What is Animal Screening
Pet screening refers to a process used by landlords and property managers to assess the suitability of pets owned by prospective tenants. As an extension of the tenant screening process, pet screening aims to ensure that any pets moving into a rental unit are compatible with the property, its existing inhabitants, and the community as a whole.
During pet screening, prospective tenants are required to provide detailed information about their pets, including their breed, size, age, health records , and vaccination information. These details allow landlords and property managers to make informed decisions about whether a pet will be allowed on the property or if additional conditions or restrictions will be imposed.
Pet screening is an essential tool for maintaining a harmonious living environment in multi-unit dwellings and helps prevent potential issues related to noise, damage, or public safety. It serves as a way to promote responsible pet ownership and ensures that all members of the community, two-legged and four-legged alike, can co-exist peacefully.
Legislation Regarding Pet Screening
As with any practice in the housing industry, pet screening must be implemented within the bounds of federal, state and local fair housing laws. Fair housing considerations when screening pets fall under the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA), as well as state and local fair housing laws. Although the FHA does not specifically mention pet screening, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)—the agency charged with enforcing the FHA—finds that screening pets is required by the Fair Housing Act in two situations:
Second, of course, is screening for service animals, which is an important accommodation under the Fair Housing Act for people with disabilities. Fair housing laws at the state and local levels may also address service animals. Also, depending on the jurisdiction, emotional support animals—or even comfort animals—may be considered a reasonable accommodation for people with disabilities. Again, fair housing laws at the state and local levels in certain jurisdictions must be reviewed for guidance.
Common Animal Screening Practices
Common practices and methods for such pet screening include pet interviews, where the landlord meets with the tenant to discuss the pet’s behavior, care requirements, and its history. They may also include questionnaires filled out by the tenant detailing the pet’s health, size, and temperament. One of the most common practices has been the collection of documentation from the pet owner regarding their pet, and as described above, such documentation can be analyzed for compliance with current law. Some landlords have gone so far as to require references, both professional and personal, for their pets. Written documentation is therefore the most prevalent method of screening pets at the application stage.
Additionally, some owners provide a lease addendum with specific breed or size specifications. Landlords often cite an owner’s ability to screen prospective tenants as a rationale for refusing to rent to individuals with certain pets. However, the addition of addendums with specific breed, size or other requirements may be discriminatory, as some landlords have been known to flatly refuse to rent to pit bull owners. In such instances, the tenant would have a strong argument for accommodation, even if they are denied.
Other common screening methods include requiring tenants to pay an increased "pet deposit." If a pet deposit agrees to be placed in a separate account and exclusively used for pet-related damages or other pet-related issues, any charges taken from that account would not be subject to double damages. However, your jurisdiction’s tenant law should be consulted, as some jurisdictions do not allow for any type of double damages. If you are not able to collect for pet damage if you do not have a separate pet deposit, then you can still ask for a pet deposit.
Landlords may also require the tenant to provide proof that their pet has been vaccinated or neutered. They may also require them to provide reports from doctors confirming that the pet is free of infections and parasites. Tenants should be cautioned that any required medical examinations or tests should be relevant to the animal’s health and safety, and should not be performed solely for the landlord’s benefit.
Tenant Rights and Animals
How does all of this square with tenant rights? In many states, landlords must not only disclose comprehensive screening criteria to prospective residents (usually prior to or very soon after the application is submitted), they are also required by statute or local ordinance to provide screening results to applicants. The purpose of these statutes and ordinances is to ensure tenants understand reasons for either being denied a rental property or being subjected to higher than advertised costs (not working at a government job may lead to an additional fee). In addition to detailed disclosure, many states also have stringent notice provisions that require landlords to inform applicants of their rights related to reason codes used by the landlord as a basis for adverse action.
The failure to properly provide screening information is a violation of the Fair Housing Act and almost assuredly triggers the ability of a prospective resident to sue the landlord in federal court. If you are a landlord, you’d better know and follow the law or face substantial exposure.
Without going too deep into Fair Housing Law, it is worth noting while many screening criteria such as credit score, anti-terrorism, and income are lawful and enforceable as a matter of course, landlords must avoid discriminating against prospective residents with disabilities . The ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and similar state law requires landlords to make reasonable accommodations/modifications to their policies or procedures to afford individuals with disabilities equal opportunities to use and enjoy their dwelling. An example of this would be with a service animal or emotional support animal where a tenant with a disability would require a certain accommodation or modification, such as a waiver of the pet screening fee or a full waiver based on a condition that prevents their animal from meeting the screening criteria. In any of these scenarios, the property owner/manager needs to be highly sensitive or leave these types of requests to their very skilled and well trained HR department and/or general counsel.
Of course, the property owner would be wise to document such a request and turn it over to the legal department for review as modifying your company’s pet policy could lead to ADA/Fair Housing scrutiny. Landlords, as part of their annual training, should go over their specific policies related to service and emotional support animals in order to help avoid a claim of discrimination.
Legality and Relevant Case Law
As rental property owners have adopted pet screening measures, legal challenges and court cases with respect to those systems have also arisen. Some courts have held that pet screening poses accessibility concerns for people with disabilities, and others have held that the use of certain pet screening criteria may constitute discrimination based on a protected characteristic. Here are a couple examples:
In Wilds v. 1-10 Collins Ave. Condo Ass’n, LLC (2011), a condo owner who relied upon a wheelchair for mobility sued the condo association, claiming that it violated his rights under the Florida Fair Housing Act (FHA) by refusing to lift him and his wheelchair into the condo. The association had an "emotional support animal" policy where one emotional support animal was permitted for each condo unit, provided that the unit owner or tenant provided appropriate documentation, such as a letter from a physician. At the time of the lawsuit, the policy stated that the association did not permit "any extras" in addition to the one permitted, but in practice, it permitted condo owners and tenants to have additional animals if they provided proper documentation. The plaintiff’s wife provided documentation stating that her husband needed to have his emotional support dog at the unit. However, the association requested further verification from the same physician who had provided the initial documentation. The physician never provided verification, so the association prohibited the emotional support dog.
The Court, however, did not limit its analysis to the policy and practice of the association, because the FHA does not only prohibit policies that on their face discriminate. The FHA also prohibits discriminatory application of policies.
The Court noted that other courts had previously held that requiring medical verification of an emotional support animal was an unlawful burden. The Court also relied on HUD guidance that states that owners of no-pet housing should not impose requirements related to verification of the disability or disability-related need. Phrasing its holding broadly, the Court stated that "[a]ny policy that requires more even if it is a low level requirement – will have a disproportionate impact on people with disabilities."
In United States v. Arlington Heights, the property owner had a pet policy that gave it the right to "refuse any breed or size." The owner also stated that it would have the right to "selectively choose the applicants that we feel would be more suitable." Given that it had certain on-site policies with regard to pet ownership, the apartment complex wanted to make sure it had the right to pick and choose who could own a pet. HUD filed a charge against the owner alleging that the policy and practice violated the Fair Housing Act.
In the agreement with HUD, the owner agreed to place on hold any policies or practices that used surcharges for pet ownership and instead used a pet screening service. What the owner wanted was control over the type of pets and the number of pets, which it obtained through the use of a pet screening program where applications were "scored" based on certain criteria. It is the later concerns that HUD took issue with. The case eventually settled, but the settlement was quite specific about what could and could not be done with respect to elevated application fees and pet fees.
Best Practices
To ensure compliance with all aspects of rental housing laws, property owners and managers should familiarize themselves with their state and local laws before implementing a pet screening process. The following are few best practices to use during the screening process: This audit trail is important for any unlawful discrimination complaints and discrimination claim brought with governmental agencies or in private litigation . In all states – including Florida – housing providers cannot charge a fee to screen a service animal. In most states, landlords can only charge a nominal pet security deposit. Even where the law permits a modest pet security deposit, a landlord should not charge a larger deposit from an applicant with a service or support animal.