Vet Pleads For Landlords To Welcome Pets

[sandgrubber]

Hey you guys that are landlords, does a pet resume sway you at all, from people who actually do stuff with their dogs?

Yes, especially if it gives the option of checking references.

[mymatejack]

If I had a rental property I wouldn't mind renting do someone with dogs, they have to repair any damage at the end anyway, no different to kids and you can't legally decline an application just because the people have kids.

I don't think you understand how much hassle it is for a landlord to get money out of tenants, even getting the bond can be difficult. If you have to go to court you have to pay $250 which is not recoverable from the tenant and judges will depreciate the value of whatever has been damaged to the point where you will not be able to fix the damage with the amount awarded to you.

[Rosaline]

Even "good on paper" tenants can turn into a disaster!

Our previous neighbours had to move interstate for 12 months and rented their beautiful, newly renovated house to a couple in their 50s who were here from Melbourne themselves, as an "executive rental".

When it came to the Christmas holidays, the tenants went away for 6 weeks and their kids were on a Uni break, so they turned up for the holidays - with a pile of friends and several dogs, not to mention a drum kit and electric guitars! We had to call the cops several times to get them to shut up.

Apparently the polished floors were trashed, the carpets and curtains stunk of cigarette smoke and the place was filthy.

The kids weren't listed on the lease as they weren't actually living there, they were "just guests".

[jacqui835]

It funny when I was renting with kids and dogs, I got knocked back for several properties because I had children and lost at least 2 bonds from damage by the kids and never got knocked back for having pets or lost any bond due to them.

I always have wondered why if they don't allow dogs why they would allow children.

Well in practice, they don't, they just can't put it on the ad. The first rental I ever had the owner told me it had come down to who they thought would do less damage, the 2 children under 5, or my trained dog. Rent was $100/wk more than the other half of the semi that wasn't pet friendly, but a gay couple lived there. But the house was in better condition when I moved out, so I got fantastic references from a large real estate agency and now have secured other houses. I had a very hard time finding my first rental, even though we were prepared to pay at the higher end of the market. I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like if money was tight and we couldn't afford $100 more just to keep our dog.

[Little Gifts]

I don't think all properties make good rentals whether there are dogs, kids or not. Timber floors will get scratched, pristine white walls will get marks and originally restored timberwork, leadlighting glass, marble kitchen bench and hard to find tiles might get damaged by accident even by the most fastideous of tenants. I have been renovating my house and I know there is no point trying to keep the timber floors from getting scratched or worrying about my lovely coloured walls being covered with dog goo. I also learnt the hard way about what colour carpet not to get!

When I was younger I had either cats or dogs at every rental I lived in without any problems because the places were generally old houses done up to be rentals. They were created with wear and tear in mind. If you do up a place you need to decide to do it for either rental purposes or resale. I don't think you can have both unless you are re-selling it as a rental. Don't put your heart and soul into a house and expect anyone else to treat it as you would. Even your family wont live up to the same standards. And I don't understand the whole flea issue - I have never had a flea issue in any of my accom. Maybe I've been lucky but why would you want your dirty and flea riddled pet snuggled up with you on the lounge? Surely keeping it clean is about more than landlord issues anyway?

[GeckoTree]

That's good of the Vet, I hope some more investors had taken note of it, as it opens up a larger market to deal with, I doubt most would have given a thought since most investment houses in Australia are not owned by 'Ma&Pa' property investors but by large businesses.

[Atanquin]

Our rental says if we have pets the carpets my be flea treated before we leave and we must pay for any damage done. Simple

[holdenv8]

I was a landlord once, we had a big Queenslander we had restored, we rented it. The new tenants asked if they could have a dog, ok, we said, but just a small/medium one. They bought an adult GSD and within 3 months all the beautiful red cedar French doors that led onto the veranda were gouged out at the bottom from her scraping to get in, she even scraped marks on a glass door.

The skirting boards were chewed and scrapes on the polished floors.

These were nice clean people but had no respect for anyone else's property.

If I were ever to become a landlord again, yes I would rent to a tenant with a dog or two, but it would be a bomb-proof house and a very large dog-bond would be charged.

The Bond then should of not been refunded if their dog damaged property, was it??

[Boronia]

I was a landlord once, we had a big Queenslander we had restored, we rented it. The new tenants asked if they could have a dog, ok, we said, but just a small/medium one. They bought an adult GSD and within 3 months all the beautiful red cedar French doors that led onto the veranda were gouged out at the bottom from her scraping to get in, she even scraped marks on a glass door.

The skirting boards were chewed and scrapes on the polished floors.

These were nice clean people but had no respect for anyone else's property.

If I were ever to become a landlord again, yes I would rent to a tenant with a dog or two, but it would be a bomb-proof house and a very large dog-bond would be charged.

The Bond then should of not been refunded if their dog damaged property, was it??

No, the bond wasn't refunded, they used up the bond money by not paying rent for 3 weeks!

[Blackdogs]

In my opinion, I don't think tenants should be forced to disclose whether or not they have pets. This would end any discrimination. Instead, it should be a simple matter of 'you break it, you pay for it' regardless of pet status.

Tenants not being able to find a rental property that allows pets accounts for an enormous number of shelter surrenders.

[sandgrubber]

In my opinion, I don't think tenants should be forced to disclose whether or not they have pets. This would end any discrimination. Instead, it should be a simple matter of 'you break it, you pay for it' regardless of pet status.

Tenants not being able to find a rental property that allows pets accounts for an enormous number of shelter surrenders.

In that case, it would make sense for shelters and breeders to look very carefully at people's rental contracts before selling them a dog or pup.

Do you really think someone with a dozen cats and a few dogs should be able to withhold that information on a rental application? Do you really think it should be illegal to ban pets in a large, hi-rise apartment complex with no parks nearby? Do you really think a community where the grounds are unfenced and a gardener is hired to keep them stunning should be forced to accept digging puppies who get the zoomies and trample the flower beds? Remember that story back a few months ago where three APBTS kept in a 3rd floor apartment in a drug-ridden slum killed a toddler who was saying the same apartment. A variety of neighbors stated that people had been pressuring slumlords to ban pet ownership because the slum dwellers tended to go for fighting dogs, and didn't pick up the dog pooh.

"You break it, you pay for it" sounds great, until you try to enforce it. Lots of renters have the means to skip town, but lack the means to pay. Plus, someone with a dozen cats probably can't smell l'eau de catbox that tends to permeate everything where a large number of cats are kept in a small house . . . so in their books they have done no damage, while the landlord ends out with a house that is going to need a lot of work to get rid of the smell.

I'm hoping, in my next transition, to end out with a semi-rural property with two rentals specifically set up for people with dogs . . . washable wainscoating, concrete floors, lockable doggie doors, and large secure yards. Where such an investment hasn't been made, I would only rent to people with very well trained and low energy dogs, or people without pets.

[Reewel]

I dont think it has anything to do with whether the renters have kids or dogs. It all comes down to the type of people they are. There are people that respect other peoples property and those that dont.

When I was renting, ( and I had 4 kids and a dog) we left that house to buy our own, it was left as we found it, if not better. Any damage done by the kids or the dog, which would have been minimal was fixed. We are lucky we have had our own home for a long time now, but if something happened and we had to move into a rental I would certainly not be getting rid of my dogs. Id rather live in a tent! I know for some people they dont have a choice, and I dont want to be judgemental, but I think sometimes people take the easy option and dump the dogs so they can get a rental. These are the type of people you wouldnt want renting your property anyway I guess. It a hard one and I dont think there is any easy answer.

[Panto]

I dont think landlords should have the right to say who or what you have in the home as long as its legal.

After working 3 jobs at once to save to afford my investment property I think I have every right to say what potential tennants have in MY home.

Personally I really like the idea of a pet bond but think it should be more in the vacinity of $1000-$2000 to cover potenital damages.

We had a tenant who fell behind in her rent by the time she was evicted (so that used up the bond)and discovered she had 2 large dogs (which being nice - never again) which we said were fine to stay so long as she repaired any damaged done by them. When she moved out the dogs had done almost $2500 worth of damage

I think if landlords are forced to accept tenants with animals then perhaps there may be a few less rental properties available.

I dont think landlords should have the right to say who or what you have in the home as long as its legal.

That's hilarious. The person paying the mortgage has every right to be given applications by the property manager and say No, No, No, No...this one looks good - young professional non smoking skippy couple with no children and no animals. Accept it.

The more demands that are placed on investment owners, the faster they'll ditch their investment properties and sink their money into something else. Then tenants will really have something to complain about.

And then let's see them complain there's nothing available to rent...

I've had tenants where just one of the parents earnt more than I did, so I was surprised they didn't purchase their own. I worked hard and saved hard, but it's not impossible. Turns out when I went to do a repair on something, their kids had EVERY toy they ever wanted, the house was PACKED and looked horrid. Each to their own, I just rent it out, I don't dictate how someone should live.

I currently rent to a family with 4 kids and an ACD - rent is paid, and PM says property is in good order, though I'm scant to believe that myself as I am yet to find a PM I can trust sufficiently.

Hey you guys that are landlords, does a pet resume sway you at all, from people who actually do stuff with their dogs?

YES. Panto has one... my friends think it's hilarious, then they sheepishly ask if they can copy it because they would like to move somewhere pet friendly :laugh:

In my opinion, I don't think tenants should be forced to disclose whether or not they have pets. This would end any discrimination. Instead, it should be a simple matter of 'you break it, you pay for it' regardless of pet status.

Tenants not being able to find a rental property that allows pets accounts for an enormous number of shelter surrenders.

That's a total load of BS. It's tenants not prioritising things in the right order - like living a little further away or looking just that bit harder. It's not not being able to find, it's not trying hard enough. Unless it's someone with health issues that needs to be very close to a particular hospital (or other such circumstance), it's not that hard. And if its because they've got a bad credit/rental history, and get knocked back from the pet friendly rentals, then that's the reason, and not because there isn't pet friendly rentals available.

[Panto]

I dont think it has anything to do with whether the renters have kids or dogs. It all comes down to the type of people they are. There are people that respect other peoples property and those that dont.

When I was renting, ( and I had 4 kids and a dog) we left that house to buy our own, it was left as we found it, if not better. Any damage done by the kids or the dog, which would have been minimal was fixed. We are lucky we have had our own home for a long time now, but if something happened and we had to move into a rental I would certainly not be getting rid of my dogs. Id rather live in a tent! I know for some people they dont have a choice, and I dont want to be judgemental, but I think sometimes people take the easy option and dump the dogs so they can get a rental. These are the type of people you wouldnt want renting your property anyway I guess. It a hard one and I dont think there is any easy answer.

Very well put

[Keira&Phoenix]

Renters get treated like shit too. I know many friends who are fabulous renters who have been screwed over by landlords selling the house from under them with no notice, or when asked saying that they are not selling the house, then do. Kick them out with no grounds or flimsey made up bullsh*t, change the terms of the lease etc. It is all illegal but most tenants won't fight it because it is a hard long road (just like landlords trying to get money).

To be honest, sometimes I think the biggest problem is property managers, they treat renters like crap, don't communicate properly, lie and so forth, they create a lot of problems themselves.

I get that landlords have a lot invested but remember renters pay out thousands of dollars each year that in the end is dead money. $350 a week turns into $18,200 a year, in dead money, they can't even choose to have a pet or not. And it is very hard to rent and save money to buy a place.

[Panto]

Renters get treated like shit too. I know many friends who are fabulous renters who have been screwed over by landlords selling the house from under them with no notice, or when asked saying that they are not selling the house, then do. Kick them out with no grounds or flimsey made up bullsh*t, change the terms of the lease etc. It is all illegal but most tenants won't fight it because it is a hard long road (just like landlords trying to get money).

To be honest, sometimes I think the biggest problem is property managers, they treat renters like crap, don't communicate properly, lie and so forth, they create a lot of problems themselves.

I get that landlords have a lot invested but remember renters pay out thousands of dollars each year that in the end is dead money. $350 a week turns into $18,200 a year, in dead money, they can't even choose to have a pet or not. And it is very hard to rent and save money to buy a place.

I've been in this position too - landlord at the time defaulted on mortgage 5 months into a 12 month lease. We decided to stay. PM and even the head of the real estate company came to try tell us how hell it would be. We had read up on our rights and after their 15min 'viewing' time was over kicked out the agents too, and only gave them the timeslots we were required to give without forfeiting our right to 'peaceful enjoyment' or whatever the term is, of our abode. The sneaky agent organised one night for an 'electrical inspection', and without telling us brought 3 parties to view the property. In front of these parties, I asked the agent inside, shut the door and blasted him for his lack of communication and consideration to us as tenants, and I that never should he do this again to other tenanted properties.

If you're a tenant in this position, you can't afford to take the "can't be bothered" or "I'll sort it out later", you have to be bothered and you have to act on your rights, and seek advice (which is free) if you aren't sure. The property manager's job is to look out for the property on behalf of the landlord, not for the renters (although a good PM knows happy renters = happy landlords).

Makes me think, if there's a market or niche out there for rental brokers, to find good tenants a property for them and back them up should things go awry. As a renter myself, I don't think it's something I would be willing to pay for quite honestly.

[Lowenhart]

There are plenty of reasons people end up renting and it's got nothing to do with not being willing to save up to rent.

Houses in the cities are unreasonably expensive compared to average wages, it is getting to the point where Australian cities are in the Top 10 most expensive in the WORLD for living (housing+food etc).

Relationships breakdown, family responsibilities arise, job transfers, suddenly unemployed.

Damage can occur in rentals without pets, if there is a problem with how damage bills are handled then that needs to be looked at.

[huck house]

I'm glad we have anti- discrimination laws in Australia. I hope we have more in the future including for those with pets who are marginalized ecconimically .It is stereotyping to suggest that a 'skippy' would make a better tenant.

Regardless of how it is achieved ,it is still privilaged to own an investment property. Most who do likely own the house they live in too. To say investors might walk away and then renters will be sorry- only if the government scrap negative gearing- maybe house prices can be slightly more realistic.

I think to suggest that people in any great numbers aren't trying hard enough to find suitable rentals so just dump pets, is out of touch with anyone finding themselves in desperate situations.

[Blackdogs]

I dont think landlords should have the right to say who or what you have in the home as long as its legal.

After working 3 jobs at once to save to afford my investment property I think I have every right to say what potential tennants have in MY home.

Personally I really like the idea of a pet bond but think it should be more in the vacinity of $1000-$2000 to cover potenital damages.

We had a tenant who fell behind in her rent by the time she was evicted (so that used up the bond)and discovered she had 2 large dogs (which being nice - never again) which we said were fine to stay so long as she repaired any damaged done by them. When she moved out the dogs had done almost $2500 worth of damage

I think if landlords are forced to accept tenants with animals then perhaps there may be a few less rental properties available.

I dont think landlords should have the right to say who or what you have in the home as long as its legal.

That's hilarious. The person paying the mortgage has every right to be given applications by the property manager and say No, No, No, No...this one looks good - young professional non smoking skippy couple with no children and no animals. Accept it.

The more demands that are placed on investment owners, the faster they'll ditch their investment properties and sink their money into something else. Then tenants will really have something to complain about.

And then let's see them complain there's nothing available to rent...

I've had tenants where just one of the parents earnt more than I did, so I was surprised they didn't purchase their own. I worked hard and saved hard, but it's not impossible. Turns out when I went to do a repair on something, their kids had EVERY toy they ever wanted, the house was PACKED and looked horrid. Each to their own, I just rent it out, I don't dictate how someone should live.

I currently rent to a family with 4 kids and an ACD - rent is paid, and PM says property is in good order, though I'm scant to believe that myself as I am yet to find a PM I can trust sufficiently.

Hey you guys that are landlords, does a pet resume sway you at all, from people who actually do stuff with their dogs?

YES. Panto has one... my friends think it's hilarious, then they sheepishly ask if they can copy it because they would like to move somewhere pet friendly :laugh:

In my opinion, I don't think tenants should be forced to disclose whether or not they have pets. This would end any discrimination. Instead, it should be a simple matter of 'you break it, you pay for it' regardless of pet status.

Tenants not being able to find a rental property that allows pets accounts for an enormous number of shelter surrenders.

That's a total load of BS. It's tenants not prioritising things in the right order - like living a little further away or looking just that bit harder. It's not not being able to find, it's not trying hard enough. Unless it's someone with health issues that needs to be very close to a particular hospital (or other such circumstance), it's not that hard. And if its because they've got a bad credit/rental history, and get knocked back from the pet friendly rentals, then that's the reason, and not because there isn't pet friendly rentals available.

As someone who has looked for some time for a suitable property, I don't agree.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Blackdogs

[Blackdogs]

In my opinion, I don't think tenants should be forced to disclose whether or not they have pets. This would end any discrimination. Instead, it should be a simple matter of 'you break it, you pay for it' regardless of pet status.

Tenants not being able to find a rental property that allows pets accounts for an enormous number of shelter surrenders.

In that case, it would make sense for shelters and breeders to look very carefully at people's rental contracts before selling them a dog or pup.

Do you really think someone with a dozen cats and a few dogs should be able to withhold that information on a rental application? Do you really think it should be illegal to ban pets in a large, hi-rise apartment complex with no parks nearby? Do you really think a community where the grounds are unfenced and a gardener is hired to keep them stunning should be forced to accept digging puppies who get the zoomies and trample the flower beds? Remember that story back a few months ago where three APBTS kept in a 3rd floor apartment in a drug-ridden slum killed a toddler who was saying the same apartment. A variety of neighbors stated that people had been pressuring slumlords to ban pet ownership because the slum dwellers tended to go for fighting dogs, and didn't pick up the dog pooh.

"You break it, you pay for it" sounds great, until you try to enforce it. Lots of renters have the means to skip town, but lack the means to pay. Plus, someone with a dozen cats probably can't smell l'eau de catbox that tends to permeate everything where a large number of cats are kept in a small house . . . so in their books they have done no damage, while the landlord ends out with a house that is going to need a lot of work to get rid of the smell.

I'm hoping, in my next transition, to end out with a semi-rural property with two rentals specifically set up for people with dogs . . . washable wainscoating, concrete floors, lockable doggie doors, and large secure yards. Where such an investment hasn't been made, I would only rent to people with very well trained and low energy dogs, or people without pets.

Yes, I really think all that. Contracts should be written to cover gardens, odour and anything else that deminishes the value of the property.

If people break the law by fighting dogs and neglecting to pick up faeces, then they should be prosecuted. It has nothing to do with the landlord and these people would probably own dogs regardless of whether not it was permitted.

Renters can skip town, neglect to pay etc, for any kind of damage. This is a problem with enforcement and needs review. Again, I think pet ownership is irrelevant to this.