[Donika]

I live in an apartment complex that charges $300 per year for me to have two cats. I think this is discriminatory because my cats are very clean, have done no damage to the apartment, and the buildings are divided into 'pet buildings' and 'non-pet buildings,' so an allergy sufferer will not occupy my unit after I move out. It seems to me that kids are much messier and more damaging to rugs, walls, etc., than most pets. Is it discriminatory for apartment managers to charge people with pets more than people with kids, since people don't need to have kids any more than I need to have cats? Why should I be penalized for preferring cats over children?
Original Code GD23. Click here to see responses from the original archives.

User Detail :  

Name : Donika, Gender : F, Age : 23, City : Charleston, State : SC Country : United States, 

[J.B.]

As a landlord, I require that there be no pets. I own three cats, so it isn't for lack of compassion for pet owners. Pets cause more damage than one realizes. They can damage screens, put hair inside the A/C returns and clog the drip pipes ($1,500 damage for that one). Pet owners generally may not realize their pets have odors that can't be shampooed out of carpet. I have had to re-carpet because of the pet smell. It just doesn't make economic sense to rent to pet owners long-term. Landlords care about making money, period. If you don't want to live by the rules set down, buy your own home and do what you want with it.

User Detail :  

Name : J.B., Gender : M, Race : White/Caucasian, Religion : Agnostic, Age : 46, City : West Palm Beach, State : FL Country : United States, Education level : High School Diploma, Social class : Middle class, 

[Author]

Posts