4 ms·

Yes, you do have to take their word for it. If the dog is disruptive (e.g. barking or not housetrained), you can ask them to leave. The dog must be under contro

Yes, you do have to take their word for it. If the dog is disruptive (e.g. barking or not housetrained), you can ask them to leave. The dog must be under control by the owner at all times. Dogs must (generally) remain on the floor or on the owner (and not in a shopping cart). Seating, food, drink, and other amenities are for the person, not the dog. In practice, asking these two questions and understanding the limits of where you can intervene is sufficient in 99% of cases. > you do basically have to take chihuahuas or Pomeranians or pit bulls or Rottweilers or whatever as service dogs Why is this a problem? Different breeds have different characteristics, and there are a variety of reasons to have a service dog -- from PTSD to blindness to diabetes.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
>In practice, asking these two questions and understanding the limits of where you can intervene is sufficient in 99% of cases. Hah, try it at a hotel that charges pet cleaning fees. Or limits the number of animals in a room. It's 99% sufficient at Costco, because the cost is low of not getting in. When you're looking at shelling out money for a pet fee or not having to pay for pet boarding or pet sitters at home, suddenly 10%+ of the population has service animals. >Why is this a problem? Different breeds have different characteristics, and there are a variety of reasons to have a service dog -- from PTSD to blindness to diabetes. It's not a problem necessarily, but you can sort of tell who is and isn't lying about service animals, at least by the discrepancy in total numbers and which ones are coming in with the badges and vests (indicating they don't know about actual ADA laws).
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  Amortize the costs of the liars across the base cost of the room. It's really not that many people who will lie about it. Some folks end up paying a little more on average and some people cheat and pay a little less, but the folks who need service animal accommodations don't get accosted by desk clerks. Sounds like a win to me.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    Many hotels and motels are small businesses (usually franchisees) that are low margin, low volume, they can't just eat the costs, which are also not equal the price of the room rate. A disruptive pet can cause you to have to refund multiple other rooms, and potential loss of future business too. A disruptive pet can cause physical damage to the room far in excess of the room rate. We once had a pet ruin the carpet so bad the room was not able to be sold for weeks, even after multiple carpet shampoos. And you also can't go after the hotel guests to recoup costs because the legal fees are hefty and the probability of winning the case, the defendants having money, and actually paying the money are all very low. Obviously all of this is true for disruptive people too, it's just that pets add another risk. Personally, after what I've seen, I would pay extra to be able to stay at a hotel that could guarantee it never had any pets stay.
    - Pfhreak 6y ago
      Don't allow pets? Service animals are not pets. And service animals can be removed from a business for being disruptive. > they can't just eat the costs, which are also not equal the price of the room rate Amortize the costs does not mean eat the costs, it means bake them into the base rate.
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        I meant any animals, it’s a personal preference. I know how well hotel rooms get cleaned, and I’d rather take my chances with rooms that haven’t had animals. It’s also not that simple for smaller business to amortize the costs since the pricing has to be competitive with larger businesses that can amortize over more rooms, so a lot of times, the business does have to eat it. It’s also a very unpredictable cost with high variance.
      - mlyle 6y ago
        We're talking about fake service animals, which pretty much are pets ;)

lotsofpulp 6y ago

>In practice, asking these two questions and understanding the limits of where you can intervene is sufficient in 99% of cases. Hah, try it at a hotel that charges pet cleaning fees. Or limits the number of animals in a room. It's 99% sufficient at Costco, because the cost is low of not getting in. When you're looking at shelling out money for a pet fee or not having to pay for pet boarding or pet sitters at home, suddenly 10%+ of the population has service animals. >Why is this a problem? Different breeds have different characteristics, and there are a variety of reasons to have a service dog -- from PTSD to blindness to diabetes. It's not a problem necessarily, but you can sort of tell who is and isn't lying about service animals, at least by the discrepancy in total numbers and which ones are coming in with the badges and vests (indicating they don't know about actual ADA laws).

Pfhreak 6y ago
Amortize the costs of the liars across the base cost of the room. It's really not that many people who will lie about it. Some folks end up paying a little more on average and some people cheat and pay a little less, but the folks who need service animal accommodations don't get accosted by desk clerks. Sounds like a win to me.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  Many hotels and motels are small businesses (usually franchisees) that are low margin, low volume, they can't just eat the costs, which are also not equal the price of the room rate. A disruptive pet can cause you to have to refund multiple other rooms, and potential loss of future business too. A disruptive pet can cause physical damage to the room far in excess of the room rate. We once had a pet ruin the carpet so bad the room was not able to be sold for weeks, even after multiple carpet shampoos. And you also can't go after the hotel guests to recoup costs because the legal fees are hefty and the probability of winning the case, the defendants having money, and actually paying the money are all very low. Obviously all of this is true for disruptive people too, it's just that pets add another risk. Personally, after what I've seen, I would pay extra to be able to stay at a hotel that could guarantee it never had any pets stay.
  - Pfhreak 6y ago
    Don't allow pets? Service animals are not pets. And service animals can be removed from a business for being disruptive. > they can't just eat the costs, which are also not equal the price of the room rate Amortize the costs does not mean eat the costs, it means bake them into the base rate.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      I meant any animals, it’s a personal preference. I know how well hotel rooms get cleaned, and I’d rather take my chances with rooms that haven’t had animals. It’s also not that simple for smaller business to amortize the costs since the pricing has to be competitive with larger businesses that can amortize over more rooms, so a lot of times, the business does have to eat it. It’s also a very unpredictable cost with high variance.
    - mlyle 6y ago
      We're talking about fake service animals, which pretty much are pets ;)