So, do you think it's a good idea to allow pets in your rental properties? I have pets and couldn't imagine being without them, but I'm not sure about allowing them in rentals. I have known a lot of people who would let their animals tear things up, use the bathroom on the floor, etc. One small dog or cat can do a LOT of damage in a home. Yet, you can make a bit with the non-refundable pet deposits if you're selective, and you will obviously be more competitive against other landlords who don't allow pets if you do. What are your thoughts?
This is a tricky one for me to answer. I know that there are some pets that will totally destroy floors, etc. and there are other problems that come along with choosing to go pet-friendly... ... *BUT* we have a kitty who is part of the family and I would not *ever* rent at a place that wouldn't allow her to live there, even if finding a place to rent was proving nearly impossible. (This is all moot now because we bought our home 10 years ago... no more renting, whew!) It just wouldn't happen. So we allow pets in our rental. Current tenant doesn't have a pet, but I think we'll not be renewing his lease in a few months, so we'll start again at square one and pets will be allowed. (Unless it's a snake colony or something... I *do* have my limits!)
I used to live in a complex where pets were allowed, but for an extra charge every month. From an ownership standpoint, you're opening yourself up to more damage and repair. You can offset that by the additional fees or deposits if the tenants choose to have animals in the home.
I understand where you are coming from. I definitely will not consider a rental if they is a not pets allowed rule. However, you do not have to worry about the mess that they could make. I know some people a specific about what type of animals they allow. For example, small dogs and cats may not do too much damage. Like you said, that deposit won't hurt either.
I think this is fair... paying a little extra to be able to bring pets into the rental. When we travel and need to look for pet-friendly hotels, very few of them don't have a pet fee. There are *some* that don't, but most have it and we understand that and don't view it as a problem.
I would never allow pet in my properties, they can damage the floor, the walls and the smell just might never come out. No extra that justifies pets in my opinion.
I agree. I definitely think pet owners should have to pay a little more in case of damage. It's unfortunate that some people let their animals misbehave, use the bathroom everywhere, etc.
Yes, it sure is. I think that's where having references would come in handy... if the last landlord didn't have a problem with the prospective new tenant's pets, I can't see that a problem of destruction or smell would suddenly start.
I think that most pet owners do have care because after all it's the house where they live, but animals are animals and they do damage the place whether we like it or not, so paying extra seems fair to me.
Don't forget the impact on the quality of life it has on the other tenants. We used to live in a multi-unit apartment, and the dog would bark all through the day. The tenant would leave the dog's "bombs" all over the shared green space. It was a nightmare.
