Can an Emotional Support Dog Be Any Size? (leasing, tenants, rental property)
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.
Once again, a "Service Animal" is specifically defined under the ADA. This is the one and only federally proteced animal throughout the USA. The requirments for a "Service Animal" is specific, the access for "Service Animals" is specific, and the limitations of anyone questioning the "Service Animal" is very limited. "Service Animals" do not need any documentation (no such thing as a doctor's note), you can not ask for any doumentation (you can ask only for mandated legal health items like rabbies shots), and the animal can not be denied access for reasons not spelled out in law (such as aggresive), and breed restrictions do not apply to "Service Animals" (fedreal law on "Service Animals trump any state/local laws or insurance company restrictions).
However, the ADA "Servce Animal" laws stop at the private premise of a residence. Landlords do not follow ADA "Service Animals" requirments for individuals renting property, they follow the Fair Housing Act as it pertains to reasonable accomodations for Assistive Animals.
Landlord are also required to follow any state or local additional protections if they apply.
Because ADA "Service Animals" definitions, protections, access and everything else does not apply, following or thinking ADA will get a landlord in trouble.
Your patience in repeating this is commendable. If only those who persist in spouting half-truths and half state-specific truths and cease and desist from confusing ADA Service Animals and ESAs would simply read ...
I have a friend in my building who got a dog at a local shelter in November. It is her emotional support dog. It is obviously a border collie mix, but is only about 20 pounds and about a year old. The shelter and the vet believe the dog will not get much larger.
However, she was visiting yesterday, and I can see that the dog is growing. I don't think she'll get as big as a border collie, but I am wondering if she will get over our building's 25 pound dog limit.
I did a little research online this morning, and learned that a landlord can say no to an emotional support dog based on breed restrictions that LL' insurance has. In other words, if the insurance won't cover German Shepherds, then the LL can say no to a German Shepherd ESA.
I also saw something about that a LL possibly can say no to any 50 pound ESA if they otherwise allow dogs, but only dogs 25 pounds or less (as an example). But this was someone talking on another forum, not a legal source.
Does anyone know? Or may have better luck finding the answer than I've had so far this morning lol? It's true, I just sat down with my coffee...
In 2006, the Office of Enforcement for the US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development issued the guidelines (still in use today) on this subject. The basics are:
It is considered unreasonable to require a landlord to accept Assistive Animals under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), if the insurance carrier for that premise will, cancel the policy, raise cost substantially for that premise, or otherwise change the conditions and coverage of the insurance policy based on breed and weight restrictions.
In evaluating if it is unreasonable, the landlord must be sure that the breed and weight restrictions will not be waived for Assistive Animals under the FHA. It's a noteworthy warning that breed and weight restrictions imposed by insurance carriers may not apply to Assistive Animals. A landlord who denies a request for accommodation based on an insurance company’s restriction but fails to verify that alternatives for Assistive Animals under FHA was available, is considered to violate the FHA. Or to put it in simple terms, the landlord has a duty to verify with their carrier that any restrictions cannot or are not waived for assistive animals.
If an insurance company offers no waiver to breed or weight restrictions for legitimate Assistive Animals, the landlord has a responsibility to inquiry with other carriers to see if acceptable polices are available that would not be a financial or coverage hardship to the landlord. Or to put it in simple terms, a landlord needs to seek coverage even if it means switching companies unless switching will create an undue hardship.
If a landlord cannot get a waiver from their existing carrier, and they are unable to find similar coverage at similar rates, they will not be viewed as violating the FHA. However, a landlord cannot impose restrictions based on their pet policy or their own other criterias.
So, to answer the question, makes sure it’s the insurance carrier and only the insurance carrier imposing restrictions, otherwise it’s considered a landlord restriction and if it violates the protections of the FHA, the landlord can be held liable.
Note: this pertains only to federal law. State/local laws may have additional protections.
In 2006, the Office of Enforcement for the US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development issued the guidelines (still in use today) on this subject. The basics are:
It is considered unreasonable to require a landlord to accept Assistive Animals under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), if the insurance carrier for that premise will, cancel the policy, raise cost substantially for that premise, or otherwise change the conditions and coverage of the insurance policy based on breed and weight restrictions.
In evaluating if it is unreasonable, the landlord must be sure that the breed and weight restrictions will not be waived for Assistive Animals under the FHA. It's a noteworthy warning that breed and weight restrictions imposed by insurance carriers may not apply to Assistive Animals. A landlord who denies a request for accommodation based on an insurance company’s restriction but fails to verify that alternatives for Assistive Animals under FHA was available, is considered to violate the FHA. Or to put it in simple terms, the landlord has a duty to verify with their carrier that any restrictions cannot or are not waived for assistive animals.
If an insurance company offers no waiver to breed or weight restrictions for legitimate Assistive Animals, the landlord has a responsibility to inquiry with other carriers to see if acceptable polices are available that would not be a financial or coverage hardship to the landlord. Or to put it in simple terms, a landlord needs to seek coverage even if it means switching companies unless switching will create an undue hardship.
If a landlord cannot get a waiver from their existing carrier, and they are unable to find similar coverage at similar rates, they will not be viewed as violating the FHA. However, a landlord cannot impose restrictions based on their pet policy or their own other criterias.
So, to answer the question, makes sure it’s the insurance carrier and only the insurance carrier imposing restrictions, otherwise it’s considered a landlord restriction and if it violates the protections of the FHA, the landlord can be held liable.
Note: this pertains only to federal law. State/local laws may have additional protections.
Wow! Thanks so much for this info. This is exactly what I was looking for!
It is so wrong not to be able to demand a certificate signed by a doctor stating that a person is qualified to have such an animal .
People aren't allowed to park in handicap spots just on their own say-so...they must have proper tags. Why should this be different?
It is so wrong not to be able to demand a certificate signed by a doctor stating that a person is qualified to have such an animal .
People aren't allowed to park in handicap spots just on their own say-so...they must have proper tags. Why should this be different?
Handicapped tags are a certification that the person in question is disabled enough (or, in many states, just OLD enough) to need it. There is no central certification for service dogs, and that's one reason it's different.
I believe that, under FHA, landlords can require a doctor's note in order to accommodate a dog that would normally not be allowed due to other restrictions. And, as I posted upthread, another reasonable accommodation would be having the dog's owner insure for liability if the landlord's insurance would not cover it (for instance, the breed).
I know very little about service dogs in general, but I dont' think it's fair that a landlord doesn't have a right to ask for proof that the dog is truly a service dog. I also doubt anyone who uses one would be that offended if asked for proof (unless it was obvious) ...I know I wouldn't be...but I also wouldn't be trying to force my landlord to accept a dog that wasn't allowed in the first place.
I was in Wal Mart not too long ago and there's this guy pushing a grocery cart with his Cocker Spaniel in the back of the buggy. The sign on the dog clearly says no dogs, except service dogs. This dog was NOT a service dog, it had no vest, and it was rather unruly. The manager was speaking to another customer who asked about the dog and the manager said " I can't do anything about it, they said it's a service dog and I can't ask for proof. I don't agree with it, but I could lose my job for offending them if they report me"
That goes on here a lot in Florida and more often in 'season' when the snowbirds come down and can't leave Pookie home alone for whatever reason. So either they lock the dog in their car or they take them in the store.
Under the ADA, they are not allowed to ask the disability, true. They can ask what services the dog does, if I recall correctly.
Also, a misbehaving dog, service or not, can be asked to leave under ADA. True service dogs are trained to behave while they are working, and they would be working in public situations. They are not required to wear a vest, though I think it would go a long way toward acceptance of the dog if they did.
I saw a service dog in training in JoAnn Fabrics before Christmas. It was wearing a vest which clearly indicated both its service status, and its training status. It was perfectly behaved. As far as I could tell, no one objected to the dog at all.
Under the ADA, they are not allowed to ask the disability, true. They can ask what services the dog does, if I recall correctly.
Also, a misbehaving dog, service or not, can be asked to leave under ADA. True service dogs are trained to behave while they are working, and they would be working in public situations. They are not required to wear a vest, though I think it would go a long way toward acceptance of the dog if they did.
I saw a service dog in training in JoAnn Fabrics before Christmas. It was wearing a vest which clearly indicated both its service status, and its training status. It was perfectly behaved. As far as I could tell, no one objected to the dog at all.
Where in my post did I say anything about asking anyone about their disability? I didn't. I said they should be required to show proof that the dog is a true 'service dog' This dog was not a service dog...that part was obvious.
Handicapped tags are a certification that the person in question is disabled enough (or, in many states, just OLD enough) to need it. There is no central certification for service dogs, and that's one reason it's different.
I believe that, under FHA, landlords can require a doctor's note in order to accommodate a dog that would normally not be allowed due to other restrictions. And, as I posted upthread, another reasonable accommodation would be having the dog's owner insure for liability if the landlord's insurance would not cover it (for instance, the breed).
What states would that be??
I know why it's different. The question I asked is why should it be different?
Where in my post did I say anything about asking anyone about their disability? I didn't. I said they should be required to show proof that the dog is a true 'service dog' This dog was not a service dog...that part was obvious.
I'm telling you that there is no certificate for service dogs, ergo, no proof. They can ask for a doctor's note under the FHA guidelines. That's as close as it gets.
I know why it's different. The question I asked is why should it be different?
In Delaware, you only need be over ... 75, I think ... I saw it when I was at the DMV. No idea about other states. I see it as a kindness to those who have difficulty walking distances due to age-related infirmities.
Really, I'd have no problem with state or federal certification of service dogs, but it does not exist at this time. My thought would be that if the dog is trained and graduates from a certified school, that would suffice. But there are no certifications for service dog schools, as far as I know, and it also excludes owner-trained dogs. Write to your congresscritter if you want that changed.
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.
