Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Oregon
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-18-2015, 10:21 PM
 
Location: Reno, NV
824 posts, read 2,791,917 times
Reputation: 754

Advertisements

I am not from Oregon, but this thread caught my eye as I AM FED UP WITH FAKE SERVICE ANIMALS!

I live in a no-pets building. I am by no means an animal hater, but my building is getting more and more of these phony baloney companion animals. That they apparently have the status as seeing eye dogs--as far as housing is concerned--is ridiculous! (The even more egregious fakers are the ones with the fake vests, for going into restaurants, etc.)

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=fake+service+dogs

Thanks for letting me vent.

Last edited by nyctc7; 01-18-2015 at 10:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2015, 02:12 AM
 
Location: Tucson, AZ
1,588 posts, read 2,532,400 times
Reputation: 4188
I think it all has to do with the humanizing of animals by people who don't want human babies. I want to barf every time I see a Facebook post using the term "Doggie daddy or mommy" or "Dog parents." Human babies are difficult "doggie babies" are relatively easy and people can post pictures of them in cute little outfits on Facebook just like they would with human babies but they have the added benefit of them not being expensive or needing constant attention. "Human babies require too much work" I have heard at least 2 DINK couples say.

In Germany an animal is an animal. It's a well trained companion but is still an animal and that is its status. It does not go into grocery stores or restaurants or indoors where it is not allowed. It does not ride around in purses or get dressed up. It does not go in the passenger cabin of an airplane... and these are very well trained dogs.

Like I stated before it's almost like people feel entitled to a pet they can take everywhere because they don't want human babies or something. It seems like the average breed is getting smaller and smaller, mini pins, mini Schnauzer, teacup chihuahua. I'm starting to see the same with cats. On my last us airways flight there was a rather robust middle aged woman with a cat in a carry-on case across from me. For some reason she thought she would open the carrier and hold the cat. Yeah right. The cat clawed the crap out of her the second it got half-way out of the bag. It promptly started running, because cat. And this woman starts screaming and crying like shes going to die, odd coincident we hit some choppy air at the same time and all the passengers start getting concerned like there is a problem with the plane or something.
One of the flight attendants told people what was going on, and it still took 20 something minutes to locate the cat. SMH. I over heard her talking later that she was just going to Portland to visit people for 5 days. You couldn't leave the cat alone for 5 days?

I have a lab and I take her a few selective places but they are all places a dog should go. The river, the hiking trails, dog parks, I even bought a home with a large yard and built special infrastructure for her. I just don't feel compelled to take her everywhere, she has never been on a plane, and I just simply will never take her on one, same with the cat. I have 3 small humans to worry about and they occupy 80% of my free time.

The biggest problem we have regarding pets is UNAUTHORIZED pets. In our Arizona house we allowed 2 dogs and a cat. or 2 cats. My neighbor called me and told me "you have 5 dogs in your back yard" and he sent me a pic of 5 dogs in my back yard 1 week apart. So I call the tenant (whom I know personally) and ask him about reports from multiple neighbors of 5 dogs at the house (I was also getting HOA complaints). He doesn't answer, I call him, he doesn't answer. I send him a nasty leagalese letter, amazingly he calls me. He BSes me uses our friendship as leverage and then says the dogs will be gone in a week he just had to hold them for someone who was on vacation.

See this is the problem. I told him 2 dogs, he signed a contract in writing. A contract that said as long as he lived by a few rules and paid me on time he got a great place to live in a safe neighborhood, its a rental, just like a rental car or a loan there are conditions. He took it upon himself to lie to me, and break the rules of our contract just because he wanted "two baddazz rotties" as he put it on his Facebook (so he had 4 that were his, only one was truly a visitor). If a personal friend won't even follow the rules then how the hell can I trust some complete stranger. People think renting a house gives them the same entitlements as owning these days so they think they can flaunt the rules, and some disconnected property management company is too busy to enforce the rules. When its a private owner its a bit more personal. That is my real problem with these new laws they have just opened a gateway to take away quite a bit of control from landlords

Thanks for your advice and experience electrican4u.

I will likely get out, the housing market is hot here and I can sell and make a good profit. Also, I still have the property mortgaged and it really doesn't make much money. I'm thinking I should have bought more properties in AZ, I could have had 2 houses for the price of 1 at one point a few years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 09:20 AM
 
2,542 posts, read 4,003,946 times
Reputation: 3615
http://www.fhco.org/pdfs/articles/Co...viceAnimal.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Reno, NV
824 posts, read 2,791,917 times
Reputation: 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyAMG View Post
I think it all has to do with the humanizing of animals by people who don't want human babies.
Oh yah. People have probably been spoiling their pets since time immemorial, but in the last twenty years or so, it has gotten ridiculous...Gourmet organic dog food, luxury day care, and couples who act like having a pet is the equivalent of raising a child. I remember a contestant on "Wheel of Fortune" who said that she and her husband where the parents of a (I forget the breed). I'd like to ask these people, if, like the parents of human children, they don't wish to outlive their "child". Heh heh.

From http://www.fhco.org/pdfs/articles/Co...viceAnimal.pdf

They list some examples that I think most people would find reasonable. Then they ruin it with the service iguana. Service iguana indeed. In other words, anybody can justify anything.

It also states "A service animal is not a pet and should never be treated as one." Funny thing, the people in my building with these companion animals treat their dogs, and have everybody else treat them, as PETS.

But maybe it works...my downstairs neighbor, who has a companion dog, has had a couple of parties to 4am. I guess without the dog, she'd be too depressed to have them...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 12:12 PM
 
129 posts, read 189,249 times
Reputation: 121
We deal with this all the time on transit. People bring large pit bulls on a rope onto our trains and call them service animals and there is nothing we can do.

However, I am wondering.. if upon leaving you find the animal did a lot of damage to the home are you still able to charge the tenant for the excess damage?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
15,578 posts, read 40,440,822 times
Reputation: 17483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarick View Post

However, I am wondering.. if upon leaving you find the animal did a lot of damage to the home are you still able to charge the tenant for the excess damage?
Yes. Tenants are responsible for any damages caused by service animals. That's why there will be more small claims court cases over companion animals (since you can't charge an upfront deposit). It is inevitable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 05:26 PM
 
4,059 posts, read 5,621,284 times
Reputation: 2892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
Yes. Tenants are responsible for any damages caused by service animals. That's why there will be more small claims court cases over companion animals (since you can't charge an upfront deposit). It is inevitable.
In general I'd agree, except that deposits seem to be climbing pretty significantly hand-in-hand with rents.

As a side note, property mgmt firms seem more inclined to find the slightest premise not large chunks now as well, but that's another thread. Here, if they've already got a $1200 security deposit there had better be some serious damage if they're going to seize that and go for more on top, imo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2015, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Salem, OR
15,578 posts, read 40,440,822 times
Reputation: 17483
Quote:
Originally Posted by bler144 View Post
In general I'd agree, except that deposits seem to be climbing pretty significantly hand-in-hand with rents.

As a side note, property mgmt firms seem more inclined to find the slightest premise not large chunks now as well, but that's another thread. Here, if they've already got a $1200 security deposit there had better be some serious damage if they're going to seize that and go for more on top, imo.
A big dog could easily cause more than $1200 in damages to a house/unit. If the renter is claiming that dog as a companion dog and gets a doc to write a fake letter, I see more cases in small claims happening. It might be that landlords just up security deposits for everyone to try and minimize that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 12:18 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,464,007 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
Familial status and disability have been protected classes for a long time and is protected on the federal level (moving to Washington will not help you as you will have to follow these laws there as well) and as state level. Service dogs are a "reasonable accommodation" as required by law. This is not new. When was the last time you took a fair housing class? Also, what is in your contract that you are mentioning kids?

Single people are not married, but they still have marital status.

Shouldn't childless adults still have familial status?

If it is unlawful to discriminate against those with children, how is it lawful to discriminate against those without children?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2015, 02:31 PM
 
77 posts, read 89,358 times
Reputation: 174
Default New landlord tenant law

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Vega View Post
Keep on voting for Democrats.
I believe this was included in the Fair Housing Act of 1988, signed into law by that staunch democratic ideologue Ronald Reagan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Oregon

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top