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.
"When the owner of the property asked the tenant about this grapevine news, the tenant admits same is true."
It still doesn't rise to the level of "fact" that would impose upon the owner any duty or responsibility. The tenant could also tell the owner he had a break-in the night before. It doesn't mean that the owner suddenly has specific knowledge of a future specific event or when it will happen and that he has a duty to prevent a future break-in.
The dog owner is the responsible party. Why in America do people always want to shift responsible away from responsible parties to others? If your dog bites me, it's you I'm holding accountable, not your landlord.
The landlord has sold the right of occupancy to the home via a lease. He hasn't adopted the tenant or become the insurance company for the tenant against anything bad or wrong that the tenant may do.
And if the "neighborhood grapevine" has concerns, they should take action in accordance with local laws instead of doing nothing or expecting a landlord to act upon their fears or hearsay.
The answer to the original poster is yes, it can happen. I gave first hand experience and knowledge.
I'm going to agree with this answer. My insurance company gave me a list of dog breeds that are unacceptable for my rental house where coverage would be a problem.
If a renter has what's considered vicious dog (pit bulls) and they bite someone. Can the owner of the property be sued??
I was holding off from making a comment...
My mom was attacked by a pit bull and injured a block from her home... she was on disability for several months because of a hairline shoulder fracture from the attack...
Mom's Health Insurance, Dental Insurance, the Landlords Liability Insurance and State Disability people independently investigated along with Animal Control and each determined legal action would be fruitless in part because they determined the Landlord had not acted negligently.
The Tenant's 13 year old daughter had just come home from school and had the family pit bull in the house... as she opened the door to get the mail, the dog bolted through the screen door and attacked my mom walking on the sidewalk on the other side of the street... along with nerve damage from the shoulder injury, mom also had a tooth knocked out.
The consensus was the OWNER of the Dog was responsible, mitigated by the fact that the dog had no prior documented incidents of aggression and the 13-year-old daughter hadn't acted negligently...
The Renter didn't have insurance and was "Judgment Proof” The lawyer for the Tenant said his clients were prepared to file Bankruptcy to discharge any possible award Mom might receive.
Mom's lawyer and several other lawyers said it is pointless to win your suit and not be able to collect... so did all the insurance companies and the State of California...
The Tenant was clearly responsible, had a new Mercedes and 1 year old SUV... but "Owned" nothing...
Last edited by Ultrarunner; 06-10-2008 at 01:43 PM..
Laws may be different everywhere.
But my experience in PA:
Two rental houses. Going out into the country-ish. No fences on either.
Neighbor had a chow dog tied up by a very small dog chain. It looked like what you would put on your cat for the vets... Yeah...
Anyway..My mother was bringing in our Lab from his business on his real dog chain and the chow broke the cat chain and bit her in the arm. Neighbors had to pay out. Not the landlord.
To answer the question simply...YES the landlord can be sued. Whether or not the suer wins is another story.
Best bet is to have a thorough pet addendum in the rental contract, with a list of rules regarding what kind of pet(s) are allowed, acknowledgement by the tenant that they know the county or city laws regarding thier pet, the list of actual pets moving in and no more without asking the landlord etc etc etc.
In most cases, you cannot sue someone for the acts or negligence of a third party. There are exceptions, but the bar is pretty high. It is the dog owner who would be sued, not the owner of the property in which the dog owner lives.
Who would you sue if the dog owner owned the property? The mortgage company? It won't fly.
The exception is if the landlord "knew or should have known" specifically that that specific dog was going to bite someone. It's not enough that it could have been "assumed" that the dog might bite. You'd have to PROVE that the landlord had specific knowledge of an impending event and neglected to take prudent action to prevent the act. That's nearly impossible to prove from a legal standpoint.
Steve
Yeah, you're right. If it was so easy to go after a landlord because of a tenant's dog bite's someone then no one... I mean, NO ONE would allow a tenant to have a dog. Period. The landlord HAS to be connected or negligent in a significant way, shape, or form.
I have rental property and anyone who moves into a house and has a dog must have an addendum for the dog. The lease says NO PETS unless a a pet lease is attached. I do not allow anyone to have the "known" dangerous breeds. If a tenant has a dog and it is not in the lease, they get evicted.
I have learned that the landlord can be sued for anything in spite of what the lease says or attachments to the lease. Some lawyers will see a landlord as "deep pockets" and go for the money. The insurance companies see it as easier to pay out 5 or 10 Thousand to have the problem go away. It's cheaper than discovery and trial. Hence, the premium goes up.
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.