Q
I run a rental property that has a “no pets” policy. I have a tenant who has made a reasonable accommodation request to have a companion dog. I understand that I need to let her have her dog, because companion animal support dogs are not pets. But I’m worried her dog will tear up the flooring and destroy the apartment. I would like to charge her extra rent or get an additional deposit from her in order to protect the property from future expenses. When I brought up that possibility, she told me that I can’t do that under the Fair Housing laws. Is she right?
A
The short answer is, yes, she is right. Regardless of what kind of assistance animal the tenant has — a companion cat or dog, a therapy animal, or a certified service dog — under the Fair Housing laws, it is NOT a pet, but a part of the disabled tenant’s medical treatment. Just like you would not charge extra rent or security deposit for a wheelchair, diabetes medication or a special hospital-style bed, you cannot change a disabled tenant additional rent or a higher security deposit because they have an assistance animal. Charging an extra fee or deposit imposes an unreasonable burden for tenants with disabilities who need assistance animals, and it places a financial burden on something necessary for their full use and enjoyment of their apartment that non-disabled tenants do not have to bear. Such fees are tantamount to charging someone for having a disability.
You can still hold tenants with assistance animals liable for any damage the animal causes. If you are concerned that the security deposit will not be enough to cover the potential damage, consider charging a higher security deposit for all tenants. Instead of charging half a month’s rent as a security deposit, for example, charge an entire month’s rent. As long as the method of calculating the security deposit is the same for all tenants, regardless of whether they have a service animal, you will be fine.
Q
A new job required me to relocate to this area and I decided to rent a room at a hotel designed for longer-stays. I signed a month-to-month rental agreement and paid a half month’s rent as a pet deposit for my small dog. After six months I found a permanent place to live and I gave the manager a 30 day notice to vacate. Prior to moving out I requested an initial inspection, and the manager signed an inspection checklist stating that my rental unit was perfectly clean and without damages. After I moved out, however, I received a letter from management stating that my pet deposit was being withheld because it was designated a “non-refundable pet deposit” in the rental agreement. Is this allowed?
A
We receive numerous calls from tenants inquiring about pet deposits, cleaning deposits, and other creatively designated deposits and/or fees. California Civil Code section 1950.5 sets forth the rules governing security deposits and deals specifically with the confusion surrounding your situation. Any fee, charge, or payment made with the fundamental purpose of protecting a landlord against damage to the property (including so called “pet deposits”) should be treated as a security deposit. The landlord is obligated to conform to the security deposit rules, which state that non-refundable deposits are not allowed in California. As a result, having cleared you of any damage or cleaning obligations at the initial move out inspection, the landlord has no recognizable basis to withhold any of your deposit, including pet deposit. We suggest you inform the landlord in writing that this pet deposit should be treated like a regular security deposit, there was no damage, and that you expect your full deposit to be returned to you.
Project Sentinel provides landlord-tenant dispute resolution and fair-housing services in Northern California, including rental housing mediation programs in Mountain View, Los Altos and Palo Alto. Call 650-856-4062 for dispute resolution or 650-321-6291 for fair housing, email info@housing.org or visit housing.org.
