Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wouldn't lie to a landlord; I might bring it up at the last minute of lease negotiation but I wouldn't conceal the third cat after the fact.
THANK YOU for being a responsible pet owner and not taking the horrible advice in this thread!
I honestly don't think you'll have a problem finding a place when you're ready to make the move. If you are a great tenant on paper and the LL allows 2 cats, they will more than likely be willing to work with you on the third. Just be honest and upfront - that will earn you points anyway. Like others have said in this thread, you cannot offer an additional deposit but you CAN offer increased (or a pet) rent. I have friends moving over in a few weeks and they're paying an extra $100 to have their cat there.
Good point, Becca. I've mentioned previously that I've rented with pets in three no-pets situations before and was upfront with the landlords. Steady income, good rental history and great credit rating, with an adorable, well-behaved, freshly groomed cocker spaniel in tow, they decided it was ok to rent to me (and in each case, I left units in better shape than I found them. In one of the three cases, the landlords did charge me more for having the dog, but it was worth it.
Good point, Becca. I've mentioned previously that I've rented with pets in three no-pets situations before and was upfront with the landlords. Steady income, good rental history and great credit rating, with an adorable, well-behaved, freshly groomed cocker spaniel in tow, they decided it was ok to rent to me (and in each case, I left units in better shape than I found them. In one of the three cases, the landlords did charge me more for having the dog, but it was worth it.
Yep, most responsible pet owners are just that - responsible. I don't have a single blemish on my rental record and have never ever been turned down for an apartment I applied for. The last apt I lived in in Hawaii - I was actually the first person in the building they allowed to have pets. Other tenants tried to report me because they all knew of the no-pet policy, but I had a lease that stated otherwise.
I have no problems paying more money to keep my dogs. I just moved into a new place here and I gave a full month's non-refundable deposit. Why? Because I loved the apt, the location, the landlord, and I don't plan on leaving for at least a few years (preferably staying until I'm ready to buy a house). Finding a place that allows 4 dogs is very hard to come by, so the extra money is totally worth it.
Something new to me came up in my most recent insurance policy as a homeowner for a rental property. The insurance specifically excludes bodily injury, medical payments, and physical damage to property by an animal or pet.
If you are a renter with a pet seeking a place to rent, you might want to include in your application proof that you have renters' insurance that covers animals/pets.
I'd not rent to a pet owner without them having proof of insurance due to my policy's exclusions.
Something new to me came up in my most recent insurance policy as a homeowner for a rental property. The insurance specifically excludes bodily injury, medical payments, and physical damage to property by an animal or pet.
If you are a renter with a pet seeking a place to rent, you might want to include in your application proof that you have renters' insurance that covers animals/pets.
I'd not rent to a pet owner without them having proof of insurance due to my policy's exclusions.
Why not require renters insurance for all tenants - not just for pets?
Usually renters' insurance protects the possessions of the renter. I feel that is their decision to make for themselves if they want their items replaced in the case of say a fire.
But in the case of pets, their insurance would help protect me the LL, since my LL's policy excludes animals/pets.
Usually renters' insurance protects the possessions of the renter. I feel that is their decision to make for themselves if they want their items replaced in the case of say a fire.
But in the case of pets, their insurance would help protect me the LL, since my LL's policy excludes animals/pets.
Renters insurance is much more than possessions. I don't want my insurance to kick in unless it is the last resort. If they damage the property or someone gets injured - I want them to pay for it via their renters insurance. For instance - if a hurricane comes in and damages the property - I'm responsible. But if my tenant burns down the entire kitchen - the renters insurance kicks in.
Here's an interesting article about the protections a renter's policy offers, yes especially useful in the case of negligence (such as burning down a kitchen).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
