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.
Sorry to keep spamming you! But, once I knew you had Travelers, I was able to find an article that says that Traveler's has no breed restrictions. So, looks like you're good to go!
Thanks Nomore..I read the first link. This is what concerns me. It's not that a landlord can't be sued..It's that if they are they most likely won't be held liable. I don't think I want the risk of having to fight that battle. I'm just not comfortable moving forward with them without talking to my agent. Sigh...
Yeah, I agree. I'd be paranoid, too. Better safe than sorry.
I've found this an interesting little research project though, and did find this interesting site that lists different states/cities that have specific breed restriction laws:
Do not take advice off the internet when it involves your insurance company, your home and your livelihood. Get on the phone and ask them personally.
Many of the bully breeds are restricted, not only by insurance companies, but by city and county govts. Before you approve these people, get a hold of your insurance company and your county/city govt offices to see if you can even let them live there.
Yes, you can be held liable for your tenant's dog.
I personally have nothing against either the Staffy or the pitbull. I do, however, have concerns regarding the owners of any of of the larger breeds (labeled bully or not) who aren't in very clear control of their pet or who haven't fully trained said pet. That is the area I would be concerned with regarding any dog a tenant of mine had. And the question arises as to whether there is fencing around the property to handle the odd chance the dog got out of the house accidentally.
I would ask what kind of training the owners have.
I personally have nothing against either the Staffy or the pitbull. I do, however, have concerns regarding the owners of any of of the larger breeds (labeled bully or not) who aren't in very clear control of their pet or who haven't fully trained said pet. That is the area I would be concerned with regarding any dog a tenant of mine had. And the question arises as to whether there is fencing around the property to handle the odd chance the dog got out of the house accidentally.
I would ask what kind of training the owners have.
^This
I have 2 small/medium sized dogs that are not even banned or on any "dangerous" lists.
I have an entire paperwork package ready to go to potential landlords on both dogs. Obedience School certificates, updated vaccination certificates, vet references and prior landlord refs, along with their ages, breed info, and pictures of the dogs.
The fact that she was not up front with you about the breed would bother me.
1. Make sure you obtain a complete copy of the exclusions and/or limitations for the policy. What Insurance Company's policy covers or not for an individual homeowner may not be the same for a rental property policy. It is your responsibility to know what your specific policy covers, not what Fred's home policy covers in another state.
2. Make sure that any limitations or exclusions are addressed in your rental application, lease and vetting process. Do not try and be the nice person and make an exception unless you’re willing to foot the bill if the Insurance Company denies a claim because it’s not covered under your policy.
3. As for dog breeds as pets. If the policy has restrictions, adhere to the restrictions. Do not fudge on this (such as allowing a banned breed to be called a mixed mutt to avoid the restrictions) as the insurance company has the resources to fight you to the death if they want.
4. NEVER EVER go beyond what is necessary to adhere to the insurance company’s or your requirements on pets. A popular belief is to qualify the pet with observation, meet & greets and good dog certificates and such. If you look at those lawsuits that have been successful, you’ll se the main reason was the property owner in some way created a personal assurance that the dog was harmless. You accept a dog based on some personal belief its harmless and you could be on the losing end of a lawsuit. The laws are already on your side with ignorance and even direct knowledge, no need to muck it up by throwing in your personal assurances. (No offense to those who believe or practice this, but it’s a great way to expose yourself to liability)
Sorry to keep spamming you! But, once I knew you had Travelers, I was able to find an article that says that Traveler's has no breed restrictions. So, looks like you're good to go!
I have 2 small/medium sized dogs that are not even banned or on any "dangerous" lists.
I have an entire paperwork package ready to go to potential landlords on both dogs. Obedience School certificates, updated vaccination certificates, vet references and prior landlord refs, along with their ages, breed info, and pictures of the dogs.
The fact that she was not up front with you about the breed would bother me.
Yeah, her leaving the breed section blank for that dog and not the other tells you a lot. She knew it might be a problem for insurance and/or that some landlords would not want that dog on their property.
Note, please, that this article is from 2009. Not necessarily relevant.
Good point.
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.
