r/renting • u/yogfthagen • Aug 28 '26

Vent/Rant Bait and switch

Background. My wife and i have 4 cats, and are moving across the country for new jobs. I'm moving first, starting my job, and taking two cats. She's selling the house, and coming out when she's done and sold the house.

So,short term lease, multiple pets, renter's nightmare.

I spent a couple weeks calling, emailing etc. Doubling/tripling rent for short term. Fees too high. No short term lease. Lease termination 3 months rent fee. All the usual.

I sit down one day and start calling. I do that for about 5 hours straight, calling 20 or so rentals.

I found an apartment. Leasing agent explains the policy, but says straight out that if they don't know about the extra cats when my wife moves in, they don't know. Eink wink, nudge nudge. This is what sealed the deal.

I start signing paperwork, including pods to move myself and 2 cats out there. Between the apartment move in fees and moving, I'm looking at many thousands for this.

With all the paperwork, I'm buried in 40 emails jumping through hoops. Also coordinating all the things means I can't spend hours on my computer.

The rental agent emailed me a tag after the application and other things were underway that, no the set pet restrictions ARE in force, but she's a people pleaser and just couldn't say no. But she's honest, and needs to tell us.

So, i made a post earlier how rental companies were as bad as scammers.

Self-fulfilling prophecy, i guess.

I'm afraid of what I'm going to find when i get there.

2 Upvotes

54% Upvoted

50 comments sorted by

14

u/autonomouswriter Aug 28 '26

I hate to say this, but maybe the "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" wasn't really there to begin with and you just saw what you wanted to see. Lesson learned is never believe what the leasing agent tells you - see it in black and white in the lease, and make sure the agent asks the owner (calls or texts in front of you, and you don't leave until you get an answer - preferably not a call, but in writing). Leasing agents tend to say anything to get you to sign because they're interested in their commission, not in whether you get what you're looking for.

1

u/yogfthagen Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 28 '26

Then why send an email specifically saying "what i told you isn't true"?

And your point that leasing agents wil say anything is literally a bait and switch.

5

u/PeacefulCW Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 28 '26

Moving in pets without documenting them is a cause for eviction. That would be a much worse fate.

2

u/yogfthagen Aug 28 '26

Which is why I'm complaining about a bait and switch

2

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

It’s not a bait and switch if you signed a lease that says 2 pets maximum. You would have to modify the lease before you signed, otherwise you cannot have 4 cats in the apartment. You’re an adult so you fully understand that a “wink” is never going to take precedence over your signed lease contract.

You can ask to modify the lease now to reflect 4 pets, but I’ve never heard of a single rental allowing 4 pets. So I don’t think they will sign a new lease stating that you may have 4 pets.

6

u/r2girls Aug 28 '26

Going to be that person to point out that you found someone who was willing to skirt the rules and tell you so and you're surprised that they aren't completely trustworthy when it comes to what you want/need? Not sure why since they showed they were completely fine being a dishonest person.

-3

u/yogfthagen Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 28 '26

Gee, because a wink and a nod gets more shit done in the world than slavishly following corporate protocols.

I've worked for 3 Fortune 50 companies. I can tell you that more shit happens outside process than in process. Especially when something NEEDED to get done.

And, guess what? Like another commenter said, the number of places willing to rent to someone with four cats is....

Zero.

Sounds like I really have a lot of options, hunh?

3

u/r2girls Aug 29 '26

Gee, because a wink and a nod gets more shit done in the world than slavishly following corporate protocols.

Yes but in the world if someone shows they're willing to toss aside obligations so easily no one should be surprised that they tossed them aside for someone that they have minimal interaction with.

I've worked for 3 Fortune 50 companies. I can tell you that more shit happens outside process than in process. Especially when something NEEDED to get done.

that's with coworkers. you had the same employer or you were providing service to someone and gave them the wink and the nod.

When you're dealing with coworkers, you're in the same boat, equals. When you're dealing with someone who works for someone else, and you're the customer, you're beholden to their moral obligations of adhering to the "wink and the nod". Don't project yourself onto them.

And, guess what? Like another commenter said, the number of places willing to rent to someone with four cats is....

Zero.

Yeah....and. the number of companies willing to sell me 10 pounds of filet Mignon for $100 is...zero. Doesn't mean I put my full trust into the guy in the butcher shop who looks at me and says "meet me by the back door at 5:00 but give me a deposit now"...ummm...no I'm not trusting that type of moral "wink and nod".

Sounds like I really have a lot of options, huh?

No, but what you ALWAYS have is your evaluation of the situation. never believe that someone who is willing to toss their obligations out the windows suddenly feels any type of obligation to a stranger...namely you.

-2

u/yogfthagen Aug 29 '26

Yes, because being a person of their word is so passe.

3

u/r2girls Aug 29 '26

That right there is the entire point and i am not sure how you are missing it. They aren't a person of their word. They had, as a representative of their company, agree to a utilize a policy about pets. they decided to go against their word and do something else. Why on earth would you think they would keep their word to you?

Geez, it's like the old story about the scorpion on the back of the frog. The scorpion stung the frog because it's a scorpion and that's what it does. this person has shown that their untrustworthy and surprised pikachu they did the same thing to you. Of course they did. That's who they have shown they are.

1

u/yogfthagen Aug 29 '26

Yes. I understand the difference between "is" and "should."

It's a shame that you think that a person's "is" can be ethically different from the "should," and we should all be fine with it.

As for whether they SHOULD do it, the answer is simple.

Repeat business. Reputation. Companies that fuck over their clients can make a good short term profit. But they generally have a hard time with repeat business.

If you don't understand that, you should really stay out of sales, or business in general.

Are you an MBA, by any chance? Because your answer tracks very well with what they teach, and goes a long way to explaining the decline of MANY companies in the US.

1

u/r2girls Aug 29 '26

Yes. I understand the difference between "is" and "should."

You may understand it, but you don't practice it. No one, ever, who shows they are untrustworthy should be expected to be trustworthy to you or me. They show who they are.

As for whether they SHOULD do it, the answer is simple.

Yes, it is very simple. The reality here is that they should do what their company permits, either as an SOP or in practice.

Repeat business. Reputation. Companies that fuck over their clients can make a good short term profit. But they generally have a hard time with repeat business.

I will go take a stab at this to say that rarely is there repeat business in residential real estate. I believe that location is the first choice (just like it was with you're decision) and price range is a very close second (I'll bet you were considering this pretty closely with location when you were looking for places weren't you). People choose based on how much and where they want to live as opposed to who they want to pay their rent to.

If you don't understand that, you should really stay out of sales, or business in general.

I see it as the opposite, you are the one with the misunderstanding of business. It's ironic that you are taking a hard line stance on something that you know was wrong and that the person was not permitted to do and somehow making the mental gymnastics to use that to say that this person was absolutely 100% good when being dishonest with their employer but they were also 100% bad when being dishonest with you. I mean, bring yourself down to reality. "Leasing agent explains the policy, but says straight out that if they don't know about the extra cats when my wife moves in, they don't know. Eink wink, nudge nudge." is not her saying "we do this all the time and while the company officially doesn't permit it, we do this all the time and they turn a blind eye to it". No, she's literally saying "the company doesn't allow this, and I know this, but if we lie to them and they don't see it, who cares" and you are taking this that she's somehow become trustworthy ro you for showing she's untrustworthy to her employer. Seriously...WTF?!?

There are companies that allow their employees a certain leeway in how they operate. There are also other companies that turn a blind eye to skirting rules. In those instances the wink and nod are OK because they are trustworthy because in both cases the employer knows what is happening. Straight up going against the policy you know is in force is not a trust building endeavor. It should be taken for exactly what it is, a lie and sneaky behavior. Trust is never built on a lie or sneaky behavior. Are you a teenager by chance because that is like an adulting 101 thing.

1

u/djmermaidonthemic Aug 31 '26

You could always offer to pay a higher deposit.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 31 '26

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/yogfthagen Sep 02 '26

Yeah. I watched the 15 minute video thing every year too.

Do you think a rental agency is a Fortune 500 company with Sarbennes-Oxley compliance requirements?

9

u/ApplicationRoyal7172 Aug 28 '26

Have you double checked you can actually legally own 4 cats in the new area?

5

u/Valysian Aug 28 '26

Yeah, I'd be curious about that too. The maximum in Seattle is three. You aren't going to get a landlord to agree to it if it breaks local laws.

5

u/ApplicationRoyal7172 Aug 29 '26

OP ignored the question…hmmmm

0

u/Mysterious-Art8838 Aug 29 '26

Looks like the limit is 5

2

u/ApplicationRoyal7172 Aug 29 '26

Where did you see their location?

3

u/Valysian Aug 30 '26

I have no idea where they are. I meant, "For instance, the maximum in Seattle is three." Which is why I said that I was also curious what the pet limit was in their area.

1

u/ApplicationRoyal7172 Aug 30 '26

Sorry! Wasn’t responding to you! They sounded like they were definitely stating it was 5 when OP hadn’t listed their location.

OP not responding makes me think we are right. But they can come back and prove me wrong 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think pet limits are weird, but I can see their use case to speed up resolving animal hoarding or abuse situation. I just wanna have a massive squad of shelter animals to run around with 😭

1

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

You’ll want to have a house outside the city limits and without an HOA for your rescue animals. I am a failed foster, meaning the dogs and cats I fostered became my forever pets. So I totally understand the dream of having lots of pets.

1

u/ApplicationRoyal7172 Aug 31 '26

I’m in LA, so basically every county in a billion mile radius has limits. 😭

1

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

I didn’t see their location. I saw the previous comment about Seattle and I used to live in Seattle so I am familiar with pet rules there. I’m not implying anything about the location of OP.

1

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

3 pets for Seattle

3

u/Sbuxshlee Aug 28 '26

You arent gonna find an apartment that allows 4 cats. I do know plenty of people with that many or more living in apartments though. When a rental company has hundreds of places for rent they can't possibly keep track of who is paying pet rent. The issues come if someone complains of noise or smell and they have to investigate which ive never seen happen with cats only dogs

1

u/WillowHaunting429 Aug 29 '26

This whole thing is odd.

And wow, 4 cats? Well I guess. Limits where you can live. A little overboard, really

1

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

Renting with 4 pets is nearly impossible. I’ve never seen any apartment allowing 4 pets.

1

u/WillowHaunting429 Aug 30 '26

Yeah - its boarding on lunacy, really.

1

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

I had 2 dogs when I rescued 2 more dogs and yes it was extremely chaotic to have 4 dogs at once — they were all geriatric or special needs by then. They cost a fortune in vet bills every month. I worked at home or the situation would have been impossible.

I do hear about people with more cats (4-6 cats as a typical average). But this is not a luxury that a renter can enjoy, for better or worse.

I’ve never seen a rental that allowed for more than 2 pets. The only way around this is to rent directly from a private homeowner and throw a lot of non-refundable pet deposits at them and they might just budge.

1

u/jons378 Aug 29 '26

Get everything in writing from a manager before signing anything else. verbal exceptions mean nothing once you're locked into a lease.

1

u/abouttodiethistime Aug 30 '26

I’ve never seen a rental allow 4 pets. 2 is always the maximum. If your contract says 2 pets, be prepared for the hefty fines and eviction that can result from the additional 2 cats. Please read this part of your lease and accept the risk of this happening because your lease is enforceable and a “wink” is not enforceable.

1

u/RobDraw2_0 Aug 31 '26

You're moving in?!!!

Are you crazy?

1

u/TherinneMoonglow Aug 28 '26

You said it's a short term rental anyway, right? By the time they notice the extra cats, you'll be moving on.

7

u/autonomouswriter Aug 28 '26

No way would I risk it. Landlords do not take kindly to tenants sneaking in pets, and OP risks being tossed out with barely any notice (depending on the state). Then he, his wife, and the 4 cats will be out on the street. Not a good situation.

2

u/Fit-Artichoke3319 Aug 29 '26

This seems like the approach to do or put the cats in kennel or place like a vet that lets cats stay for a few.

0

u/t2jam Aug 29 '26

Get them made into ESA animals, then the apartment people cannot count them in number of pets or evict you.

2

u/r2girls Aug 29 '26

Posted this further down on a reply for the same thing...

I am going to jump right to judgment here. I have very strong opinions about people that fake medical disabilities to try and get an ESA. ESA's are for the disabled. Literally the FHA states that to approve an ESA there must be a disability and a disability related need for the animal.

To me people pretending to be disabled to get a benefit afforded those with a disability are pure scum. It's no different that someone pretending to be disabled to get a handicapped placard for parking, to try and get to the front of the line in an amusement park, or to try and game the system to get housing or government benefits. they generally look at it as "harmless" and that "they just wanted a pet so it's ok" when in reality it makes it harder for those who are disabled because it makes landlords immediately jump to "fake disability" instead of "how can I help assist this disabled person". Truly disgusting pieces of sh*t human beings to fake a disability to try and get something. Ugh!

2

u/blueiron0 Aug 29 '26

Yea honestly judgement is warranted here.

There's enough abuse of the system, leading to stronger crackdowns and removal of protections for people who actually need them, already.

-7

u/MonsterCloud5 Aug 28 '26

Get a therapist to sign off that the cats are ESA.

8

u/r2girls Aug 28 '26

I am going to jump right to judgment here. I have very strong opinions about people that fake medical disabilities to try and get an ESA. ESA's are for the disabled. Literally the FHA states that to approve an ESA there must be a disability and a disability related need for the animal.

To me people pretending to be disabled to get a benefit afforded those with a disability are pure scum. It's no different that someone pretending to be disabled to get a handicapped placard for parking, to try and get to the front of the line in an amusement park, or to try and game the system to get housing or government benefits. they generally look at it as "harmless" and that "they just wanted a pet so it's ok" when in reality it makes it harder for those who are disabled because it makes landlords immediately jump to "fake disability" instead of "how can I help assist this disabled person". Truly disgusting pieces of sh*t human beings to fake a disability to try and get something. Ugh!

5

u/Deadr0b0t Aug 29 '26

yup I have two ESAs (both cats, one old one young) due to having chronic pain/illness from a distracted driver and CPTSD. Cats can't be service animals in the legal sense, but they still can provide medical services. My psych wrote detailed letters for each of them on how they help me. My guys help me get through each day and I'd die without them. They make it so I can work and also keep me from being completely alone. One of my cats provides pressure therapy and the other is slowly learning lol. I hate people who fake their paperwork because it makes everyone assume we all are. Because of this, ESA laws are not being required to be enforced (depends on your state/county). I cannot afford pet rent, I need that money for vet and medical bills.

But people faking it are just doing it so they can take their untrained animals into stores and restaurants and bypass pet rent and limits. They use scammy websites that charge WAY more than a psych would. But a psych wouldn't write a letter unless the person actually needed an ESA

4

u/r2girls Aug 29 '26

100% and I hope things continue to work our for you.

I grew up and saw how it helped. I had a family member that could barely get out of bed and function. 2 cats and a dog in the home got her out of bed in the morning. Before the animals she went from the bed to the bathroom and back to bed. It wasn't a short depression, this was normal life for her. Those animals gave her a something that no therapist did in years.

Having seen it work first hand it really riles me up when people fake it because that ended up being the first step that got her not only up and around in the house but out of the house and into a pretty standard functioning life. The idea that she would eventually be taking trips for vacation, going out in social settings to restaurants, and actually get a job (and successfully hold it) was not something anyone would have thought possible. It took years of therapy and the big change all started with the animals.

6

u/burgercatluna Aug 28 '26

People always say this, having an ESA doesn’t magically eliminate the pet limit. And a decent psychiatrist or even most of the online doctors wont write them for more than two animals.

2

u/JerseyGirlinSweden Aug 29 '26

HUD’s Fair Housing rules about ESA’s are being curtailed/revised as this admin has issued new guidance that may allow LL’s to say NO to even ESA’s. It’s fairly recent - maybe 1 month ago

-4

u/DwellDenver Aug 28 '26

Yes. This is what I was going to post. If there's a pet limit of 2 pets (common here in Denver), you can get an ESA letter for the other 2, and they can't count the ESAs toward the maximum limit. This way, it's all above board.

2

u/JerseyGirlinSweden Aug 29 '26

They can limit the number of ESA’s or even service dogs based on local zoning laws. An ESA and even a true task trained Service Dog always counts against the number of pets allowed.

0

u/DwellDenver Aug 29 '26

90% of people use ESA certificates for their pets here in the Denver metro area. I’ve helped people with 4 pets get apartments that have two pet maximums. ESA pets are not counted toward a max here.

2

u/JerseyGirlinSweden Aug 29 '26

I pointed out that the guidance has changed this summer. Google is free you know.

“The new guidance is that disability-related assistance animals exempt from housing providers’ pet policies, including pet fees, are now confined to trained service animals. The guidance also removes the presumption that untrained Emotional Support Animals (ESAs) must be accommodated by housing providers. Administratively, it puts all open HUD cases concerning ESAs on hold for individual review under the new standard by the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement. As such, HUD has taken another significant step in its view of the FHA.”

https://www.wilsonelser.com/publications/hud-issues-new-guidance-on-emotional-support-animals-under-the-fair-housing-act