twodoggies2001

Sure, but if he came to have a look at an agreed time, I'm sure, if the dogs had been indoors, there would be tell tale signs.

There is nothing in the contract about the dogs not being inside - do the landlord is breaking the agreement, not the tenant. In Vic it is illegal for a landlord not to allow pets inside unless it is specifically outlined in the contract. It is specifically outlined in the agreement that they're not allowed inside the unit. We're lucky to have the garage that I can use as a cuddle area There's the answer. It's really unfortunate that you found out after the move though. If you moved out early, then as I said before, the terms of the lease would be broken and you would still have to pay the rent until a new tenant, approved by the landlord takes over. At least you have that cuddle area to be with your pups which is a good thing. I know it's hard, and others in this post have said to sneak them in, but if I were you, I'd be careful. You don't want to be caught out, especially when someone the landlord knows looking over y our shoulder. Twodoggies is right. Legally you don't have a leg to stand on. You should not have signed the lease if you didn't agree to the conditions. Now you are bound by them & thats exactly what the tribunal will say. With the owner's friends living upstairs, I'd resist the urge to bring the dogs in, you will get caught & then could be evicted and/or lose your bond. Legally. As I mentioned before it doesn't matter if the neighbours catch them bringing the dogs inside. A landlord can't have neighbours essentially spying on their tenants, this goes against the legal rights of the tenants to quiet enjoyment of the property. Landlords aren't even allowed to drive by a property to check the condition of the front yard. Anything brought the tribunal that was reported to the landlord by their friends and the tenants neighbours will get thrown out. The landlords might find out but legally they won't have a leg to stand on providing the property is seen to be well maintained during routine inspections. Not if the signed lease specifically says that the dogs are not to be brought inside. I wouldn't call living in an upstairs area spying on another tenant. An agreement is an agreement otherwise why would anyone go to the extent of signing documents. The tenant in this case by signing the lease agreed to the conditions. That's the way I see it. That might be how you see it but that's not the way the law sees it. Yes they signed a lease saying the dogs would be outside but the landlord cannot prove they are breaking that condition unless they see it for themselves during a scheduled inspection. Tenants have rights too and those right include not having your landlord or their friends spying on you. Here is a detailed article about the rules and regulations around quiet enjoyment in QLD... http://tuq.org.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Entry-and-Privacy-Nov-09_SD.pdf As far as the neighbours go I get the impression that they'll only be able to tell if the dogs are not in the backyard. If they are not in the backyard they could either be inside or in the garage. If the neighbours tell the landlord that the dogs are inside and are actually in the garage then what is protecting the tenants then? It's the same for any neighbourhood complaints, you can't film someone else's backyard and produce that as evidence, there have been plenty of examples of this in this forum alone. Yes tenants do have rights too as do landlords. I am NOT saying that the neighbours should spy as you infer but take the scenario that if they are friends of the landlord and the conversation comes up about the dogs and the neighbour mentions that he doesn't see them in the yard then perhaps the landlord has the right to ensure that the dogs have not been allowed in the house. If they are sleeping in the garage, then good on the tenants for keeping their side of the lease agreement as they should. If not, then they are breaking that agreement. Any sensible person would check things out first to back up any suspicions if they exist.

There is nothing in the contract about the dogs not being inside - do the landlord is breaking the agreement, not the tenant. In Vic it is illegal for a landlord not to allow pets inside unless it is specifically outlined in the contract. It is specifically outlined in the agreement that they're not allowed inside the unit. We're lucky to have the garage that I can use as a cuddle area There's the answer. It's really unfortunate that you found out after the move though. If you moved out early, then as I said before, the terms of the lease would be broken and you would still have to pay the rent until a new tenant, approved by the landlord takes over. At least you have that cuddle area to be with your pups which is a good thing. I know it's hard, and others in this post have said to sneak them in, but if I were you, I'd be careful. You don't want to be caught out, especially when someone the landlord knows looking over y our shoulder. Twodoggies is right. Legally you don't have a leg to stand on. You should not have signed the lease if you didn't agree to the conditions. Now you are bound by them & thats exactly what the tribunal will say. With the owner's friends living upstairs, I'd resist the urge to bring the dogs in, you will get caught & then could be evicted and/or lose your bond. Legally. As I mentioned before it doesn't matter if the neighbours catch them bringing the dogs inside. A landlord can't have neighbours essentially spying on their tenants, this goes against the legal rights of the tenants to quiet enjoyment of the property. Landlords aren't even allowed to drive by a property to check the condition of the front yard. Anything brought the tribunal that was reported to the landlord by their friends and the tenants neighbours will get thrown out. The landlords might find out but legally they won't have a leg to stand on providing the property is seen to be well maintained during routine inspections. Not if the signed lease specifically says that the dogs are not to be brought inside. I wouldn't call living in an upstairs area spying on another tenant. An agreement is an agreement otherwise why would anyone go to the extent of signing documents. The tenant in this case by signing the lease agreed to the conditions. That's the way I see it.

There is nothing in the contract about the dogs not being inside - do the landlord is breaking the agreement, not the tenant. In Vic it is illegal for a landlord not to allow pets inside unless it is specifically outlined in the contract. It is specifically outlined in the agreement that they're not allowed inside the unit. We're lucky to have the garage that I can use as a cuddle area There's the answer. It's really unfortunate that you found out after the move though. If you moved out early, then as I said before, the terms of the lease would be broken and you would still have to pay the rent until a new tenant, approved by the landlord takes over. At least you have that cuddle area to be with your pups which is a good thing. I know it's hard, and others in this post have said to sneak them in, but if I were you, I'd be careful. You don't want to be caught out, especially when someone the landlord knows looking over y our shoulder.

I think this is the key to the problem. Talicat accepted the landlord's offer on the unsaid but implied understanding that the conditions (dogs inside) would be the same as the place they had at the time. The landlord produced new conditions - because the fittings in the studio (new place) were all new - not because of problems at the previous place. Talicat and family would never have accepted the new place if they knew that the dogs would be expected to live outside. The landlord might not have understood that this is a problem with people who have dogs as an intergral part of their family. Lots of people think it is just fine to leave dogs outside all the time. Yes I realise this but it's on Talicat to perform due diligence and I think it's a lesson well learned not to take anything for granted. I agree it's a bit unfair of the landlord but unfortunately now the lease has been signed and both sides should stick by it.

I'm sorry I'm going against the trend. Firstly, as a tenant, you firstly sign a lease with the real estate agent, or as in your case, the landlord. You don't sign after the event. Me as a landlord would want to get conditions sorted out before any signatures are put to paper. Secondly, a lease is a contract between landlord and tenant, so you can't just move out. You would be breaking the contract and be liable for rent up until a replacement tenant is found for the same amount of money as the lease is signed for. Thirdly, if the lease has been signed, even after the move, and the lease stipulates no dogs inside, then this needs to be adhered to. By the way, I do find it odd that if you have rented another property from this same landlord and dogs were allowed indoors he should now disallow them unless the dogs created some sort of a problem inside the property. No point in being sneaky. It may come back to bite you on the bum. By breaking this agreement, could in future go against your references for another rental property.

She certainly has. It's not up to you as a tenant unless it was you as the tenant caused the insecure fence. It's up to the landlord to rectify the problem. Not good enough, and I'm speaking as a landlord lol.

The real estate agent can ask the owners of both properties to fix the fencing. It's up to the landlords to keep these sort of things inn good repair. I don't feel it;s starting off on the wrong foot. I would also go to the neighbours too and point out any concerns.

definately

Exactly what'd happen at the Tibbie picnic. Tibs that'd never met before automatically 'grouped' like a family & accepted new arrivals. But, when, someone walked past with a kelpie that was minding his own business, he got ticked off. that is so funny. Wish I could have witnessed both.

I sympathize with you, knowing what you are going through. I had a mini schnauzer who had his off days and then there were the good days. In his lifetime he had a liver shunt diagnosed at 6 months which surgery repaired. In his later years he lost an eye,the remaining one had a cataract. Ii believe he also had dementia. He would not eat for several days and after my thinking to myself that if tomorrow he hasn't eaten, it was time to say goodbye and then he would somehow rally. I looked at his quality of life. He was unhappy to come to the park because for him it was unfamiliar surroundings. He would sleep on the couch at night and every morning I would pray that he had left us during the night only because I didn't want to make the final trip to the vet. When I took both dogs for a check, the vet commented that he was a very unhappy little dog, and my decision was made. He left this earth laying on my lap, surrounded with love from his 'brother', his master and mistress. I know it's a very difficult decision, but his quality of life was poor and we felt in our case it was far better to release him to a better place. I feel the decision we made was the best one and you will also make the best decision in your case. Whichever way you go, I wish you well and will be thinking of you and Penny.

I just recalled that when our family had a standard Schnauzer he played and grew up with a Boxer pup. The way they played was noisy and growly and he would always greet any other Boxer in the same manner.

I think they recognize their own breed. There could be a large group of dogs at the park and in between one miniature schnauzer. My two will flush the schnauzer out and socialise with it before doing so with any of the others.

Could it be related to your house move? She may be feeling overwhelmed being in a different environment.

You're like me. I buy all my dog's meat from my own butcher. I don't buy food from the pet shops.

I know it's more expensive, but I buy kangaroo mince for human consumption at the supermarket. It doesn't smell so 'gamey' as the one from the pet shop.

Thanks all for your replies. My reason for the question is that I was given some from a friend of mine who lost their beloved pet and the dosage was for the larger dogs. Anyway, I used half for each of my boys yesterday.

I buy the Sentinal in the double dose size and cut them in half for my mini schnauzers. This on top of heart worm and intestinal worms renders the fleas infertile but today I noticed some live fleas on my younger boy. I am leaning towards buying Capstar to kill whatever is there. as anyone bought the dose for larger dogs and cut them in half?

Sorry, I missed that. I just don't like the idea of any dog being confined on the end of a chain, so I guess I was being protective of her.

I have just noticed there is no bedding in the kennel. I wouldn't be happy with that if I wee her.

What a terrible thing to happen. I'm so sorry and pray that everything will be AOK in the end.

Does she need such a heavy chain?

I get so mad and so distressed when I hear the puppy, Rosetta. The people are known in the neighbourhood for being a bit strange, particularly the woman. I would not be happy approaching them. I have no idea why they got a puppy, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was simply to be able to say they have a dog. I never see or hear the children playing with her. That is the sort of outcome we would all hope for. Well done your son Thanks. I like to think that he has been well brought up lol. I also often wonder why some people get a dog and not make it part of the family. We had at one stage a particularly large Great Dane who lived inside with us.

My son had a similar situation with a dog barking most of the night. He located where it was and put a note in the owner's letterbox and the barking has now stopped. It happened to be a small dog which was left out all night but now they bring it in. Seeing that they remedied the situation, he sent them a thank you note in appreciation.

Hope it's clearer now.