4 ms·

I would assume it reduces their insurance rates to say "no pets, unless ESA".

ghostly_s 9y ago
Doesn't pet damage fall under your renter's insurance liability + damage deposit? How is it relevant for the owner's property insurance?
- diggernet 9y ago
  I've heard that some owner's policies raise liability premiums if tenants have dogs (especially certain breeds). Presumably due to risk of someone suing tenant + owner ("deep pockets") after a bite.
  - briandear 9y ago
    That is exactly the case. Dog bite liability is a huge issue. A pit bull injuring a child is massive liability. Breed size restrictions are a back door way of screening potentially dangerous breeds. A beagle, to my knowledge, has never killed anyone, but there are plenty of tragic cases where certain large breeds has maimed or injured people and other animals. It’s actually a fact that more dog bites are committed by small dogs, but a kid losing an arm over a chihuahua bite is unheard of, thus the liability risk for small dogs is dramatically lower. Also as a parent, I would be extremely wary of living in a community where pit bulls are allowed. As a property owner, I am not going to base the safety of my property on the hope that a pit bull owner has trained his dog appropriately. Hope is not a valid strategy for risk mitigation. I also have an admitted prejudice against pit bull owners based on my experience with such owners — so if I am legally able to discriminate against certain animals, I admit I would because it would allow me to avoid leasing to pit bull owners. If anyone has been a landlord for very long, they would know that you can tell a lot about a potential tenant by the type of dog they own — and the anecdotal experiences of my dad owning rental properties tend to support my prejudice. I actually actually own a large breed, a white Swiss shepherd, and I am completely understanding when people are wary of a massive working dog, although living in France, people here aren’t so afraid — perhaps because culturally the French seem to do a better job of training dogs so there are fewer experiences of people being attacked or annoyed by rowdy animals.
    - bjterry 9y ago
      > A beagle, to my knowledge, has never killed anyone Wikipedia mentions two cases in the US[0], but what's more interesting is the existence and thoroughness of this Wikipedia page. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_Unite...
      - JBlue42 9y ago
        That wikipedia page is amazing.
- czep 9y ago
  It also lowers the attractiveness of the unit from the perspective of other potential tenants, since many people are not interested in living around the noise, smell, or allergens of animals.

Doesn't pet damage fall under your renter's insurance liability + damage deposit? How is it relevant for the owner's property insurance?

diggernet 9y ago
I've heard that some owner's policies raise liability premiums if tenants have dogs (especially certain breeds). Presumably due to risk of someone suing tenant + owner ("deep pockets") after a bite.
- briandear 9y ago
  That is exactly the case. Dog bite liability is a huge issue. A pit bull injuring a child is massive liability. Breed size restrictions are a back door way of screening potentially dangerous breeds. A beagle, to my knowledge, has never killed anyone, but there are plenty of tragic cases where certain large breeds has maimed or injured people and other animals. It’s actually a fact that more dog bites are committed by small dogs, but a kid losing an arm over a chihuahua bite is unheard of, thus the liability risk for small dogs is dramatically lower. Also as a parent, I would be extremely wary of living in a community where pit bulls are allowed. As a property owner, I am not going to base the safety of my property on the hope that a pit bull owner has trained his dog appropriately. Hope is not a valid strategy for risk mitigation. I also have an admitted prejudice against pit bull owners based on my experience with such owners — so if I am legally able to discriminate against certain animals, I admit I would because it would allow me to avoid leasing to pit bull owners. If anyone has been a landlord for very long, they would know that you can tell a lot about a potential tenant by the type of dog they own — and the anecdotal experiences of my dad owning rental properties tend to support my prejudice. I actually actually own a large breed, a white Swiss shepherd, and I am completely understanding when people are wary of a massive working dog, although living in France, people here aren’t so afraid — perhaps because culturally the French seem to do a better job of training dogs so there are fewer experiences of people being attacked or annoyed by rowdy animals.
  - bjterry 9y ago
    > A beagle, to my knowledge, has never killed anyone Wikipedia mentions two cases in the US[0], but what's more interesting is the existence and thoroughness of this Wikipedia page. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_Unite...
    - JBlue42 9y ago
      That wikipedia page is amazing.
czep 9y ago
It also lowers the attractiveness of the unit from the perspective of other potential tenants, since many people are not interested in living around the noise, smell, or allergens of animals.