If you can't hang with the big dogs...don't offer them a lease?
May 2, 2010 8:18 PM Subscribe
Why do landlords set limits on the sizes of dogs that tenants can own?
I've never fully understood this. Certainly, bigger dogs will cause more damage to an apartment if they are going to cause damage at all. But that kind of damage can almost certainly be discovered by the security deposit.
Is there another kind of permanent damage to an apartment that larger dogs can cause? Dog stink? Intimidation of neighbors?
I've never fully understood this. Certainly, bigger dogs will cause more damage to an apartment if they are going to cause damage at all. But that kind of damage can almost certainly be discovered by the security deposit.
Is there another kind of permanent damage to an apartment that larger dogs can cause? Dog stink? Intimidation of neighbors?
Best answer: It can be a roundabout way of having a breed ban. Someone may insist that their pit-bull-looking dog isn't actually a pit bull, so a size or weight limit can have the same effect without the arguments.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:22 PM on May 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:22 PM on May 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
Best answer: if they have weight limits they don't have to have breed limits (most controversial breeds will be larger than the weight limit). small dogs might be yappier, but by virtue of their size, big dogs usually bark lounder. small dogs probably won't gouge through the walls by scratching. their insurance might have a weight limit on animals
posted by nadawi at 8:22 PM on May 2, 2010
posted by nadawi at 8:22 PM on May 2, 2010
They may assume that small dogs would cause less damage than large dogs.
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 8:24 PM on May 2, 2010
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 8:24 PM on May 2, 2010
There can be any number of reasons, which both you and other responders have listed.
Another possibilty is simply an arbitrary limit, in which it's thought that, say, 20 pound dos are safe while 21 pound dogs are not.
Etc.
posted by dfriedman at 8:24 PM on May 2, 2010
Another possibilty is simply an arbitrary limit, in which it's thought that, say, 20 pound dos are safe while 21 pound dogs are not.
Etc.
posted by dfriedman at 8:24 PM on May 2, 2010
Best answer: You've begun to touch on it, and I think the summation is: diminishing returns.
A small dog can create small messes, small damages, and small (though annoying) noise issues, plus intimidate paying tenants during walks. (Yeah, over time the small messes/damages can become bigger, but see the next point).
Every one of those problems is multiplied for a larger dog.
At some point, NO amount of damage deposit is worth the risk to some landlords. If other tenants move out because of a threatening dog, or an apartment requires thousands of dollars in repairs (and the less responsible the dog owner, the less likely the landlord is to recupe their losses), a mere damage deposit won't cut it.
posted by IAmBroom at 8:25 PM on May 2, 2010
A small dog can create small messes, small damages, and small (though annoying) noise issues, plus intimidate paying tenants during walks. (Yeah, over time the small messes/damages can become bigger, but see the next point).
Every one of those problems is multiplied for a larger dog.
At some point, NO amount of damage deposit is worth the risk to some landlords. If other tenants move out because of a threatening dog, or an apartment requires thousands of dollars in repairs (and the less responsible the dog owner, the less likely the landlord is to recupe their losses), a mere damage deposit won't cut it.
posted by IAmBroom at 8:25 PM on May 2, 2010
Best answer: Someone asked this question before which I'm trying and failing to dig up. The answers were generally most of the above and more specifically a large breed dog could, if something went wrong, potentially kill someone. That risk is much smaller for a much smaller cat-sized dog. So I think it's less about damage to the apartment and more concern over liability that the dog actually do something to another person or dog.
posted by jessamyn at 8:28 PM on May 2, 2010
posted by jessamyn at 8:28 PM on May 2, 2010
Best answer: In addition to the very pragmatic (and correct) reasons you and others listed, some landlords also consider it to be an ethical issue in terms of quality of life for the animal. A full blown German Shepherd or whatever is not going to live a fulfilled life if left alone inside for eight hours a day because the rental has a tiny strip for a yard, no yard at all, or no fence. Such a frustrating existence will of course also lead to the aforementioned destructive behaviors.
If I were a landlord renting a house with a decently large, fenced in back yard, and I got to meet the dog(s) in advance to assess personality and training, I would rather have renters with large dogs than high strung small ones.
posted by Derive the Hamiltonian of... at 8:31 PM on May 2, 2010
If I were a landlord renting a house with a decently large, fenced in back yard, and I got to meet the dog(s) in advance to assess personality and training, I would rather have renters with large dogs than high strung small ones.
posted by Derive the Hamiltonian of... at 8:31 PM on May 2, 2010
Best answer: A lot of large dogs actually require less exercise than small ones. I could go for a five mile run with my corgi and he would just be getting warmed up, while my greyhound started flatly refusing to go on any walk longer than a couple of blocks several years ago.
I have never had a problem with my sixty-pound dog. I usually take her in to the office, they are charmed by her cocktail party manners and she is in like Flynn. She is extremely courteous and mannerly, though, and very few people have encountered or heard of an aggressive greyhound.
Breed bans are the answer, mostly. It is much less dangerous for people (and other dogs!) to have a bunch of undisciplined bichon frises and Yorkies running around than a host of pit bull mixes. But the potential scale of damage is a factor as well. I have seen photos of a house that had an extremely friendly and bored boxer who got into mischief one day. The dog had actually chewed into the wall itself. There were huge holes in the walls, he had destroyed a couch, a door, a door frame and had ripped huge holes in the carpet. It was probably at least ten thousand dollars of damage. He wasn't being bad, he was just bored and under-exercised. If a landlord has gotten burned once with something like that, they're not going to risk it again.
posted by winna at 8:54 PM on May 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
I have never had a problem with my sixty-pound dog. I usually take her in to the office, they are charmed by her cocktail party manners and she is in like Flynn. She is extremely courteous and mannerly, though, and very few people have encountered or heard of an aggressive greyhound.
Breed bans are the answer, mostly. It is much less dangerous for people (and other dogs!) to have a bunch of undisciplined bichon frises and Yorkies running around than a host of pit bull mixes. But the potential scale of damage is a factor as well. I have seen photos of a house that had an extremely friendly and bored boxer who got into mischief one day. The dog had actually chewed into the wall itself. There were huge holes in the walls, he had destroyed a couch, a door, a door frame and had ripped huge holes in the carpet. It was probably at least ten thousand dollars of damage. He wasn't being bad, he was just bored and under-exercised. If a landlord has gotten burned once with something like that, they're not going to risk it again.
posted by winna at 8:54 PM on May 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
Although some larger breeds may not require as much exercise as smaller ones, they often still are louder, in terms of bark & step. One neighbour has a "puggle", the other had a lab. The puggle barked more, but I noticed it less. I would be sitting in my den, which is a finished basement and one the opposite side of the lab-neighbour and still hear that dog. I am in a stand alone house, I can't imagine dealing with that in an apartment. Even just walking around the place, I can see a larger dog making much more noise, which could be really bad (for other tenants) if the dog is moving around the place with much vigor.
posted by kellyblah at 8:59 PM on May 2, 2010
posted by kellyblah at 8:59 PM on May 2, 2010
Response by poster: I actually meant to say "covered," not "discovered," in my question. Thanks for the convincing answers so far.
posted by ignignokt at 9:02 PM on May 2, 2010
posted by ignignokt at 9:02 PM on May 2, 2010
Best answer: My recent tenants had a large dog. The house's polished floorboards are covered in scratches from its claws. A small dog has neither the weight nor the force to make markings like this. The yard was also full of turds and sharp bits of chewed bone, various mulched dog toy relics, and the dog had ringbarked three trees, probably through boredom. I believe a smaller dog would have caused less damage.
posted by Wolof at 10:21 PM on May 2, 2010
posted by Wolof at 10:21 PM on May 2, 2010
All of the answers seem right so far but I also want to reiterate winna's point about her greyhound - a lot of time you can get by the size restrictions just by having the landlords meet the dog. If it is clearly a well-behaved pup, you fair a good chance of beating the limits (well, this isn't first hand experience, but I've heard lots of other people give similar stories to winna)
posted by alaijmw at 4:41 AM on May 3, 2010
posted by alaijmw at 4:41 AM on May 3, 2010
Best answer: Here's another thread that addresses the same question.
posted by insectosaurus at 7:41 AM on May 3, 2010
posted by insectosaurus at 7:41 AM on May 3, 2010
Insurance restrictions is also a possibility
posted by Shark Tail at 6:20 PM on March 28, 2011
posted by Shark Tail at 6:20 PM on March 28, 2011
This thread is closed to new comments.
You've already answered your own question.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 8:21 PM on May 2, 2010