Landlording & Rental Properties

3 Reasons Landlords Should Blacklist Certain Dog Breeds

Expertise:
8 Articles Written
cute gray dog panting while peering over concrete wall outside

Fully 68 percent of American households own pets—definitely something to consider when formulating your pet policies as a landlord. Over two-thirds of the population is a huge swath of tenants to exclude.

Want more articles like this?

Create an account today to get BiggerPocket's best blog articles delivered to your inbox

Sign up for free

Still, many landlords opt to not allow pets at all. Because of this, pet owners can be very motivated tenants—they know their options are limited.

At the same time, there are good reasons some landlords don’t like pets. Poor house training could mean pet accidents that seep all the way into the subfloor. Claws can scratch up your nice hardwood or shred your carpet. Dogs and cats can scratch at doors and even chew up walls.

A substantial pet deposit and monthly pet rent can usually make up for these issues. But an even more serious issue is the liability associated with so-called “vicious dog breeds.” Is it worth taking on all types of dogs if you choose to allow pets?

Should You Blacklist Certain Dog Breeds?

Much has been written on pit bulls in rental properties, but I’d like to give my take on why I advise my investment students AGAINST accepting pit bull-type dogs and other risky breeds—even if they are willing to accept pets in general.

Related: Should You Allow Pets in Your Rentals?

Certain Breeds Are Largely Responsible for Deaths

First off, where there is smoke, there is usually fire. These breeds have a bad reputation for a reason.

Many will say the media has some kind of bias against these dogs, and the way they report dog attacks is unfair. However, you just can’t get away from the hard statistic that 471 Americans have been killed by dogs since 2005, and 66 percent of those deaths were caused by pit bull-type dogs. All that, even though they comprise only 7 percent of the dog population.

reddish brown pit bull runs in grass with bottom of owner's legs in view

The next most deadly breed is Rottweiler, causing another 10 percent of the deaths.

In addition, there are millions of non-fatal attacks and maulings every year. An attack or death by a dog on your property can cost you BIG TIME as a landlord. Insurers hemorrhaged $675 million in dog bite claims in 2018 alone, and the average claim is on the rise.

Folks, if pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers are responsible for the vast majority of deaths and damage but are only 7 percent of the dog population, that’s a whole lot of risk you can remove from your plate without shrinking your pool of tenants by much.

Landlords Are Often Targets of Lawsuits

Second of all, lawyers can and will sue everything that moves. If a dog attack happens on your property and the tenant is broke and/or underinsured, you as a landlord are going to have a giant red target on your back.

Landlords are perceived as having money, and it very well could be shaken out of you in court. And if it’s not the first time the dog has bitten someone, they might even have a pretty strong case. Learn from the mistakes and horror stories of other landlords on this issue, so you don’t have to repeat them yourself.

Related: Why I Will Always Allow Pets in My Rental Property

If you choose to allow pit bulls, at least have a “one bite” policy in place, so that if the dog ever exhibits troubling behavior, the tenant understands and agrees that the dog MUST be removed from the property. The next bite could be worse.

You should also require that all tenants (pets or not) carry their own renters insurance policy, and if they have a dangerous breed, make sure it is covered. Most standard insurance policies will have dangerous breed exclusions, so it is worth your time to ask for a copy of their policy so you can call and verify. This type of policy might not be cheap. (Remember how much money was paid out last year for dog bites?!)

Your tenant might even be tempted to cancel this costly policy without telling you, so you might need to call and verify that it is still in place periodically. Personally, this is a lot of extra headache and worry that I don’t need.

confident asian young freelancer in smart casual working and concentrated on laptop sitting on desk in modern office ,co-working space or at home with copy space, webinar over the internet

Dog Liability Insurance Can Be Challenging to Secure

The main reason landlords should exclude dangerous dog breeds is because getting the liability insurance that covers them is a nightmare. Why is that the case? Well, actuaries are good at math.

Those with a soft spot for pit bulls can make all the excuses they want. They can blame the media for unfair reporting. They can show all the cute photos of “pibbles” who will just lick you to death.

Tell it to an actuary. Anecdotes like this are not the basis for sound business decisions. If your insurance company doesn’t like the risk, you probably shouldn’t like it either.

The Bottom Line

Breed does matter.

Of course, a neglectful or abusive owner is going to contribute to the bad behavior of any dog. But as much as pit bull apologists love to say, “It’s the owner, not the breed,” that is not always the whole story.

The truth is breeding matters. That’s why people do it. Breeders have very successfully bred traits into and out of dogs based on the purpose of the breed. Herding dogs herd, hunting dogs hunt, guard dogs guard, and fighting dogs fight. Because of selective breeding, these traits become innate and instinctual.

In conclusion, I advise landlords to avoid dealing with tenants who own pit bulls and vicious dogs if at all possible. Over 1,000 cities in the U.S. have breed-specific laws that ban pit bull-type dogs from the get-go, so it’s not even your call. But there are also situations where Fair Housing forces you to accept tenants with such dogs if they are emotional support animals (ESAs). But that’s a topic for a whole different article.

If you can remove risk from your bottom line, I call that good business. Accepting pit bulls may get you a loyal long-term tenant, but if that tenant comes with a ticking time bomb of liability, is it really worth it?

How do you feel about dog breed restrictions for rentals?

Weigh in with a comment below.

Joe Asamoah, MBA, PhD, is a seasoned real estate investor. He owns an impressive portfolio of superior homes in the Washington DC area. With over 30 years' experience acquiring, renovating, and managing single family homes, "Dr. Joe" transformed what was once a hobby into a highly successful business. In 2003, his real estate investments enabled him to realize a personal goal of financial independence via passive and residual real estate cash flow. A major objective of Dr. Joe's business is to invest in people and properties. Many of his tenants are low-income families that participate in voucher programs. Because of his dedication to the industry, Dr. Joe is a recipient of numerous professional and real estate awards. Find out more on his website JoeAsamoah.com or on his Facebook page. or on Instagram.

    Maria Hernandez
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Considering pit bulls are actually a breed not a type. A type of dog would be terrier or bull breed. Pit bull is an abbreviation for American pit bull terrier, which is a recognized breed, it is the sister breed of the American Staffordshire terrier, not the Staffordshire bull terrier. It's not a mastiff it's not large breed of dog. It's a small athletic breed of sporting dog, both the American Pit bull terrier and the am staff breed standard dictate, dog on dog aggression is possible. But neither breed, should be any form of human aggressive. It's a fault, and it's one that will get them banned from showing. The "pit bulls" that attack, are often mixed breed dogs, that are realistically bred for money or the wrong reason. Dogs that attack people, come from dogs that also showed the same trait. Problem is a person who lacks education in genetics, doesn't realize the problem they're potentially causing. They think their dog is protective and doing their job, some dogs are wired wrong and dangerous, some dogs are fear biters, some dogs are just aggressive, because their parents had been too. (No puppy is born a blank slate, no matter how we wish it. They will all retain some form of their parents traits. If people had a proper understanding of genetics and what genetics can do, it might be a smidge different. You also have the people who believe, they can hug aggression out of a dog. You can totally fix reactivity fear aggression, or dominance. You can't train out aggression, that is true. When you get a dog that was abuse, if can slowly heal and learn not to fear. A dog that wants to fight is going to fight, any chance it gets. And some people don't realize, we can't Save every dog. Than we have the people who are purely lazy, they won't kennel or properly contain their "aggressive dogs". Or they think a proper muzzle is abuse. And than, you have the ignorantly innocent people, who think their dog isn't capable of aggression, because they've never witnessed it first hand. So they assume it won't happen. If people trained their dogs, contained their dogs properly, and actually did research on the breed of choice. And than we have those who, think they can take a coonhound and keep it in a duplex, but boy does ol hound bark and talk. Or the husky that is left in a studio with minimal walks and visit to dog parks or anywhere. Most behavior issues.. Barking.. chewing.. urinating.. anything of that sort. Is often cured, by good old fashioned exercise and mental stimulation. Own a dog that is full of energy and destroys your apartment? Take them jogging or for long fast paced walk and than play really hard, you can kennel them after. They will sleep, once they wake up. Make sure they have dog puzzles it chew toys.. This is why, a lot of working breed owners, purchase dog powered treadmill. That dog can, play with it's owner, take a potty break and run hard on the mill until it decided it's done, boom 5mile run, in a few minutes. People need to understand, the media is trying to make pit bull a breed type, hut 75% of the dogs you see mauling people, will come back with a dna mark of other breeds. Instead of just pit bull, which you could try and argue..that's because pit bull isn't a breed, but both wisdom panel and embark test for pit bull dna markers. "The individual breed". With embark being more accurate. Now if we wanted to contest the apbt aka pit bull, was bred for dog on dog combat, I'd tell you it's written in history. But it doesn't mean all pit bulls exhibit aggression, there is a " cold dog" which is a pit bull that will never show interest in aggression with another animal. There isn't a training technique or anything that makes them fight. You can find videos of 5 week old puppies requiring to be separated. Goodnight.
    Rebecca Mcneese
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Yes breeding/genes has something to do with behavior just as it does in humans. We do not ban children from living places because his dad is an ass hole. These things can be taken care of just as you behavior problems with your kids, A good Dream., good parenting, proper socialization, consistency, a good diet.
    Adriane Allard from South Jersey
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I'm sorry, but you are equating genes to behavior with animals (pets specifically) to humans? This is not the same as a genetic heath issue.
    Rebecca Mcneese
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Dream was supposed to be Dr. I get a lil upset and frustrated with this topic. I have had a no kill pit bull rescue and currently have 3 rescue of my own that were severely beaten and almost starved to death before we got them yet they still wouldn't hurt a fly
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Hi Rebecca, This article was written from the viewpoint of risk mitigation as a landlord. The discussion is NOT about the pros - and cons of pit bulls and rottweilers. That is a completely separate topic which can be debated "until the cows come home." My view is that as a buy and hold real estate investor, you've worked hard to establish your rental portfolio. For this reason, I strongly believe you should protect it so you and your loved ones can enjoy the fruits of your labor (i.e. cashflow, equity build-up, tax benefits, appreciation etc.). I have absolutely no problem with pets and do not profess to be an authority on animal behavior. If you knowingly choose to allow certain types of dog breeds into your property then that is your prerogative. Insurance actuaries and plaintiff attorneys may not be so considerate and understanding if you are hauled up in court as part of a lawsuit. I'd be curious to know how all the cute stories about how "Tibbles" was such a nice and "harmless" dog will hold up. Again, I'm not against pit bulls and rottweilers but I think as investors we should not ignore the actuarial statistics and case law. https://www.buildium.com/blog/pet-policy-no-help-to-landlord-in-civil-lawsuit/
    Eric Powers
    Replied about 1 month ago
    With that way of thinking. You might as well start refusing to rent to certain ethnic groups because they do more murders. My pure breed blue nose does not have a aggressive bone in his body. 85lbs and cowers to smaller dogs. He is all about play. Toys Toys Toys. Everybody knows it's how they're brought up. All I'll ever have is a giant puppy.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Hi Eric, I think its a real stretch equating pit bulls and rottweilers to certain ethnic groups. As we all know, Federal law has protections against certain classes of people based on race, religion, color, sexual orientation etc. To my knowledge, pit bulls and rottweilers are not a protected class (unless they are certified as emotional support animals). Statistics clearly suggest that certain types of dog breeds are known to cause bites and fatalities than others: https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/09/13/americas-most-dangerous-dog-breeds-infographic/#17c3aa1d62f8 Now we can debate all day long about the pros and cons of renting to owners of these dog breeds. All I'm saying is I choose to be extremely cautious and leery. I'm sure your pure breed blue nose is harmless. Unfortunately, not all owners raise their dogs as you do and for this reason, I defer to my insurance carrier and their decades of experience and millions of dollars of actuarial research and payouts.
    Brandon Burrows
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Excellent point
    Alexander Bontempo
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Exactilly.....every PhD holder should put an effort to make this world a better place making policies that permit everybody a good life no talking of blacklist. What a wasted PhD....
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Hi Alexander, I don't think my MBA and PhD in Information Systems is wasted because I choose to be cautious about renting to owners of pit bulls and rottweilers. Is this how you measure people's contribution to society? I choose to make the world a better place by buying distressed properties in highly desirable neighborhoods, renovating them and renting these quality homes to low income families with Section 8 vouchers. I take pride in providing opportunities to families that otherwise may not be given a chance by other landlords. We all have god given gifts and talents. I'm doing my part and I hope you are also my friend.
    Curt Connelley
    Replied about 1 month ago
    That's bs breeding has alot to do with it but raising them to be mean and aggressive has more to do with it. I have 2 rotties and my kids get on the floor and lay with them all the time. Never have bitten anyone my male would lick everybody before biting them and my female would sniff your butt before she bit you
    Micaela Wallace
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I had a staffie and is was a 130 lb. of sweetness. Never once did he ever harm anyone. I now have an American Akita and two of my neighbors tell everyone he is mean and dangerious. He is not! I had to put him in lock up for 10 days because they claimed he bit them. He was just 9 weeks at the time and never let him out without being on a secure tie. But the animal controler said her word against mine. Cost me 60 bucks as well. Im so fed up with all these idiot dog haters. Id rather be surrounded by dogs than most people. They are the problem not our furry paws who love us and unconditionaly. My akita Rider at 6 months saved my life. I had a stroke and he went and got help for me. When I had surgery on my hip I asked my neighbor if she would come by and check on me that I would pay her. She said no that she was busy. Yeah, dogs any breed are far better than some idiots. Just depends how they are raised. Love pits they are the best!
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    HI Micaela, Please don't take offence but I'd rather be surrounded by humans than pit bulls. Perhaps there's there something wrong with me that I feel this way!! I have nothing against pit bulls or any other animal. The article is written from a liability perspective. If you don't properly protect yourself from liability and potential lawsuits then you may as well walk around with a target on your back. The choice is yours. http://www.stuartkaplow.com/legal-library/real-estate-law/court-holds-landlord-liable-tenants-dog-bite/
    Tricia Hanson
    Replied about 1 month ago
    It all depends on how you raise the dog. This article is ignorant for many reasons. Any dog can be just as dangerous, especially other attack/ protection dogs like German Shepherds. Many of these dogs are just discriminated against because they look like a pit bull terrier, but that does not mean they are. So what if they are anyway? Pit bulls and “pit bull type dogs” are often the sweetest dogs you could ever meet because they have been given a horrible reputation. The dogs that are killing and harming people are not doing it on their own account or because that’s just what their breed does, they are doing it because their owner raised them that way. Most of the time those owner’s are abusing those dogs as well. When saved from that situation those “pit bull type dogs” will give all the love in the world to whoever wants to do the same for them. You’re argument is invalid and close minded.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Hi Tricia, I agree with you that any dog can be dangerous if its raised a certain way. Like it or not, I don't make the rules. if I can't get insurance then I have to make a decision. Operate without insurance and hope for the best or implement systems and process to mitigate risk and potential exposure. That is all I'm trying to say in the article. It is not about being ignorant. The insurance companies for the most part have deemed certain types of breeds to be dangerous.Therefore, should I wage a crusade to change their minds or should I be prudent and operate my business with this reality. That's all I'm saying. It's not about being ignorant or close minded.
    Edward Seid Real Estate Agent from Seattle, WA
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Causation is not correlation. Your article is very, very wrong and inaccurate because you're writing purely on a breed's reputation. It's not the dog itself that's the problem, it is the owners behind the dog. The blind leading the blind.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Hi Edward, Thanks for your comments. Please don't shoot the messenger. Once you've convinced the major insurance carriers and actuaries then perhaps we can have a more meaningful discussion. If you choose to rent to owners of pit bulls and rottweilers then that's your prerogative. I personally don't have anything against the owners or the dogs, I'm just concerned about liability in the event of an unforeseen and unfortunate accident. In this case, plaintiff attorneys may not be too sympathetic with excuses.
    Anthony Vann Real Estate Professional from Newport News, Virginia
    Replied about 1 month ago
    As the owner of a Rottweiler I understand that they can be some of the most gentle dogs on the planet. Ours has been around my four kids for the past four years and is one of the most gentle animals I've ever seen. However, my insurance company doesn't care about that. It's written into the policy, so I understand what the author is saying. We, dog owners, know our pets because we're around them everyday. The insurance companies do not and don't care. And that's not changing anytime soon. While I do accept pets I tell my tenants honestly that there are breed restrictions because certain breeds mean the insurance company won't insure the house. I wish that wasn't the case but it is.
    Steve Webster
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Exactly! My takeaway from the article was more about protecting yourself and your investment by limiting your liability. I own a Cane Corso mix and a Pit Bull mix, both are great dogs, but your investment in your property shouldn't have anything to do about how a specific dog behaves. The policy should be consistent for all renters.
    Jeremy Clayton
    Replied about 1 month ago
    That was yer take away from an article titled to target dog breeds and comments made throughout about how that is even a real factor after screening tenants. If the dog is the liability and the owner isn’t the problem or reason the dog acts destructive I’ll kiss your ass! If they are irresponsible dog owners I won’t let them rent period, dog or not because their character is a liability. How u got limiting your loss info out of that I’m curious but god bless u none the less. Don’t own a pit or rott either but have before. Just don’t believe in ignorance being spread and being called informative. Listen to his garbage about “pit apologist” instead of pit bull owner. Wasn’t used when a pit attacked someone either it was used describing a person who probably knew more about his dog than this genius can open his mind up to see.
    James Free Rental Property Investor from Fort Collins, CO
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Anecdotes about your one "good dog" do not refute the statistics about the population in general. EVERYONE says their own dog is good, including the owners of the worst dogs. You might as well start buying lottery tickets on the advice of some guy you met who won the lottery.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Good point James.
    Kat Kaat
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Honestly, you really should do your research before posting such a thing. I understand, as an investor, the lawsuit aspect. And recommending against certain breeds due to fatality rates is certainly acceptable. What isn't acceptable is classifying certain breeds as "aggressive". Firstly, the breed that instinctually bites the most is the Golden Retriever. The reason there is such a stigma around Pit Bulls and breeds with similar composition, is due to their jaw strength. If they're prompted to aggression, or are just particularly an aggressive dog, then yes their bites are oftentimes more fatal. However, if trained properly, the dog would have no reason to attack, unless threatened. Usually the most common cause of aggression in dogs is puppy mills. That's to say, no matter how many attacks are for a breed, statistically, a landlord should evaluate pets on a case by case basis.
    Joanna M. Wilson
    Replied about 1 month ago
    So glad to see I am not the only one who really disagrees with this.. what a bunch of crap...
    Sue Hampton
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Im 59yr. Ive got an old english bulldog, ( u know those big goofy dogs that sleep on couch all day) ive been looking for a rental for over 6mo. Landlords need to educate themselves and learn that there is a difference between pitbulls and the other dogs included in the term bully breeds. Give me a break!
    Jo Thurston
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Good to see most have recognised ur bias and misinformation. If your going to publish your opinion, try to get the proper I formation. I hope no one relies on your post for info.
    Andy Gibson from Cincinnati, OH
    Replied about 1 month ago
    This is one of the more ignorant posts I've read. If it's wasn't illegal, maybe we also should consider looking at crime statistics to deny housing to certain groups of people that account for the most crimes? Also, you fail to cite any actual sources for your statistics. Disappointed this is an actual approved post on BiggerPockets. Do yourself a favor and skip over this blog post, it's not worth getting angry over.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I understand why many readers are upset with the article. Again, the article is not a discussion about the pros and cons of certain types of dogs. If you feel this way, then you are COMPLETELY MISSING THE POINT. We live in a very litigious society where unfortunately, some people are looking for a payday at another persons expense. https://www.iii.org/article/spotlight-on-dog-bite-liability http://www.insurancequotes.org/home/10-dog-breeds-that-drive-up-home-insurance-rates/ As a landlord, if one of your tenants is the cause of an accident and it can be somehow connected to you, then it is assumed you have deep pockets and therefore an increased chance of being dragged into a lawsuit. Unfortunately, this is how things are right now. If you are OK with this, then feel free to rent to persons with any type of dogs. That is your choice and that's OK. From my perspective, I am very much in favor of landlords renting to responsible dog owners - that is not the issue. I personally don't want the possible legal exposure if an accident occurs and its proven that I knowingly allowed a type of dog breed my insurance policy excludes. Call me ignorant. I would call this a prudent business decision.
    David Cruice Rental Property Investor from Raleigh, North Carolina
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Ha! I read this post and thought to myself, "Ooh, straight to the comments!" What a firestorm! Ouch! Burny hot! :-) There are some things left unsaid, and anything regarding dogs or cats is one of them! Yowza!
    Heather Hall
    Replied about 1 month ago
    "First off, where there is smoke, there is usually fire. These breeds have a bad reputation for a reason." This is full admission of the author's bias. It is an editorial. All of his data is from one site, and it is selective. Allow pets or don't. If you do allow them, be clear about rules and enforce them. Just like everything else with a rental. Keep in mind, that "benign" breed may pee all over your rugs and that other "benign" breed may indeed bite the neighbor. Allow dogs or don't. Just don't discriminate. Other data from the same site: "From 2005 to 2009, rescued or rehomed dogs only inflicted 2% of dog bite fatalities." On the ability of intelligent people to identify "pit bulls": "Shelter workers were able to spot real pit bulls and pit bull mixes 33 to 75 percent of the time, depending on the worker. But they labeled non-pit-bull dogs as pit bulls up to 48 percent of the time. That’s almost a 1 in 2 chance that a dog with no pit bull DNA could be lumped in with the unfortunate pit bulls." -Proud pit bull mix owner x 2
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Again, I have no say in why insurance companies designate or exclude certain types of dogs from policies. Perhaps you should ask them, I'm sure they can provide you with volumes of payment claims to support their policy decisions. Here is a post from the insurance information institute. https://www.iii.org/article/spotlight-on-dog-bite-liability My article was written from the perspective of liability and whether YOU as a landlord should take on the potential liability of OTHER PEOPLE's dogs that YOUR insurance policy has designated as dangerous. If you want to take on this exposure then all power to you. Just don't get upset if I or other landlords choose not to take on that exposure. This is NOT IGNORANCE - far from it. It is a business decision. As landlords we are sitting targets already. Its up to you if you want to add another target to you back.
    Scott English
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I own a property where the tenant has a 95lb Pit Bull and is a gentle giant. And I have no concerns. I also own a Pit who is a mush and greets kids trick or treating on the porch. This kind of limited thinking can easily apply to humans as noted in a previous comment above that I would agree with 100%. There are minority’s that commit crimes/murders that are only maybe 20% of the population yet commits the vast majority of criminal atrocities. Look up the FBI statistics. With the same logic I would reduce my legal risk and avoid renting to them also.
    Michael Baum from Olympia, Washington
    Replied about 1 month ago
    We have a short term vacation rental and we allow dogs. We do restrict the breeds and based on weight. Some dogs are just more naturally more aggressive outside the home. Everyone's dog is great with their kids and at home, but it is when they are away from home and in a new and strange situation that things crop up. This is just my experience. For example, several years ago in Seattle, a sweet wonderful pair of perfect pits got out of their yard and killed 3 other dogs and attack a little old lady. By all accounts they were raised right from puppies, had a big family home with a big yard and lots of love and attention. No abuse or anything like that. I guess that they both could have been wired wrong etc. but I just don't know. The bottom line is not whether what Joseph is saying is correct, it matters was the perception is. What he is saying is that there could be legal trouble arising from these types of dogs. The legal and insurance industry has flagged these types of animals as trouble. That may not be the case in EVERY case. It's like with teenage drivers. Boys are more expensive to insure than girls. Does that mean each and every boy is reckless and dangerous behind the wheel? No. Does that mean that every girl is perfect, well behaved behind the wheel, Also no. So, try not to blame the messenger here. The stats say one thing, owners say another. In the case of legal matters, the stats always win.
    Gavin Hirsch from Springfield, New Jersey
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Honestly all of what you said about business is correct and so much of what said about dogs is wrong. Your advice to not allow them is smart but seriously don’t talk about breeding unless you also happen to be an accomplished breeder.
    Casey Keck Rental Property Investor from Buckeye, AZ
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Here in Arizona (and in many other states), it is actually ILLEGAL to restrict dogs based on breed. I believe that specific cities may specify size restrictions, but I'm not sure of that.
    Casey Keck Rental Property Investor from Buckeye, AZ
    Replied about 1 month ago
    "The law, which takes effect in August, forbids Arizona's cities and counties from enacting or enforcing breed-based dog regulations. BSL still in effect in hundreds of jurisdictions across the country — though it's on the wane. With Arizona's new law, 20 states now have so-called 'BSL-preemption' laws." -BarkPost, 2018
    Casey Keck Rental Property Investor from Buckeye, AZ
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Correction: that article was about a law that was actually passed in 2016, not 2018.
    William Price
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Just reading topic I knew there would be some backlash on article. IMO this article was written for the purpose of protecting your investment. Unfortunately there are folks that train there dogs to be aggressive and a lot of times they are pits and Rottweilers. No matter what type of breed of dog I always have prospective tenant bring there dog/dogs whenever they come to view property so I can get a good idea how there temperament is ( unfortunately we cannot do this with kids)and not focus so much on breed.I do not charge deposit but do charge 40 per month First dog and 25 for for second,2 pet minimum Remember the beast is usually on the other end of leash, also I charge 50
    Michael Casile
    Replied about 1 month ago
    While I am the owner of 2 rescued pits (and have owned 2 others that have crossed the rainbow bridge in their time) ... I understand the article. I absolutely believe that the attacks are largely going to be un-fixed males ... many of them bred for violence ... if the worst happens (a serious attack) ... the landlord will be more vulnerable. As a dog lover (especially a pit lover) ... it is hard issue.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Thanks for your thoughts Michael. This is exactly the point I was trying to make in the article. Its unfortunate that many people saw the article as a slight against pit bulls and rottweilers.
    Steven Ashwood
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Oh man you brought the wrath of all the pit bull defenders on here. Until they get sued by someone also then they will remember this.
    Catherine Johnson from Vallejo, California
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I am a landlord and a long-time shelter volunteer. My insurance company happily doesn't ask for the "breed" (so often indeterminate) but if there is a history of aggression. I make sure I meet the dogs first and do my own assessment, along with required vet/prior landlord references. And yes, dogs that were possibly/probably bully mixes have lived in my properties without issues. Of course I also require that they are spayed or neutered. Some of the sweetest, most docile dogs I have known have been Rotties. I did read once that Dachshunds are the breed most likely to bite.
    Keith Gehring from Waukee, Iowa
    Replied about 1 month ago
    My insurance company (american family) recently did a house inspection to make sure i was insuring the rental house correctly and adequately. The inspector took a pic of my tenants dogs (two black lab mixes). The inspector commented that if they would have been pit’s or rott’s or another breed that was higher risk, there would have been a good chance that my coverage would have been cancelled/non-renewed. The bottom line is the insurnace companies/actuaries make the rules. Landlords have to either follow their rules or risk being non-renewed or having to move coverage to a more expensive insurer. More expensive translates to less cash flow or forcing the landlord to increase the rents if they allow the higher risk breeds.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Good points Keith, For the most part I agree with all what you are saying. its not about cashflow -- its about legal liability and exposure. I don't make the rules about insurance - my insurance carrier does. If want to be covered, then I have to abide by their terms otherwise, their lawyers will find an excuse to deny a claim. I think this point is being missed by many people it appears are greatly offended by the article. If they want to take on the added responsibility and legal exposure, then that's their right.
    Christopher Smith Investor from brentwood, california
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I get just a little irritated when certain dog owners get so highly offended by possible restrictions on their large breed dog. My property managers have their own standard of permissible breeds and they require proof of renters insurance specifically covering dog bite insurance so I don't need to get involved. However, if I were to get involved I wouldn't hesitate for a second to decline a prospective tenant if I felt at any level it's animal mght be a threat. Additionally, to equate this to a civil rights issue is beyond patently absurd and frankly offensive, it's about risk mitigation and nothing more. I'm a dog owner and have been for many many years. I own a 9 lb Shitzu in part because even if it were to bite someone it couldn't really do any serious damage. No matter how "sweet" a 60 lb plus dog might seem it's capable of inflicting very serious injury to a person and killing a child, and that's something I simply won't accept or tolerate in one of my properties.
    Keith Gehring from Waukee, Iowa
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Also, making sure ur tenants carry a Renter’s Insurance policy with adequate limits will give the landlord some protection. Also ask the carrier to list the landlord as an “additional interest” (no charge to the tenants) so if ur tenant does let it lapse, the landlord will be notified......
    Natalie Burge
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I am a professional canine behaviorist and property investor. Allow dogs or don't. Period. If you allow dogs require tenants to have proper insurance (there are plenty of insurance companies which cover all breeds of dogs at competitive rates). Meet the dog when you meet your tenants. If you don't think you are "qualified" to "interview" a prospective tenant's dog. Then require the dog to have been assessed and cleared by a canine behaviorist or dog trainer. One of the services I provide is assessing dogs and giving them Canine Good Citizen Certifications. Documents like these let landlords know the dog is friendly and the owners are responsible. My certifications mean not only that the dog has ZERO human aggression but also that it is trained and therefore won't cause damage to the property. All dogs are capable of biting. It is true that large dogs can more readily do more damage than small dogs. Still I've seen some horrific injuries on children from small dogs. On a personal note I'm hearten to see all of the intelligent well reasoned responses to this article stating that breed discrimination is WRONG. And I agree with earlier posts that breed discrimination is the new "acceptable" form of racism. I.e. people who know it is socially unacceptable to be racist against people have turned this energy towards dogs. Stop being hateful. These are the same types of arguments which have been used by landlords to refuse renting to people of color.
    Krista Blanco
    Replied about 1 month ago
    What a horrible post. I didn’t realize Bigger Pockets had a shortage of things to talk about, and needed to put this garbage up. This is the exact reason pit bulls, which isn’t a breed by the way, have the stigma they do. My husband and I talk about about it with our properties, what will we ask ANY dog owner for before allowing them to rent? What will the security deposit be? What training has the dog had? References? Meet and greets? How about you get a little bit more creative, outside of googling ‘pit bulls’ and pulling the same crap we hear when they’re being stereotyped. There are a lot of good dog owners out there and a lot of crappy ones, so how about screening the tenant better?
    Keith Gehring from Waukee, Iowa
    Replied about 1 month ago
    It’s a post to show how to mitigate risk, which i think is/was excellent....and again, sometimes landlords dont have a choice, as our insurance companies make the rules on what dogs are allowed/not allowed.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Exactly. I think many of the writers should be directing some of their wrath to insurance companies and plaintiff attorneys as well.
    Melissa Green
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I like the "one bite" idea in a tenant contract. Regardless of what breed lives in your rental, all dogs are a liability and it gives the tenants the understanding that you are serious about it. I own dogs and love them, but I was recently bit by an Australian Shepard mix while dropping off a baby shower gift for a friend. It was terrifying and totally unexpected. Dog lunged his head out of the gate and bite through 2 jackets plus my wrist. I cant imagine what would havr happened if my 2 year old had approached the gate first. Animals are not people. Period! The point of this article was to safe guard your investments. It was not meant to be a personal jab at the people who own pitt-bulls.
    Joshua Roberts from Englewood, CO
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Uneducated. I read the title and against my better judgement proceeded to the first paragraph. In that short time I had read enough to know I didn’t need to read further and wrote off the remainder of your propaganda. Find a better way to attract an audience. Bored.
    Jeremy Clayton
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I think you are on point with your comments about animals being a liability and possibly causing your property to be damaged. Where it got put on the dog breed instead of the jack ass irresponsible dog owner/renter is when I quit reading with any kind of hope for learning anything useful. Ya see , you shouldn’t rent to the guy because he’s irresponsible and a liability HIMSELF the poor dog is just stuck with his ass and loyal. Don’t matter what the breed is I’d rent to someone, or not, based on him not what breed dog he or she has. Can’t take advice past the property owner part and why ALL pets suck to have in your property because it was all insulting after that with stupidity about “pebbles and how we are ignorant of our viscous dogs doings when clearly they are monsters because of breed or wtf ever your condescending comment was. Got 2 mastiffs that wouldn’t let any child get harmed and own my home that they couldn’t begin to destroy like an ignorant, not properly screened, non pet owner could. So once again it’s human ignorance that limits all that from happening, not acting like pet owners are retarded or that the dogs they own are to blame. I get that you were writing about the liability aspect but kinda dipped if into some breed hater thing. We’re you bit by a dog named pebbles or scared emotionally that you haven’t recovered from or am I to believe that you can’t see a shit head tenant being the problem? Or every dog owner and their ignorance because you know our dogs and we couldn’t possibly due to our ignorance. Bud, don’t bunch us all in a group because you didnt pre screen like you should’ve and let a clown move in. Any dog can destroy or bite, pits & rotts got higher numbers due to higher numbers of people choosing them to make a certain way and their capabilities. U thinks it’s due to A higher percent of them being mean or unstable w/o idiots helping that happen? That’s passing ignorance instead of being the least bit helpful or looking at excuses to blame our poor choices of tenants on a breed of dog. That is pretty much where your article went to despite saying otherwise. By the way my dad was renter and had a mean looking dog but it was him that pissed all over and tore it up. Bet the dog made him do it and I had it all wrong🥴💨
    Jeremy Clayton
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Not to mention you titled it about blacklisting certain breeds of dog so yeah that’s kinda what it was about. One form of limiting property damage but come on with that bs about what it was about. That was what u used to try & pass of your garbage about dangerous breeds of dog. Not near the problem ignorant people cause landlords to deal with in damages.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Perhaps you should contact insurance companies and ask them why they charge extra premiums or exclude some types of dogs from policy coverage. Lets say I was a neighbor of yours and one of your tenants dogs bit my child. It is a pretty good chance we would be able to work it out amicably and move on with our lives. You (or your dog) meant no harm. No problem - lets shake hands and go about our daily lives. However, there are some people who see this as an opportunity to get paid. Now, if you were under insured or your insurance company refused to cover you because of some technicality (i.e. your policy excluded this type of dog) now what? Are you going to tell the parent of the child that is looking to get paid that "pibbles" didn't mean to bite or injure their child. They may not be as understanding as me and will probably call one of those "you've got a phone - you've got a lawyer" ambulance chasing lawyers. Now lets say you owned numerous properties and not just one. I assume based on this experience you may want to reconsider your "open door" policy of allowing any tenant to own any type of animal because according to them, THEIR dog is sweet and innocent?
    John Manner
    Replied about 1 month ago
    You are writing an article based on bias and telling your readers to not rent to certain tenants based on that bias? Then you refuse to see any corollary to bias not associated with dogs? I guess I'll just keep asking questions until you get this.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Hi John, I don't think I'm writing based on bias. The article was written based on the FACT that insurance carriers deem certain dogs as likely to increase liability. https://www.iii.org/article/spotlight-on-dog-bite-liability As I stated in the example, the reason we buy insurance is to protect ourselves from unforeseen events. The last thing you want is for the insurance company to deny your claim based on some technicality. If you are a landlord and YOUR insurance carrier will not cover certain types of dogs, then you have a few options including change companies, pay extra premiums or self-insure and hope for the best. Perhaps you may call me lazy, but another option is to maintain my insurance policy and abide by the policy conditions and not rent to owners with these types of dogs. Its a tough call and I know it will affect some otherwise great people. Curious to know what you would do especially if you owned a large rental portfolio that you and your family have worked very hard to establish.
    Tracie Fowler
    Replied about 1 month ago
    If you actually look at the statistics, labs are responsible for more bites than "pitbulls" and second is lab/pitbull mixes. There is also a huge skew for misidentification of breed. If you don't want to allow dogs, that's fine. But, please stop perpetuating misinformation.
    Winslow NA
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Good article. I think pet owners are often blinded by their love for their animal, as shown in the comments.
    Davey Rowe Attorney from Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I disagree. Liability for dog bites fall on the owner of the dog. Unless the landlord has a reason to be liable for negligence, e.g. knowledge of a previous bite by the dog. Source: I’m a lawyer.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Unfortunately, its not so cut and dry. As a landlord, you are potentially exposed: http://www.stuartkaplow.com/legal-library/real-estate-law/court-holds-landlord-liable-tenants-dog-bite/
    Colin March Rental Property Investor from Portland, ME
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I love how the author anticipated every single emotional response and addressed it in the article.
    Bryan Scott Real Estate Broker from Castle Rock, CO
    Replied about 1 month ago
    @ Joe Asamoah. Thanks for taking the time out of your busy week to write the article in an attempt to assist your investing comrades in protecting their interests. Too bad your intents were misinterpreted and twisted by so many. Regardless of what I think or believe about so-called dangerous breeds, I took your article exactly as it was intended vs. trying to find fault with nearly every word you wrote, then attacking you personally. For my rentals, bottomline is if my insurance provider says no, it's no. This includes trampolines, pools and playsets. I love those items too, but I am not willing to put myself, my family, or my portfolio at risk just because I happen to disagree with the insurance actuaries of the world. For those who differ, or wish to take those risks, I hope it all works out for you.
    Adriane Allard from South Jersey
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I agree
    Carlos Fernandez Investor from Miami, Florida
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Am I missing something or have NONE of the renters (and a few landlords) addressed the central argument about insurance liability? If this article is such bs, certainly there should be enough data out there to be shown to insurance underwriters to have the insurance industry switch policies on certain breeds. (I may have missed a cogent argument while laughing at the hysteria on this page.)
    Hillary Bayne
    Replied about 1 month ago
    legislators have been trying- thats why in New England states many of them have no discrimination requirements for insurance companies to follow, until certian organization's followers get involved in writing those legislators and scaring them half to death. So instead of dogs being covered she hoped to hell in a hand basket that it would be one more nightmare on the owners and they'd give them up to be euthanized.. Joseph: You may not be the one designating certain types of dogs as dangerous but you sure are pushin' the stereotype based off looks you can neither prove or force renters to prove without open denial of the dog. Go ahead and google image search Boxador (Labrador Boxer mix) and tell me if that fits the "criteria" (which you didnt even state what it was regaridn type since it covers some 20-30 different breeds to include their mixes). Would they make the cut in your home past "insurance requirements" and all the other fallacies you're speaking? etc?
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I totally agree with you Carlos. Some of the writers are venting their anger on me. I think they should be venting their anger on the insurance companies since all I'm suggesting is that landlords defer to their insurance policies. I'm not the one designating certain types of dogs dangerous - its them.
    Sandra Chlubna
    Replied about 1 month ago
    State Farm doesn't discriminate
    Chris Sager Investor from Sumner, Illinois
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I think the one bite policy and renters insurance should apply to any renter with a dog. I do think I have knowledge to weigh in on this topic. My wife, before retiring, was a veterinary technician for more than 25 years and has bred, shown, and raised American Staffordshire Terriers for more than 30 years now. I also worked as a UPS delivery driver where I came into contact with many dogs. In the years that I did that job, I was bitten twice, once by a Chihuahua and once by a Schnauzer. Even a small dog can be dangerous, especially to babies and small children, and can do permanent damage or be the cause of a lawsuit. My wife knows much more than I do about dog behavior but she has taught me a lot. She says that a dog will take on some of the personality of its owner. A lot of people that want to be tough or seem tough get a dog breed like Pitbulls, etc. Then the dog can end up with an aggressive attitude like the owner. This type of behavior in how some people choose dogs does affect the statistics but the facts are that any dog breed can be dangerous. My wife does not breed many litters of puppies but when she does, she temperament tests them at specific times. I believe it is 3 weeks and 8 weeks. She is able to determine if they have a tendency to be aggressive toward other animals or towards people. They should never be aggressive toward people and she would put one to sleep if they were. That may sound mean but her goal is to better the breed and a dog like that should never be bred or have the opportunity to hurt someone. The point is that there are some dogs that are born with certain tendencies and others can be developed by their environment but this is true of all breeds. Being aggressive toward people is not a normal trait for a Pitbull or an AmStaff. There are breeds that were bred to be guard dogs and be aggressive toward people but I won't comment on them because I don't have specific experience with them. It is also true that some breeds can be more dangerous because of their strength and pain tolerance. The real topic here is minimizing risk as a landlord and I believe that any policies that we have should apply to any breed of dog. Statistics can be useful for many things but not so great for predicting either animal or human behavior.
    Adriane Allard from South Jersey
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I think at the end of the day we all will have varying views. I am an avid pit bull lover and own a bull nose myself. Emotions aside, this article is not based on a matter of right or wrong. As an investor in real estate you need to protect yourself. The main content emphasizes the effects of renting to pet owners and the due diligence that should be considered to avoid possible costs later down the line. The given statistics add to your own decision making when formulating your leases and added clauses.
    Alaina Donofrio from Denver, CO
    Replied about 1 month ago
    LOL you sure opened a can of worms! Lots of people 'Well MY dog is a sweetie, so you're clearly totally wrong!' as well as people trying to tie race into discussions about dog breeds, like humans have no consciousness or understand repercussions of their actions...woooow. Oh and one knucklehead who decided to take a swipe at Democrats...I mean seriously. It's a good article, well-written, thank you. Sorry you're getting such a response.
    Hillary Bayne
    Replied about 1 month ago
    It's not a good article when its blatantly biased and full of misinformation that anyone with 20 minutes of actual time could debunk with google scholar- understanding medical journals and how they're written to include the bias of the BLOG writing the information..
    Sandra Chlubna
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I'm afraid that this article has been shared amoung all the bully breed haters so the hate will flow throughout the thread. Breadsticks is here, and many of the big guns of dogsbuttdotorg.
    Jeff MacIntosh
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I am in agreement with this. The vitriol is undeserved.
    Emma Lunsford
    Replied about 1 month ago
    What if...instead of restricting certain breeds, we evaluated each dog and its own personality. You're right, sometimes "it's the owner, not the breed." isn't true. Sometimes you can't control a dog's behavior, no matter what. In that case though, it's a personality problem and not a breed problem. And if you look up most aggressive dog breeds, you may find that chihuahuas are actually at the top of the list too, does that mean you're going to restrict all chihuahuas? I agree not all pitbulls are mean and vicious, but I can also see where you're coming from with a landlord's perspective. It might be worthy to consider ALL aggressive breeds though if you're really worried about getting sued.
    Yiftach Tygiel
    Replied about 1 month ago
    If we accept all of your factual/statistical assertions, then strictly from a liability perspective, you make a great case. Its also a great case for racial profiling and discrimination. If we put moral and emotional issues aside and focus only on statistics and risk mitigation, about 30% of the US population belongs to racial and ethnic minorities groups who make up the overwhelming majority of the prison population. Shouldn't we also refrain from renting to them? If we are looking at statistics - you haven't examined the total litigation awards involved in non-fatal dog bites vs. fatal dog bites. Its obvious that bigger dogs can and do cause more damage when they bite, but smaller dogs bite a heck of a lot more often. A well mannered large ("vicious" as you like to call them) dog won't spook as easily because kids are running around, they have a much higher threshold for pain and they literally do not feel as threatened by people as smaller dogs. With well behaved large dogs, your biggest risk is that they will join in with horseplay and knock someone over. Smaller dogs are easily stressed out by people because you accidentally stepping on them or running into them is for them like getting hit by a car. They bite a lot sooner and with less discrimination, but of course with less damage too. Statistics are a beautiful thing. If you choose wisely you can make almost any point. What you are making a great case for, is canine liability insurance for sure and responsible dog ownership. On a personal note, I owned a 100+ lbs rottweiler/shepherd mix and while I trusted her with my kids and my cats completely, I wouldn't have her out with guests unless they were big dog lovers (because 4 years of law school will drill the fear of liability into anyone). We maintained an excellent liability policy for her (this was all outside the US, so it was relatively cheap), The only real danger I worried about was that she would interpret someone as a threat to my kids while I was not present. When we moved into our apartment, I replaced the outer door handle with a fixed handle so that we would have to open the door from inside , so no one could accidentally surprise her. All in all, an "annoying" yet informative article. We don't have to agree or accept your positions, but thanks for taking the time to write it.
    Jeff MacIntosh
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I appreciate the passion people have for their animals, however you cannot substitute anecdotal evidence for actuary science and statistics. No amount of stories will change that fact. Animals are unpredictable. You cannot presume to know their trigger. The bigger the animal, the greater the destructive capability. People who are investing their futures in providing housing must protect their investment. In no way do they owe it to anyone to put their own future at risk. I've been around dogs and breeders my whole life. While it would be nice to assume that everyone knows their animal, the landlord is not obligated to have that same understanding.
    Sandra Chlubna
    Replied about 1 month ago
    As a B & B owner who rents with NO BREED or size restrictions I have to say that bully breed owners are so appreciative of being able to travel without being discriminated against that they are the most considerate, sweet people with the most well-trained dogs ( if you have to judge by breed). Miniature Poodles, on the other hand mark EVERYWHERE, dig up carpets and chew on table legs. Give me the pits anytime.
    Cristy Stevens
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Very realistic views .. Can appreciate common sense these days .. As for public safety the one bite rule can be a double edge sword as Pitbulls and their types do not "bite" .. They grip and tear with intent to kill if and when an attack happens . The cost of those attacks are easily in the 6 figures ..Prevention is always key ..Not worth the risk
    Hillary Bayne
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I love the fact you tried to say you're not biased while quoting a fortune tellers numbers as if they're factual yet have been debunked NUMEROUS times.. EL OH EL. *straight face* let me put it to you like this, chief. Under the pit bull title, there are an estimated 18 million dogs.. the dogs are to equal around 20% of the known dog population of 89 million dogs. Are you really willing to go against the majority, that would willingly pay your bills in that home that you're renting out because you dont like a dog? Then here is an an easy answer- DONT RENT YOUR HOME OUT. Not hard to understand. no bias involved.......until you write articles like this. And dont tell me you're not biased... Are those not your words writing it? Then yes, you're biased because it's your opinion that wrote it with debunked information insntead of taking the time to do LEGIT research instead of clicking on the first link you came across that backed your agenda. Major insurances DO cover the dogs. DUH DERP. come on seriously? lets get real here. If JULIE WALL OF MINNESOTA would stop harassing legislators who have anti discrimination bills on the floor regarding insurance, more dogs would be covered which means it would be easier for owners to get insurance on the dogs. but between you and her, you wouuld hate that. why? because past 18 milllion estimated dogs, there would be even more... which by the way doesnt look like that 18 million is slowing down any time soon thanks to the american bully out now (not pit bull by the way).. And how are you also verifying those dogs are even what the owners claim? if the cdc stoppedd tracking breed attacks in 1998 due to an 84% fail rate of breed identification by victims what do you think owners havev since a vast majority of the dogs are bought from the shelters who have beeen scientifically proven to not be able to properly breed label. So you want to set yourself up for a discrimination lawsuit. Great to hear.. Because sooner or later it's going to happen.. 18 million owners of a dog that looks like something you categorized that without DNA proof you dont have which you cant ask for because thats illegal per the company as its for education uses only which I hope all owners read up on. "Joe Asamoah, MBA, PhD, is a seasoned real estate investor. He owns an impressive portfolio of superior homes in the Washington DC area. With over 30 years' experience acquiring, renovating, and managing single family homes, "Dr. Joe" transformed what was once a hobby into a highly successful business. In 2003, his real estate investments enabled him to realize a personal goal of financial independence via passive and residual real estate cash flow. A major objective of Dr. Joe's business is to invest in people and properties. Many of his tenants are low-income families that participate in voucher programs. Because of his dedication to the industry, Dr. Joe is a recipient of numerous professional and real estate awards. Find out more on his website JoeAsamoah.com or on his Facebook page. or on Instagram.V" - this is your persona bio at the end of the article right? You have a PhD. Okay great .lets use a little bit of logic on someone who can use logic and books smarts. Was it NOT YOU WHO SAID " In conclusion, I advise landlords to avoid dealing with tenants who own pit bulls and vicious dogs if at all possible. Over 1,000 cities in the U.S. have breed-specific laws that ban pit bull-type dogs from the get-go, so it’s not even your call. But there are also situations where Fair Housing forces you to accept tenants with such dogs if they are emotional support animals (ESAs). But that’s a topic for a whole different article." - This is incorrect by the way- less than 900 cities have BSL considering there are between 12 and 25 city repeals annually with 20 states that have mandatory laws that you cannot discriminate type of dog for legislation which means the only cities left in those 20 states are grandfathers and those are jjust ticking away to be repealed.. So. ..you flat outright tell people,, in your own opinion (with bad information) to not rent to people who have pit bull type dogs- yet you cant identify pit bulls.. How ccan you identify a pit bull type dog is science jjust proved the CDC numbers right? pet owners have a 25.1% cchance of breed id by eyeball. pet professionals haev a 25.8% and you want to think youre going to look at a dog and claim it something and not rent to someone because you dont like the way their dog looks? Hello pot. How you doin' kettle?! Oh I'm great, Pot. thanks for askin! Are we really serious right now? Do you care if labrador owners have insurance on their dogs? Oh but guess what. In canada, just yesterday labradors were put in a BSL list.... Until the city said "nope" due to public outcry and then no dogs were put on the bsl list and bsl was ultimately repealed in QC. Of course not. labradors are the highest registeredd dogs. forget the fact you can mix them with almost any type of dog out there and it come out to look like the "type" you claim... Guess you're discriminating family favorites now too. . Do the research past the first click sir. wouuld save you this embarrassment of ignorance.. If YOU DONT WANT TO RENT TO PEOPLE WITH A TYPE OF DOG YOU CANT PROVE BY EYEBALLING, be our guest. We hope your renters find this and read the comments to see fact from reality even with your responses. As for Cristy Stevens FOLLOWER OF DOGSBITE. yeah. .it's realistic when it's your fortune teller's fake information making everyone''s lives a living hell when SHE GOT PAID FROM A DANGEROUS DOG ORDINANCE, NOT BSL. Oh.. yeah,, she also got paid from insurance to- JULIE WALL. did colleen tell you how many repeals there would be this year or did her runes book not produce too well on that? whoops.
    Tracy Hines
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Well, I think your piece has elicited another very sound reason not to rent to pit bull owners. The evidence is in the comments, some of which are very long indeed. However, you already answered every single one when you wrote: "Those with a soft spot for pit bulls can make all the excuses they want. They can blame the media for unfair reporting. They can show all the cute photos of “pibbles” who will just lick you to death. Tell it to an actuary. Anecdotes like this are not the basis for sound business decisions. If your insurance company doesn’t like the risk, you probably shouldn’t like it either."
    Eileen O'Toole
    Replied about 1 month ago
    My dog and I were attacked by my neighbors pitbull. My dog died after a 3 day stay at the emergency vet. $7000 bill. I needed stitches, knee surgery and all the follow up visits that go with that. $50,000. Owners of the pitbull had to sell their home because they were not able to afford the new insurance costs after this because they were dropped by first company for lying about owning a pitbull dog. It’s a serious issue. I’d listen to the advice above. My situation happened to be private homeowners... landlords could lose everything in a lawsuit involving a dog attack. My injuries were relatively minor compared to most pitbull attacks .
    Julie Wall
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Maryland Court of Appeals Holds Pit Bull Owners and Landlords Accountable After an Attack https://blog.dogsbite.org/2012/04/maryland-court-of-appeals-holds-pit.html
    Christi Himes
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I wish they didn't exist!! I feel unsafe with a pitbull around, for our pets and children! I'd rent somewhere they're banned but I wouldn't rent somewhere they're welcome. You can't love out their genetic purpose, only be ignorant to it until yours turns out of the blue like other families experience. The once pit bull advocates saying blame the owners were now the owners being blamed when they did everything right! These dogs need to GO
    Amy Cravey
    Replied about 1 month ago
    “Hard facts that these dogs are responsible for 406 deaths”?? Where are those “hard facts”. There is NO federally recognized organization that tracks dog bites by breed. The CDC stopped 2 decades ago. Why? Because breed confirmation is too difficult to confirm from anectdotal reports and visual IDs. As a matter of fact, there are several studies showing that visual IDs are inaccurate up to 86 percent of the time by shelter employees (which would be more knowledgeable than the average bystander). The only sites that track dog bites are known to be biased against pit bull TYPE dogs and have an agenda to eradicate them. Unless your “hard facts” come from a trustworthy source, your entire premise is based on media hype and a misconception about these breeds. I would suggest going to the AVMA, JAVM, HSUS or ASPCA for your “facts”. They all contradict the premise that block headed dogs are inherently dangerous.
    Joseph Asamoah Rental Property Investor from Washington, DC
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I'd appreciate if several of you weigh in on this scenario I posed to another person yesterday: "Perhaps you should contact insurance companies and ask them why they charge extra premiums or exclude some types of dogs from policy coverage. Lets say I was a neighbor of yours and one of your tenants dogs bit my child. It is a pretty good chance we would be able to work it out amicably and move on with our lives. You (or your dog) meant no harm. No problem - lets shake hands and go about our daily lives. Now as you well know, there are some people who see this as an opportunity to get paid. Now, if you and/or your tenant were under insured or your insurance company refused to cover you because of some technicality (i.e. your policy excluded this type of dog) now what? Are you going to tell the parent of the child that is looking to get paid that "Pibbles" didn't mean to bite or injure their child. They may not be as understanding as me and will probably call one of those "you've got a phone - you've got a lawyer" ambulance chasing lawyers. Now lets say you owned numerous properties and not just one and that you worked very hard over many years to grow this portfolio with the goal of providing you and your loved ones with financial freedom. Please enlighten me how are you going to handle this situation. Its one thing if the dog is YOURS. What if the dog was SOMEONE ELSE'S dog (i.e. your tenant) and YOU knowingly rented to this dog owner which YOUR insurance company deemed dangerous. Suffice it to say that the tenant glowingly told you that "Pibbles" was such a sweet and innocent dog that's oh so playful around children. As a dog loving business owner seeking financial freedom and knowing full well there are people who have hidden agendas and looking for a quick pay day, feel free to educate me on what you would do. This is not a theoretical scenario but real and is the premise of this article. I had a prospective tenant approach me very recently just like described.
    Kata Walters Rental Property Investor from jersey city, NJ
    Replied about 1 month ago
    As much as I understand the point of this article I think it is unfair to point the finger to certain breeds. I am the the owner of a " vicious" red flag breed myself - a Doberman Pincher . I am also a responsible, fastidious, perfect dream tenant and landlord ! I read an article when I was considering a tenant for one of my first rentals in regard to allowing dogs, cats etc and in fact it mentioned that quite often pet owners are more responsible tenants. I have close friends with pitbulls and I would love them as tenants, they are caring and loving people and take amazing care of their well trained dog and their house ! . I could say very different things about some of my own tenants without pets who have children and create way more of a headache than a pitbull . I think it's good knowledge to be aware of the problems a bite can cause a landlord and for the safety of all tenants . But I think we need to keep a open mind and not just cut off all tenants with these type of dogs either. If this was the case I would not be able to live in my current apartment with my own dog. It would be heartbreaking to move out of the city ( no I would not give my dog up ) haha . An open mind, education and some common sense goes a long way before we put these bans and walls up. Just my two cents.
    Scott Bowles Real Estate Investor from Salt Lake City, UT
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Thanks for the article, made me think, though as I read it I knew this would trigger so many people. Just remember dogs are people too.
    Melvin Vargas Specialist from Massachusetts
    Replied about 1 month ago
    @joseph Asamoah This is great information. I would have thought no-pets straight up. But stats are stats. you Can't argue with the numbers. A lot of people took the post to the chest. I wouldn't doubt that some people made a bigger pockets account just to reply. Not one person who disagreed with the OP used facts or stats. They all resorted to name calling, and logical fallacies, and saying "My dog is not like this". Which is purely subjective. Regardless, why punish all pet-owning tenants when only a minority owns the infamously dangerous dogs (according to the stats in the original post) which have harmed other pets, people, and REI Portfolios to many Investors? Mitigating risk is not a sin. Thank you for this post!
    Haley Powell
    Replied about 1 month ago
    I am quite new to this site and am learning so much about real estate investing, but this article was particularly thought provoking for me. I had never considered this angle before and it makes a lot of sense to me. It's sad but it's also a real gamble. Everyone says their dog is great but the reality is that you can't always take their word for it. I was renting in Nashville last summer and the landlady (also my roommate) had the sweetest black lab. She was taking him out one day and a neighbor's pitbull had managed to bolt out of their house and attacked the lab and left holes in his neck. The owner came over and apologized and said he was actually such a sweet dog but that she couldn't let him out of the house regularly because of tendencies like these. It was good that she recognized the issue and I'm sure he was a great dog, but had my landlady not taken steps to settle the issue amicably there could have been real issues with animal control (I am unsure if litigation would have been possible). Had something similar happened to a human, I really can't imagine the can of worms that would have been opened. By and large, I think most dogs are good-natured, but insurance companies make the rules and the stats are not in pitbulls' favor right now. Hopefully in the future that will change, because they really are great dogs.
    Julie Wall
    Replied about 1 month ago
    TAKE ACTION! Please contact the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Financial Services to oppose the 3 bills listed below. It affects your bottom line. H.1037 An Act concerning the use of certain insurance underwriting guidelines pertaining to dogs harbored upon the insured property H. 1038, An Act to prohibit housing discrimination against responsible dog owners S. 595 An Act concerning the use of certain insurance underwriting guidelines pertaining to dogs harbored upon the insured property [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
    Julie Wall
    Replied about 1 month ago
    ADD these two people to the list to contact [email protected] [email protected]
    Mark Franks Rental Property Investor from Hudson County, NJ
    Replied about 1 month ago
    Thanks for a solid article. I own a couple "dangerous breed dogs". While they are total sweethearts to me and my girlfriend, I'm not blinded by my love for them like most of the other dog owners to believe their diarrhea of the mouth arguement of "they'd never hurt a fly". I know they would tear open a small dog given a perfect storm of events. I will definitely rent to dog and cat owners in the future but will absolutely discriminate against certain breeds. Been around dogs for over 30 years.
    Sabrina Brown
    Replied 27 days ago
    As a volunteer at the National Victims of Canine Attacks Support Network since 2012 I’ve seen the breed of dogs that are creating the most severe and fatal damage to people and pets. It’s usually a pit bull terrier, an American Staffordshire Terrier or an American Bulldog. There are often mixes, but the victims, often their owners, correctly identify the dog breeds and most are pit bull terriers. I personally know the victims, the attacking breeds and the situations. The main problem is breed genetics. If you have a pit bull, Am Staff, Am Bull you have an aggressive dog breed. Period. Will it snap? Maybe maybe not. Bloodline DNA play the role of determining that. Most people don’t know anything about their bloodlines. Plenty of dogs are abused and neglected yet don’t severely and fatally wound living things as a result of that. I’ve worked with these attacks for 12 years. Pit bull apologists need to stop focusing on only their own experience with these dogs (many have still had bad experiences and won’t admit it) and look at the bigger picture. These attacks are only increasing. To take a dog like this into a home as a landlord is just asking for problems. I will never allow my renter to have an aggressive breed. I know many others who feel the same way. In fact, most people shy away from whole neighborhoods if they find out that pit bulls reside there. People don’t want someone else’s bad judgment to mean injury for their children on the way to school or out playing. I’ve seen whole neighborhoods lose value because of these breeds. Such a shame for everyone.
    Joe Berg Investor from Minneapolis, Minnesota
    Replied 27 days ago
    This article is full of misinformation. While I agree that banning certain breeds may play a roll in risk mitigation by fending off lawsuits and appeasing insurance companies the statistics presented are entirely false. You cited Forbes as the source of information and Forbes referenced dogbite.org. But a simple google search will largely discredit dogbite.org. I'm not the only one who disagrees. Virtually every leading veterinarian association as well as the CDC agree that dog specific legislation is misguided and wrong https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/breed-specific-legislation. Further as others have highlighted above: what is a pitbull? If we use the American Pitbull Terroir as the definition of a "pitbull" the UKC lists it as a small to medium size dog that is family friendly. They describe the breeds characteristics as follows: "The APBT is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers. Aggressive behavior toward humans is uncharacteristic of the breed and highly undesirable. This breed does very well in performance events because of its high level of intelligence and its willingness to work. Disqualifications: Viciousness or extreme shyness". As a landlord I allow dogs. On some properties I have weight requirements because I do not feel the property is appropriate for a large dog. On others I may have breed restrictions because of the insurance on the property (I'm in the business to make money not subsidize dog ownership). As a dog breed enthusiast I understands that dogs are bred to display certain traits and behaviors and that this could be used as a deciding factor in what dogs we as landlords rent to. But as long as we contribute to the spread of misinformation by buying into attention grabbing headlines we become a part of the problem that prevents us from achieving our ultimate goal of risk mitigation and from running a profitable business that encourages lasting tenant relationships. I also understand that most landlords are not going to be experts on dog breeds. You may just want to start by placing weight restrictions on the dogs you are willing to rent to since the larger the dog the more potential danger it presents to a human. Maybe start with 60 pounds?
    Eric Carr Real Estate Broker from Los Angeles, CA
    Replied 25 days ago
    I screen the dogs just as I do a human. I allow Pit Bulls and always will. It's a sad way of fearful thinking to believe what is cited here. Spreading misinformed click bait statistics is what the news does. Which would have us believe that immigrants, people different than us, are the cause of violence and our problems. It's small thinking. I have pit bulls, Dobermans, and work with rescues. If a dog is aggressive, aside from major behavioral/psychological issues, which are a rare occurrence and not breed specific, it is never the dogs fault, but the humans that harm them.