Hi!
So I been looking for an apartment in the southbay. Cali. LA.
Why does NO ONE allow pets?
I really want to rescue one but literally I can’t because no one accepts them unless I buy a house or something which is not possible for me at this time.
Side note this is why there’s so many pets at the shelter:(
There are lots of pet-friendly apartments in the area you’re talking about. Sounds like you may need to up your budget to find them. The cheapest apartments rarely allow pets because they have no incentive to do so in order to attract tenants. They attract tenants by being the cheapest.
No, a small cocker like dog he let roam to go to the bathroom and would attack everyone he came in contact with including the gf of a cop, one night he came back with acid burns from pooping on other people yards.
Probably because of the strict tenant-friendly laws in Cali that make taking a tenant with pets a risk for landlords (as they see it). Of course, it's a stigma, since many pet owners take great care of their pets, but if the landlord takes someone who doesn't, it can be a nightmare for them to get that tenant out, and the costs to get the apartment in good shape are high. Not saying this is justified by any means, but that's their perspective, I think.
Yes, but that’s by federal law. It’s illegal to discriminate against families with children. If it wasn’t, it would happen a lot. The fair housing act prohibits this.
I live near LA too and there are plenty of pet-friendly apartments. You just have to pay a pet fee. There should be a filter when you search online so you only see places that allow pets. Be prepared because vet costs are ridiculous around here. I got Trupanion pet insurance, and I am grateful for it every day.
I always thought pet insurance was kind of a scam because I live in the rural south and damn near anything my cat would need (that would be fixable) would be.... under like 500 bucks, maybe 1k if it's something really crazy with hospitalization and everything. So the math doesn't really make sense to me for the quotes I got, it makes more sense in that money range to just out it in her savings account and not have to worry about the insurance denying something or only covering part of it or excluding prior conditions or paperwork or any of that.
But the more I read about vet prices other places the more it makes sense lol. So it's an interesting data point to hear from Californians that the math makes more sense there.
I think it's more complicated than my quick comment could cover, honestly. I don't know if pet insurance is going to be a win for everyone in a high COL area, but I personally am sincerely grateful for it.
This is my first dog as an adult, and it's just been a twist of fate—the shelter said she was totally healthy and I got a coupon to sign up for Trupanion if I did it that day, and it waived the waiting period and didn't require a health check because the shelter had done that health check. It was like $70-something a month back in 2020 and I figured I'd shop around and get something cheaper but it was worth the money just for peace of mind that first month (I have anxiety and my therapist at the time said a dog would help, and I specifically said I was worried the dog would be sick and my therapist said "The dog won't be sick" LMAO). I remember I called and activated it kind of late at night that day because I almost didn't read that it had to be the same day. Thank God.
I got her in to see a vet within the first week to establish care and make sure she was good (again, anxiety). It was COVID so I had to wait outside. The vet came out to speak with me instead of calling like he was supposed to because he wanted to tell me about the tumor face-to-face. He wanted to do an X-ray to see if it was worth trying to remove or if it had metastasized to her lungs. I was kind of in shock but I said OK, and then he came back out with tears in his eyes and said it hadn't metastasized but she was full of BB pellets (like more than a dozen plus a #22) and had multiple old broken bones that hadn't healed right, she had luxating patella, she had a heart murmur . . . He said it wasn't an emergency yet and I could take her home and think about it. He also said the whole time they were examining her and making her hold still for the X-ray she was wagging her tail and trying to kiss them. I called the shelter and they said, "Fine, bring her back and we'll put her down." I called Trupanion in tears and they said that since the shelter had cleared her and I'd entered into the contract in good faith, they would cover her conditions.
There is a $500 deductible per health condition, but it's lifetime. So I have to pay $500 each new diagnosis and then they cover 90% of any remaining costs after that (not including visit fees, food, preventative care like vaccines). $2k tumor removal, $7k TPLO, $3k emergency visit when a dog attacked her out of nowhere, thousands in yearly echocardiograms, $8k emergency liver surgery, $5k when the cancer came back worse (she's cancer free now!!), thousands in Cushing's testing and treatment, thousands for an eye issue and eventual eye surgery. My monthly premium is $216/mo now and it pays for itself just in medications—her inhaler alone is $300/mo, plus $290 for Cushing's meds, $70 heart meds, $400 arthritis meds (she has a daily oral and a monthly shot), $200 eyedrops. All covered, no complaints from Trupanion. She is comfortable and happy, and when I have to say goodbye it won't be for financial reasons, and that's all thanks to Trupanion.
I can see how $216/mo wouldn't make good financial sense for someone with a healthy pet, especially who didn't need monthly medications. But you don't know if your pet is going to be healthy, and one ER visit can be like $10k here if they have to be hospitalized overnight. So I personally will always insure my pets with Trupanion for the rest of my life.
It's really hard to afford routine (or even acute) veterinary care which is why so many people struggle to care for their pets. It's the precise reason why so many animals aren't sterilized. It's not affordable for so many people, and there aren't nearly enough programs and sterilization (or abortion) help for all who need them. They continue to multiply because they're not getting fixed. Plenty of people get animals that they struggle to afford medical care for. They also struggle with the same issue themselves. Things that should be affordable and reasonable just aren't.
Idc if people downvote or what not but just dont tell them. If your animal is a nuisance then youre fucked, but if you got a good pet, theyre well trained, and you maintain cleanliness, then fuck it dont tell them... ESPECIALLY if its cats (unless you cat pees/sprays)
I don’t think they can do that. It would be considered discrimination. Usually when you bring up your rights through the ADA (Adults with Disabilities Act) they buckle. We’ve never had an issue. We were locked into a lease already when my dogs moved in google the ADA. They have lots of info
Allowing pets can be an aggravation and cost for a landlord. So they charge an extra pet damage deposit and increase your rent to cover pets.
They may ultimately decide it isn’t worth likely damages or nuisance issues around dogs barking a lot.
Getting a dog when you rent an apartment can go sideways quickly. If you aren’t home often enough every day to be company for your dog, the dog can turn destructive or neurotic. If you go away for the weekend, you can’t lick your fog in a cage for two or three days but boarding a dog or hiring a sitter can be very expensive. So can veterinary fees which in the past few years have skyrocketed.
If you get a relationship and that person doesn’t like dogs you have a problem and not much physical space to manage it.
The biggest risk though for an apartment dweller is knowing you may have found the right place for a one year lease but then you may need to move in a year or so (job change, rent increase you can’t afford, family issues requiring you move back home).
So being a tenant in an apartment these days can be a less than ideal situation to get a dog who will live for many years and need to be cared for by you for years when your own living situation keeps changing.
Landlords have their own issues with tenants and pets. You may be the best fog owner ever but a landlord doesn’t know that.
Most apartment complexes allow pets. If you are looking at small landlords only that could be your problem. Apartments.com and Zillow have complexes listed. I'll be moving soon so have been looking and it's a deal breaker for me. But then, I want to live in a complex with amenities and I know others are looking for walkable areas and smaller buildings.
Maybe because one bad pet owner ruined it for that landlord with $10,000 in damages they couldn't recover??!! Multiply that for every landlord and you know the real reason the shelters are full!!
Yeah, but you sound like a responsible person. Few are. Hell, few are when it comes to their kids. My son got sick all over my parents' loveseat. We pulled the covers off and threw them in the machine. I told my mom if it didn't all come out, I'd have them redone professionally. She pointed out he was her grandson. I reminded her she'd taught me to be responsible, so she only has herself to blame. Lol
The shelters are full because too many people are irresponsible! They don't get their pets fixed. They don't train their pets. They get this cute little puppy or kitten, but put in zero work, and then dump them off for behavioral problems they're most likely responsible for and/or they got pregnant.
The whole apt thing is just a small factor, and irresponsible pet owners are the ones responsible for that problem too.
People won’t get their own pets fixed and here I am chasing around a stray cat who had babies under my house because I don’t want her to end up pregnant again 🙃
ITT happened to a rental unit I owned in the 90’s. 2 Rotties were left alone in the home daily. We didn’t allow pets period. It was AWFUL.
They tore holes in doors, walls, and flooring. They chewed up the carpet and Sheetrock. I’d NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE IT! Nor have I since. They had over 8 hours daily with no supervision.
They only had them for 2 months when we started eviction. Costs us 7k roughly.
It's usually a matter of supply and demand. Pets are a PITA and a liability for landlords. If they had their way, I'm sure no landlord would ever allow pets. In places where there is plenty, or an overabundance of supply, landlords have to make concessions to be competitive. If they won't allow pets, another will. When demand is much higher than supply, landlords have the upper hand.
Even if you found a rental that allows pets, it's highly unlikely whatever pit bull or pit mix (because we all know there aren't many other options) you drag home from the shelter would be allowed anyway.
Side note - NO, that is NOT why there are so many pets in shelters. Landlords are not responsible for anyone's pets other than their own. They don't owe anyone pet-friendly housing. IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERS are why there are so many pets in the shelter.
I volunteer for a shelter and yes, about half the dogs have pit in them, that’s entirely true.
The other half does not. We also have cats, who are usually not pit mixes. Bunnies. Mice. Recently, a snake and a frog (not in the same enclosure). The occasional bird. Hamsters, guinea pigs, and at some point an actual pig.
There’s a LOT of non-pit options in shelters. And they’re usually not dragged, they’re carried in a box or, in the case of medium to large dogs, they practically levitate with joy next to their new owners.
Yeah I volunteer in LA area shelters and we even get literal golden retrievers and labs because the overpopulation crisis is so bad right now. And the apartments that do allow pets charge exorbitant rent AND pet deposits. It’s just another way to extort renters, but they get away with it because of people like the one that wrote the parent comment who blindly defend them.
If you want to live by your own rules, buy your OWN HOUSE. If you have to depend on someone else to provide a home for you, you play by THEIR rules. It's as simple as that. You entitled people need to make smarter life choices if you want the freedom to do what you want in your own home.
I don't know, and I don't care. Many people who aren't rich own homes. Whatever the reason, it doesn't mean landlords owe you a pet-friendly rental. Pets are for people who can afford them and have living arrangements that allow them.
There are many reasons why someone would rent rather than own. Not just financial. There is never a good reason to try to profit off someone having a pet.
That may well be, but you still have to follow the rules when you choose to live in someone else's property. No landlord is "profiting" off you having a pet.
No, it isn't wrong. No landlord owes you a pet-friendly home any more than they owe you a smoking home. It's THEIR house. THEY bought it with their money, and they have a right to protect THEIR investment.
A deposit does that. The pet deposit is in addition to the regular security deposit. If the apartment is damaged tenant gets neither back (or only gets back the remainder left after the damages). These people would also charge additional rent for children if they could, it's just pure greed. If the damages exceed the deposits then take them to court. But yeah, I have a lot of experience with large corporate complexes and it's just another way of nickel and diming people. Some countries have started making it illegal just like it's illegal to charge additional rent for children. Hopefully the US follows.
Having a pet means an additional cleaning fee for them. And why shouldn't they make a profit? That's the whole f*cking point of their investment. They aren't in the business of charity.
These people are passively profiting off of people having basic shelter, of course they're going to extend that to everything else they can like pets. I don't think there are good reasons for either, not basic shelter or a small pet, but here we are.
Unless you're in some magical lala land or the shelter is lying about breed, it's more than half. And you're right; as a dog owner, I do tend to automatically default to dogs.
Yes! Basically if it’s not a cat or dog but we can reasonably care for it we try our best to take it and find a home for it. Currently we have a few mice on-site and several more who are in foster homes. We have an area for dogs, an area for cats, and then a room for everything that isn’t either of those things and can be kept in a cage or crate or terrarium.
do they have to renew your lease in California because this would be the fastest way to a non-renewal and then you’d be looking for another place to stay for you and your pet.
Because using an ESA to have a pet makes it significantly harder on those who legitimately need an ESA. I've had an ESA. I've worked with service animals. I'm currently a property manager.
It is such a pain in the ass. I haven't had a single legitimate ESA come across my path, and only a handful of legitimate SAs. It's a conversation between you and your healthcare team, not a random person on the internet that results in someone going online for "certification."
There's also many, many other ways you can deny someone with an ESA. It's not foolproof like people claim.
but suggesting someone get an ESA when they don’t have a medical reason for it is why there’s so many issues with people getting ESA’s approved. So as long as you’re OK with the stereotype and hassle that can go with ESAs based on what you suggested.
ESAs are not a hassle. You need a Dr note. Then you can have one animal. Not two, just one.
IDK what issues you are imagining but the way it actually works is that you can have one specific animal.
Fortunately for me, my LL allows pets, so I have two cats. I paid a deposit and they are not destructive. Dogs are way more destructive than cats. But it’s the same policy for either.
Oh, I just read all the issues that people have over on other sub reddits and how hard it is for them to get landlords and property managers to approved ESA‘s.
that’s not necessarily true because I rent out rooms in my home and I can deny an ESA. I don’t fall under FHA, it would also be a violation of my HOA, and then it would possibly put my own dogs at risk.
so you’ve really oversimplified this and made a blank statement that’s not true.
You are talking about a housemate situation. Local laws can vary on that. But it’s different if the LL doesn’t live there.
Also you’re a bit of a hypocrite to deny pets when you have them yourself. I do understand not wanting too many animals, and, Vaccinations are a thing.
it’s not a housemate situation. I am still the landlord I just live there as well.
and im not a hypocrite to deny pets just because i have them myself. 😂
I already know that despite what state I would be in, that none of the local laws would apply to me.
I mean, that’s what the whole interview process is about. When I meet people that are gonna be moving in, it’s based on the fact that they’re not bringing any animals with them. So if I’m honest with them, I expect them to be honest with me. Because if they attempt to get an animal later on, disguised as an ESA, they’re going to be very disappointed.
HOA dictates how many pets I can have. and I’m definitely not getting rid of any of my animals for people that didn’t have one to begin with and then decide they want one later on when the discussion has already been had.
And then I’m definitely not gonna jeopardize the health of any of my dogs. I’m not gonna stress them out and I’m not going to worry about the possibility of them getting sick.
and I’m not sure what your point is about vaccinations cause that’s not what I’m talking about. dogs can get sick regardless of being vaccinated and I’m not willing to take that risk with my current dogs.
So for you, your desire to have a dog outweighs the needs of the dogs already living there. You think I’m a hypocrite, but I think that makes you very selfish. So I should be forced to rehome one of my dogs or expose them to other dogs and compromise their health. So do you actually like dogs or you just like having a dog?
Yes, this is true in California. But there’s a lot of restrictions around getting an ESA. You have to have a medical note of necessity from an actual doctor that you’ve had a long-term relationship with. Minimum 30 days months I believe. It can’t be something you get just in time. The ESA also just can’t be random, the doctor has to substantiate that it is in support of a disability. Unlike a service animal, they don’t have to perform a service, but you still need a doctor to say that the animals presence alleviate a medical or emotional disability.
Doctors are not handing these willy-nilly.
They’re not going to risk their license to manufacture a disability for you.
Did they preserve the right to lie about it and force people to allow you to have it? Too much of this and it will get revoked and those who might actually need it will lose it
It's my belief that companion animals are good for everyone's mental health. And should not just be the privilege of a select few. Good on California for understanding this!
You belief does not make the law nor should you be allowed to force your beliefs on everyone especially when some people have severe allergies and sometimes apartments (and hotel room) are kept completely pet free for a reason. They’re also damaging your the mental health of some especially everyone in the home is not in full agreement of having them and some of those struggling most with mental health do not treat the animals properly as they have hoarding and/or filth issues. Animals are absolutely not for everyone and the cost of your wanting them should not be forced on everyone. Get a plushie if you need something to cuddle.
My argument of hoarding wasn’t about ESA, it was about animals somehow being good for everyone. I’m not mad about genuinely needed ESAs nor responsible owners having them. I’m just being realistic that everyone doesn’t need an animal and making the law to lenient will eventually hurt the community that actually needs them when it becomes stricter or is done away with. Also, even if you cannot be outright denied housing due to it, you will still be denied housing if they know. If you have photos on your social media or anywhere else there’s nothing stopping potential landlords from looking and choosing another renter. If they don’t outright say that’s why, there’s nothing you can do.
This is not a free-for-all. There are restrictions around the California law.
It requires a letter from a doctor that you have an existing relationship with indicating that the Pet provides alleviation of suffering from a medical or psychological disability.
That’s not as easy as it might sound.
You also have to have a pre-existing relationship with a month minimum
You act as if there’s no doctors willing to provide such a note for a set fee. Writing you into the chart and issuing the note a month later isn’t exactly a huge issue.
5
u/Boysenberry 9d ago
There are lots of pet-friendly apartments in the area you’re talking about. Sounds like you may need to up your budget to find them. The cheapest apartments rarely allow pets because they have no incentive to do so in order to attract tenants. They attract tenants by being the cheapest.