This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

rules about dogs in rentals? — Brooklynian

rules about dogs in rentals?

lnelson
lnelson
edited November -1 in Park Slope
as many of you know, i have a beloved and wonderful dog who was explicitly allowed for in my lease. my upstairs neighbor wants to get one, but his lease says no dogs. i seem to remember having done some research years ago and found that if an NYC landlord allows one tenant to have a companion dog (i.e. not a service animal), the door is open for all. is that right?

i should mention also that my super couldn't care less and my building manager takes a strict laissez-faire approach to his alleged job.

Comments

  • jolojim
    jolojim
    Not sure, but am guessing the folks at tenant.net would be able to answer this one
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    The law states:
    a no-pet lease clause is deemed waived where a tenant “openly and notoriously” kept a pet for at least three months and the owner of the building or the owner’s agent had knowledge of this fact.
    It has nothing to do with other pets in the building. Some adoption agencies want proof that the animal will be legally allowed to be kept, most are just happy to be rid of another stray and some will falsify the date of adoption. I maneuvered my dogs into my apartment by introducing them to my super who also didn't care early on (with witnesses). After that I kept a low profile for 90 days. Bottom line was however the LL didn't really care.
    If the super is friendly enough ask him what he thinks the LL will do. $50 goes along way.

    Taking pictures of your dog notoriously enjoying the view out your window with an old copy of the NYT in his lap will also help, not to mention sitting by last years Christmas display in the public lobby. Photoshop anybody?
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    Addendum: lnelson, you should ask the super what he thinks the response will be from the LL just in case it raises a red flag with your friend.
  • nykittyny
    nykittyny
    modsquad wrote: The law states:
    a no-pet lease clause is deemed waived where a tenant “openly and notoriously” kept a pet for at least three months and the owner of the building or the owner’s agent had knowledge of this fact.
    It has nothing to do with other pets in the building. Some adoption agencies want proof that the animal will be legally allowed to be kept, most are just happy to be rid of another stray and some will falsify the date of adoption. I maneuvered my dogs into my apartment by introducing them to my super who also didn't care early on (with witnesses). After that I kept a low profile for 90 days. Bottom line was however the LL didn't really care.
    If the super is friendly enough ask him what he thinks the LL will do. $50 goes along way.

    Taking pictures of your dog notoriously enjoying the view out your window with an old copy of the NYT in his lap will also help, not to mention sitting by last years Christmas display in the public lobby. Photoshop anybody?
    Unless you all have rent stabilized apartments, tricks like this will only rish you getting booted from your apartment at lease's end.
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    NYkittyNY wrote:

    Unless you all have rent stabilized apartments, tricks like this will only rish you getting booted from your apartment at lease's end.
    Yes, it's a possibility, but if you are paying market level rent and have no other issues with the LL then it is unlikely the addition of a pet will be the reason, especially if others in the building have dogs. Given the fact that management and the super are indifferent to what goes on in general I would guess the LL is very absent from the premises. If the dog is successfully kept for 90 days the last people to inform the LL of the scheme will be the hoodwinked super and property manager.
    But, yes it's possible.
  • bluiz711
    bluiz711
    I just had to deal with this personally. My husband and I had a no pet clause in our lease, but moved in with our cats anyway. Fast forward 2.5 years later and we decided to get a dog. Our building is FULL of dogs. I couldn't possibly exaggerate that statement, because there are so many dogs. After about a month and a half with our dog, the landlord served us with a notice to get rid of the dog or be evicted. He wouldn't take a pet deposit or extra rent either. I also work in a law office, so I had a partner in our real estate litigation department look into my rights. I pretty much had none, but the one stated above. However, we hadn't had our dog for a full 90 days yet. Now my dog is in a foster home while we look for somewhere else to live.
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    bluiz711 wrote: I just had to deal with this personally. My husband and I had a no pet clause in our lease, but moved in with our cats anyway. Fast forward 2.5 years later and we decided to get a dog. Our building is FULL of dogs. I couldn't possibly exaggerate that statement, because there are so many dogs. After about a month and a half with our dog, the landlord served us with a notice to get rid of the dog or be evicted. He wouldn't take a pet deposit or extra rent either. I also work in a law office, so I had a partner in our real estate litigation department look into my rights. I pretty much had none, but the one stated above. However, we hadn't had our dog for a full 90 days yet. Now my dog is in a foster home while we look for somewhere else to live.
    I am curious to know why the pet clause in your lease would not be considered void, given that you had 2 cats that have been kept for 2.5 years. I don't believe that once a clause has been rendered unenforceable on one day it becomes enforceable the next. Why would the LL not petition for the removal of the cats given he believes the clause is still valid?
  • booklaw
    booklaw
    The landlord probably has no knowledge of the cats' existence in the apartment (most people don't take cats outside for daily walks).

    If he/it has no knowledge, the cats' presence in the apartment probably cannot be used to argue that the landlord has waived the lease restriction.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    cats by default are quiet mostly unless in heat and doing it very loudly :p or fighting with strays. but dogs can either be well behave or demons from hell if the owners don't properly train them.
  • youbetcha
    youbetcha
    Might have a case but it would probably take longer to pursue it than the actual lease. A lease is a contract signed by both parties stipulating what can and can not be done. A tenant shouldn't sign a lease that he doesn't agree with, believing that a stipulated rule can be changed mid contract. You sigh a contract the onus is on you.
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    booklaw wrote: The landlord probably has no knowledge of the cats' existence in the apartment (most people don't take cats outside for daily walks).

    If he/it has no knowledge, the cats' presence in the apartment probably cannot be used to argue that the landlord has waived the lease restriction.
    two and a half years is a long time. Can't believe a conversation with a super or somebody in management would not have happened that can be corroborated by a neutral party. Pictures of cats sitting in windows taken from outside are evidence, maybe passing a doorman taking the cat to the vet, witnessed by someone else over the years. That would work. If they can prove indifference over the years regarding the cats they could probably get their dog back. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. But what do I know?
  • minet
    minet
    hi,
    Why doesn't your neighbor ask the LL for a waiver to get a dog?
    Your neighbor knew going in there was a no dog policy.
    It seems a little inconsiderate. I know there is the 90 policy, but that seems so shady. Why does every one feel it is ok to skirt the issue to get what they want?
    Sorry, that is just another take on it.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    some people just have no respect for landlords, in nyc landlords are monsters that should be ripped off and bankrupt etc...according to some posters anyway. other wise respect is a two way street.
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    Minet wrote: hi,
    Why doesn't your neighbor ask the LL for a waiver to get a dog?
    Your neighbor knew going in there was a no dog policy.
    It seems a little inconsiderate. I know there is the 90 policy, but that seems so shady. Why does every one feel it is ok to skirt the issue to get what they want?
    Sorry, that is just another take on it.
    Agreed Minet. That would be a good plan B. Have a third party ask the LL for the waiver. If it's refused then no suspicion has been brought on the person who actually wants the dog. Just in case you have to go back to shady plan A
  • bluiz711
    bluiz711
    Just thought I should clarify some aspects of my situation given the responses.

    We were told that pets were okay when shown the apartment. Then, while in the midst of moving here from out of state, and basically being homeless and living in a hotel, we went to sign our lease and were surprised it had a no pets clause.

    Several of our doormen, the building super and some building maintenance people have known about about our cats from the first day we moved in. Nothing was done w/in that 90 day window, so the cats are good to say.

    Apparently the "90 day" law applies to each individual pet. So while my cats were in the clear, my dog was not.

    I have since found out that another resident in the building made a formal complaint about one of the doormen. That doorman assumed it was me, and in revenge, complained to the landlord about our dog being threatening. It was a complete lie, and we had many neighbors to back us up about the quiet and docile nature of our dog, but the landlord still insisted we get rid of the dog.
  • opossumqueen
    opossumqueen
    We lived in a place where the owner had a very strict no dogs policy. Our building had 20 units and the owner had 1 or 2, all NO DOGS!

    He told us no dogs, even with a deposit, so we gave him notice that we would be moving b/c of this. He quickly changed his tune at the prospect of loosing good tenants (he knew of the improvements we'd made) that always paid rent on time. We were the only of his tenants to have a dog, but we made sure to get it in our lease and then we never had any troubles. (We knew what dog we wanted, and there was actually a picture of the dog in our lease stating that was the only dog allowed in the building).

    Sine your LL already allows at least one dog in the building, your neighbor probably has a better chance than we did by just asking and possibly offering a pet deposit. I would want it in writing, though.
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    Apparently the "90 day" law applies to each individual pet. So while my cats were in the clear, my dog was not.
    I guess the question would be if the LL was evicting the dog because of a nuisance charge. That would be grounds for removing even a legally allowed dog pet clause notwithstanding.
    Most standard leases in NYC have a no pets clause in the boilerplate that has to be lined out before signing. Very standard. Still though I would argue the clause is a blanket one and once it was rendered unenforceable it cannot be reapplied to another pet. But saying that, going to LL/tenant court is a ugly proposition and without a certain case to back up your position it will cost time and money. Can't blame anybody for avoiding it.
  • walkathon
    walkathon
    As long as the dog refuses to talk you should be okay.
  • modsquad
    modsquad
    Walkathon wrote: As long as the dog refuses to talk you should be okay.
    Dog cannot be forced to testify against itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories