrug: I lived in the same suite for 7 years...did my own repairs, paid my rent, kept quiet, took care of things (shampooed, painted, fixed leaking taps, etc.) and the company MADE money off me...the next tenant might not have been so good...it's a crap shoot, but a lot of businesses are like that.

It all boils down to good people or bad...pets don't dictate how a person is going to treat a rental property and to charge extra just in case seems unfare...especially if you don't give it back (with interest) when the person moves out.

Well if they do away with damage deposits, I believe the homeless rate will jump, because ppl aren't going to "risk" their properties without some kind of compensation, nor should they be asked to.
Just like there are shady landlords out there, there are just as many if not more shady renters, that falsely represent themselves, and with the privacy act it's harder to weed out the bad from the good, and it's the landlord that stands to lose more than a renter, infact many good landlords end up paying out far more in repairs then they collected in a damage deposit, including the interest incurred.

mastifflover
June 26th, 2009, 06:51 AM
Living in Toronto landlords cannot refuse to rent because of a pet even though they do. I know it is not right but if they do not ask I do not offer the information and once you move in and you have a well behaved pet there is nothing they can do. I had a landlord try and kick me and Bud out but to his dismay the other tenants all came to his defense and said he never bothered anybody in fact they felt safer with him there. I find kids way more destructive and noisy than most pets.

TacoGrl
June 26th, 2009, 08:51 AM
Yes, good landlords are painted with the same brush as bad landlords...kinda like how good renters are painted with the same brush as bad renters. ;)

LPG...your intentions may be good and I understand where you are coming from, but to charge a cleaning fee is against the rules unless the place is left in a condition above "normal wear and tear" and then cleaning is supposed to come out of the DD...if the place is left clean, then the tenant is legally entitled to their money back...with a non-refundable deposit however, the tenant really doesn't legally have to clean anything before they move out and that is more work for you. :shrug:

As I have previously said, I am not sure why more landlords don't do regular inspections of their rental units...have it in the lease and have the renter sign off prior to possession that they will be evicted if they do not maintain cleanliness and damage-free tenacy...would solve a lot of problems down the road. :shrug:

Luvmypitgirls
June 26th, 2009, 01:51 PM
Yes, good landlords are painted with the same brush as bad landlords...kinda like how good renters are painted with the same brush as bad renters. ;)

LPG...your intentions may be good and I understand where you are coming from, but to charge a cleaning fee is against the rules unless the place is left in a condition above "normal wear and tear" and then cleaning is supposed to come out of the DD...if the place is left clean, then the tenant is legally entitled to their money back...with a non-refundable deposit however, the tenant really doesn't legally have to clean anything before they move out and that is more work for you. :shrug:

As I have previously said, I am not sure why more landlords don't do regular inspections of their rental units...have it in the lease and have the renter sign off prior to possession that they will be evicted if they do not maintain cleanliness and damage-free tenacy...would solve a lot of problems down the road. :shrug:


Asking for a pet fee for cleaning carpets is against the rules, perhaps I didn't make myself clear, she is borrowing my area rugs and hall runners, as she can't afford her own. I would othewise be taking them to my new house.
She wants to borrow them until she can afford her own, that is why I am asking for a fee ontop of the DD. Why shouldn't I ask for a fee to have them cleaned? When she gets her own, I will be taking mine to my new house, I don't see it any differently than if someone borrows something and it gets damaged, you would expect compensation. I borrowed a friends dress, I accidently ripped it, I paid for it.
She is "borrowing" something of mine, and I feel it's fair to ask for the money to have them cleaned, and she has no problem with it either.
If I had broadloom carpet, wall to wall, then the damage would be covered by her DD, but I am not required to leave personal items for her to use, therefore asking for a fee to have them cleaned is perfectly within my rights.

If they make collecting a DD illegal, watch for skyrocketing rents. What would cost you 1200 to rent will now be 2000 +.

Melinda
June 26th, 2009, 03:18 PM
my cousin tried to evict his renters but it was winter and it was illegal to put them out in certain weather conditions, so he gave two months notice, thats the only legal recourse he could take, thats when they skipped.

TacoGrl
June 26th, 2009, 03:36 PM
Asking for a pet fee for cleaning carpets is against the rules, perhaps I didn't make myself clear, she is borrowing my area rugs and hall runners, as she can't afford her own. I would othewise be taking them to my new house.
She wants to borrow them until she can afford her own, that is why I am asking for a fee ontop of the DD. Why shouldn't I ask for a fee to have them cleaned? When she gets her own, I will be taking mine to my new house, I don't see it any differently than if someone borrows something and it gets damaged, you would expect compensation. I borrowed a friends dress, I accidently ripped it, I paid for it.
She is "borrowing" something of mine, and I feel it's fair to ask for the money to have them cleaned, and she has no problem with it either.
If I had broadloom carpet, wall to wall, then the damage would be covered by her DD, but I am not required to leave personal items for her to use, therefore asking for a fee to have them cleaned is perfectly within my rights.

If they make collecting a DD illegal, watch for skyrocketing rents. What would cost you 1200 to rent will now be 2000 +.


I didn't realize that fee was just for cleaning the borrowed rugs...I thought it was a general cleaning fee...if for just the rugs, then whatever deal is made is ok and I have no problem with it either...not that my opinion is the be all end all :D

The government is also considering collecting the DD themselves and the landlords have to prove they made the repairs they are claiming as well as that the damage was actually made...other-wise the tenant gets the money back from the government...a lot of administrative costs with that one :eek:

It is just a shame there are so many bad on both sides that make it such an ugly sitution and ruins it for the good on both sides. :frustrated:

Luvmypitgirls
June 26th, 2009, 08:22 PM
I didn't realize that fee was just for cleaning the borrowed rugs...I thought it was a general cleaning fee...if for just the rugs, then whatever deal is made is ok and I have no problem with it either...not that my opinion is the be all end all :D

The government is also considering collecting the DD themselves and the landlords have to prove they made the repairs they are claiming as well as that the damage was actually made...other-wise the tenant gets the money back from the government...a lot of administrative costs with that one :eek:

It is just a shame there are so many bad on both sides that make it such an ugly sitution and ruins it for the good on both sides. :frustrated:

I wouldn't have an issue with a Landlord/Tenant Board collecting DD's and putting them into a savings account to build interest. It should stay in trust for 30 days after the tenant vacates, so that the landlord has time to make any repairs needed and then supply the repair records with receipts, then the money spent is deducted from the balance of the DD and the interest it accumulated. Should the repairs exceed the amount of the DD, then the said Board could advocate for the landlord in court to sue.
Should the repairs not exceed the amount of the DD, then the balance left after repair and cleaning, could then be reimbursed to the tenant.
That way good tenants aren't going to get ripped off and good landlords have recourse too :D
I believe there is too much government meddling in our lives as is, but this is one idea that I could definately appreciate!:D

TacoGrl
June 26th, 2009, 09:30 PM
I wouldn't have an issue with a Landlord/Tenant Board collecting DD's and putting them into a savings account to build interest. It should stay in trust for 30 days after the tenant vacates, so that the landlord has time to make any repairs needed and then supply the repair records with receipts, then the money spent is deducted from the balance of the DD and the interest it accumulated. Should the repairs exceed the amount of the DD, then the said Board could advocate for the landlord in court to sue.
Should the repairs not exceed the amount of the DD, then the balance left after repair and cleaning, could then be reimbursed to the tenant.
That way good tenants aren't going to get ripped off and good landlords have recourse too :D
I believe there is too much government meddling in our lives as is, but this is one idea that I could definately appreciate!:D


It does sound like a good idea...just so many disagreements over DDs...on both sides...there should be a mediator/arbitrator so neither side gets ripped off. I know down in the states (I was reading on-line when I was researching something else :rolleyes:), there is a system in a few states where the landlord can sign off immediately to return the DD or has 15 days to deliver to the tenant a breakdown of repairs needed...the tenant can then go to arbitration and it is decided there what the tenant has to pay or IF the tenant has to pay if it is dealing with normal wear and tear...the landlord does have to prove the repairs were done within I think it's a month after the decision.

Coolcustomer
July 26th, 2013, 06:42 AM
After spending a whole month trying to find a reasonable landlord for my small dog and cat I found that you simply have to lie to them to even find a place to bring in your pets, there is no negotiation or reasoning with them, just your application in the garbage. 75 percent of landlords here are rejecting your aplication because of pets, then they get all shocked and shaken when they get lied to citing the damage that pets do on their properties.

You read many posts about their cage rattling about how a dog did this and that. Sure, if you don't take care of your pets, they'll tear up your apartment from boredom, starvation, wanting to go to the bathroom, just the same as any 8 year old child. Thats abuse plane and simple, bad dog owners are no different than bad parents.

Also, many landlords talk about damage on the cheapest flooring material that you can get, well, those cheap laminate, plastic, imitation wood that the landlord insists that you must protect for the years you live there. Sorry guys, this tenant isn't buying it, even under basic regular use conditions, these floors last only a couple of years before they are completely finnished in places. If you got proper hard wood, or or some kind of stone or ceramic tyling. All scratches made on those are on the surface and are buffed right out. Really good floors can literally last decades!

To avoid the Cheap out and charge tactic from the landlord, you need to take pictures of the place before you move in, you need to also find where he got his floor and at what price, then take a picture of that, put those pictures away somewhere safe and VOILA, safety, oh, use a newspaper or make sure your camera can time stamp your digital pictures.

Oh, back to the shock, shaken and betrayal attitude of the landlord, when you bring in your pet after signing a lease and telling them you never had one. The law is protecting pet owners, because a lease that says no pets is not enforceable. People need places to stay, (after being personally rejected 20-30 times arguing to keep my furry friends) if landlords will not reason with a tenant, then perhaps they should consider paying their mortgage on their own, any other actions against you because of it can be brought to the rental tribunal.

Dog Dancer
July 26th, 2013, 11:50 AM
As a landlord, homeowner and pet owner myself, I'll be damned if my tenant is going to set the terms of occupancy in my suite. I've had pets all my life, and when I rented yes they did damage to the properties. I always repaired the damage. But it happens and it doesn't mean you're a bad pet owner, it just means that dogs don't like to be alone all day while you're at work maybe. Currently I have two puppies and a senior. The puppies have chewed the stairs outside, chewed the moulding on the corners of the house, wrecked the lawn to say the least, all just in the course of being puppies. I totally would love to rent my basement to someone with a pet, but I have three pets and that's the limit allowed in our city. If you move in with a secret pet, I'm throwing you out. I will not jeopardize my pets by letting you have one.

I have to tell you as a landlord, the tenants have most of the rights. It took me two months to evict a tenant who wouldn't pay rent. Really!

You really expect that landlords should put top quality hardwood flooring down in their rental suites so that your pets won't ruin it?? Buy your own home and do that. My bedroom floors are laminate and my dogs have not destroyed them. If it's good enough for me it should be good enough for my tenants. If not buy your own place.

Lastly, any good landlord does a condition inspection of the suite, along with the tenant and fills in papers prior to the tenant moving in. If both parties agree to the condition of the unit prior to occupancy then disputing the damages done shouldn't be a problem.

I really do get that it's hard to be a renter when you have pets, I did it for 20 years. If you are a renter it's very important that you have a long term plan before you buy a pet so that there is some security for your pet. Forcing your pets onto somebody else is not the answer. But the bottom line is this is my home, I have my own pets, and my rules are my rules. I don't need to rent to anybody I don't want to. If you move in with pets and have lied to me, you will be very, very sorry! Lying is not a good foundation for landlord/tenant relations.

Barkingdog
July 26th, 2013, 12:49 PM
As a landlord, homeowner and pet owner myself, I'll be damned if my tenant is going to set the terms of occupancy in my suite. I've had pets all my life, and when I rented yes they did damage to the properties. I always repaired the damage. But it happens and it doesn't mean you're a bad pet owner, it just means that dogs don't like to be alone all day while you're at work maybe. Currently I have two puppies and a senior. The puppies have chewed the stairs outside, chewed the moulding on the corners of the house, wrecked the lawn to say the least, all just in the course of being puppies. I totally would love to rent my basement to someone with a pet, but I have three pets and that's the limit allowed in our city. If you move in with a secret pet, I'm throwing you out. I will not jeopardize my pets by letting you have one.

I have to tell you as a landlord, the tenants have most of the rights. It took me two months to evict a tenant who wouldn't pay rent. Really!

You really expect that landlords should put top quality hardwood flooring down in their rental suites so that your pets won't ruin it?? Buy your own home and do that. My bedroom floors are laminate and my dogs have not destroyed them. If it's good enough for me it should be good enough for my tenants. If not buy your own place.

Lastly, any good landlord does a condition inspection of the suite, along with the tenant and fills in papers prior to the tenant moving in. If both parties agree to the condition of the unit prior to occupancy then disputing the damages done shouldn't be a problem.

I really do get that it's hard to be a renter when you have pets, I did it for 20 years. If you are a renter it's very important that you have a long term plan before you buy a pet so that there is some security for your pet. Forcing your pets onto somebody else is not the answer. But the bottom line is this is my home, I have my own pets, and my rules are my rules. I don't need to rent to anybody I don't want to. If you move in with pets and have lied to me, you will be very, very sorry! Lying is not a good foundation for landlord/tenant relations.

I tired being a landlord and hated it. I have a tenant that had not paid rent for 2 month and had a one child and was also pregnant , she did not tell me this when she moved in . I had a right to know how many people would be living in my apartment . I lived upstairs . It was a pain in the butt getting rid of the deadbeat tenant. My rent was very reasonable and I the welfare office called me as they wanted me take someone welfare for a tenant . There was no way in Hell I would had done that as it would very hard to evict a person on welfare. And no it should not be illegal for a landlord to say they want no pet in their apartments. Even if the pet did no damage it could still have ticks or fleas and they're hard to rid of. And someone pet bit another tenant the landlord could be held reliable for allowing the pet in their building

marko
July 26th, 2013, 02:54 PM
This is an old thread being brought back to life.

LOTS of things play into a landlord's decision not to rent to pet owners.

Here in Quebec for example, landlords aren't allowed to ask for damage deposits. and tenants know this. There is zero incentive therefore to rent to pet owners when it's an extreme hassle to collect the damage that dogs and cats do. (scratches in the walls, doors, and worse). Very very very few tenants will repair the damage their pets make in my experience. Quebec landlords lose money in repairs when they rent to pet owners, so they choose not to.

Surely this doesn't represent members on this board, but it represents so many situations that it's not worth it for the majority of landlords that I know. :2cents: