Real Estate Investor · FL · Member since 2008 · 5 posts · 0 votes
I have a prospective tenant who is moving to our area to work as an air traffic controller. He seems very responsible, but he has a pit bull. The dog seems very friendly but I am afraid to be opening myself up to liability. It is a single family house and it has a fence all around. He plans to get renters insurance and any additional insurance. I live in Florida and Pit Bulls are not banned in our county. Would you rent to a Pit Bull owner?
My other prospective tenant is a family with 3 kids which would probably be a safer bet.
There are a lot of myths surrounding Pit Bulls and showing prejudices toward Pit Bull owners simply furthers the problem. According the the ATTS (American Temperamental Test Society), Pit Bulls have a passing rate of 85.3% compared to the average of 77% for all dog breeds. (Schnauzers, on the other hand, have a passing rate of 66.1%.) During the first part of the 20th century, Pit Bulls were the most popular family dogs. Over the years people began to take advantage of Pit Bull's loyalty and willingness to please and thus began the Pit Bull fighting trend.
I am not saying that you should allow all dogs to be on your properties. There are dogs out there that are just going to be a liability, but basing your decision on breed and not the temperament of the individual dog is nothing more than bigotry.
I'm with Josh on this one. I have a renter with a small dog, but pit is another issue. I own a black lab mix with pit myself and I have an automatic gate to my house. My dog escaped twice because the gate was left open. Now that was my responsibility and my control, but to be responsible to someone's else actions, is a whole different ball game.
Many insurance companies have a vicious dog list and they will not cover you if you allow a renter with a dog on that list. The pit is just one of many breeds on the list!
I would be tempted to go against the grain on this one. Since he seems responsible allow him to prove it by getting an insurance policy for the pit before he moves in and also get a pet deposit for not only the potential inside damage, but also for the refurbishing of the yard.
The wording of the rental should also include a provision that if the city or county ever do put in a restriction against the pit breed that the contract is voided.
If he can and is willing to jump through all the hoops necessary then it should be ok.
There are a lot of myths surrounding Pit Bulls and showing prejudices toward Pit Bull owners simply furthers the problem. According the the ATTS (American Temperamental Test Society), Pit Bulls have a passing rate of 85.3% compared to the average of 77% for all dog breeds. (Schnauzers, on the other hand, have a passing rate of 66.1%.) During the first part of the 20th century, Pit Bulls were the most popular family dogs. Over the years people began to take advantage of Pit Bull's loyalty and willingness to please and thus began the Pit Bull fighting trend.
I am not saying that you should allow all dogs to be on your properties. There are dogs out there that are just going to be a liability, but basing your decision on breed and not the temperament of the individual dog is nothing more than bigotry.
You're absolutely right - pitbulls can be excellent, loving, family dogs. Unfortunately, that's not the issue. The issue is that they (along with at least 10 other breeds) have been identified as vicious dogs and allowing them on the property creates a liability for the owner and may invalidate your insurance coverage.
Not a chance. Even if the tenant gets appropriate insurance, you can STILL be held liable if the tenant's dog causes harm to someone else. If a plaintiff wins a lawsuit against the owner for more than the owner's policy will pay, you'd better believe they're coming for you next.
While it's unfortunate, it's a reality of life, litigation, and insurance. I have too much at stake to ever take that risk.
Matthew, you do have a very good point, but as I said in the beginning, If he gets enough insurance (just how much is really enough?) and is willing to sign the approiate non-idemnity clauses. Then you have shown that there is no neglect on your part and those cases against you should not succeed.
Should not succeed does not mean that they wont succeed and thereby there is still risk.
Since nothing is ever sure in the reality of todays society and the judges rulings, My original statement of I WOULD BE TEMPTED to go against the grain, does not mean that I would rent to him, but I would definately consider him, if as was stated, he was responsible and did the right things.
But with the additional information provided of another rental client also ready to rent same apt. I would have to go with them first.
Josh,
In my city, you have to get a special license to have a "dangerous breed" such as a pitbull. I can't afford that liability of specifically allowing a "dangerous breed" on my properties.
You're right though, it doesn't make sense. A person doesn't need that license for a Giant Schnauzer or a Catahoula - both of which have been used to hunt bears.
No!!! We have a major issue with Pit Bulls in my town. By law the owners are required to register them with the city. Not one owner has registered and no one enforces the law. My tenants have black labs and cannot even walk their dogs up the street due to being attacked by Pit Bulls. They called me the last time it happened and I told them to to stop screwing around and call the police. They refused saying that the kid that owns this one is really nice and the dog just get out the door sometimes. Mean while they cannot walk up that part of the street with their dogs. Most Pit are friendly to people, it's other animals they have issues with.
I'm in the same place now...I have a prospective rented with a 4 month old pit bull.... I called the police department to ask them about it...they told me pit bulls are allowed and considered like any other breen in our city and that any liability would fall on the dog's owner...not the landlord....I am really curious to know....did you rented your house to the pit bull owner?
I don't know that I'd be taking legal advice from the police department. Perhaps for guidance on a criminal matter, but if the dog hurts someone you will be likely named in a civil suit.
I was bitten by a pit bull--I was the dog's first bite victim. In other words, the dog did not have a history of being aggressive--I guess I just "got lucky" as I was walking by the house and someone left the gate open and the pit came right after me. I am extremely lucky there was a block wall I jumped on as the pit went after someone else down the street so when it came back to me it couldn't reach me. It was a rental property and it was the tenant's dog. I actually talked to an attorney for damages (doctor bills) and he said the tenant probably doesn't have any money but the landlord probably does. In the end, I decided not to sue anyone but I'm just that way...another person would have sued the landlord.
There is not a chance I would rent to someone with a pit bull...NEVER.
First, my insurance company will not cover me for liability for a pit-bull.
Second, there is something wrong in the head of a tenant who says to himself: I am a tenant. Landlords don't like to rent to dogs. Most landlrods won't rent to large dogs. No landlords will rent to pit-bulls. Hey, I think I'll get myself a great big pit-bull.
I know wonderful responsible owners of American Staffordshire Terriers (the show version of the Pit). Not one of them is a tenant. They are all home owners.
Every tenant I've ever met that owned a Pit-bull is a sleazeball. The dog I might take (the majority of Pits are nice dogs), the owner, never.
Every tenant "seems" nice, "seems" responsible, has a good excuse for everythig when they are applying. I'd take that pit-bull to indicate that guy has issues.
You can't stop him from canceling insurance and his insurance won't stop you from getting sued. It could be a dog scratch or someone fell down because it scared them to see a Pit-bull inside the fence, and all the jury has to hear is "Pit-bull" and you just lost your case and had the judgement tripled.
abhyler, just a suggestion: do not allow a 4 month old puppy of any breed. My rule is dogs over 1 year of age. They must be past the chewing and piddling stage.
Terriers and high energy breeds, I won't acept less than 18 months of age.
With a 4 month old pit-bull puppy, you'll be lucky if the kitchen cabinets and all the baseboard aren't chewed to splinters.
I'm with the consensus on this one all the way. IMO you are opening up a can of liability issues by allowing a pit bull. Not to mention the dog would probably trash the place much faster than a family with small children.
I just made an account because I am so annoyed by everyones response. I have a pitbull just like all those other "sleeze bags" which I am not. That is very stereo typical. My (PITBULL) dog is very friendly with people and I am not trying to prove you wrong whether you believe me or not. I just want to let you all know your fear is probably pitbulls because you do not have one. Mostly all the dogs that walk in my pet store are pitbuls. Most of them are very calm and well trained unlike all the little dogs that jump and bark 24/7. I believe most people that are attacked by pitbulls are because they come into their personal space just as people would react. Oh yeah one more thing you will never be responsible for anything that happens with the dog because the owner is also accountable. A DOG IS A DOG at the end of the day.
My dog is afraid of everything.... bags, baskets, and bottles now you tell me she is vicious.
I think if you read the thread and step back a bit, the message youll get is that landlords are afraid of lawyers & insurers weaseling out of potential claims, not pit bulls.
Its a business, my personal feelings are at the bottom of the priority scale.
I just made an account because I am so annoyed by everyones response. I have a pitbull just like all those other "sleeze bags" which I am not. That is very stereo typical. My (PITBULL) dog is very friendly with people and I am not trying to prove you wrong whether you believe me or not. I just want to let you all know your fear is probably pitbulls because you do not have one. Mostly all the dogs that walk in my pet store are pitbuls. Most of them are very calm and well trained unlike all the little dogs that jump and bark 24/7. I believe most people that are attacked by pitbulls are because they come into their personal space just as people would react. Oh yeah one more thing you will never be responsible for anything that happens with the dog because the owner is also accountable. A DOG IS A DOG at the end of the day.
My dog is afraid of everything.... bags, baskets, and bottles now you tell me she is vicious.
I have friends with many pit bulls, and these dogs, treated well and trained by their owners, are some of the best dogs around of any breed. One of our friends even trains abused pit bulls in shelters so they will be more adoptable. But I also had a pit bull break through its own fence (not the gate, the actual fencing) to attack my lab puppy on a walk with my then 5-year-old daughter, and it took 30 or so hard kicks from my husband to finally get the dog off him. "A dog is a dog" to me means that you as its owner must always realize the potential for any dog of any breed to attack, and responsible owners never assume their dog cannot become aggressive. And believing that it is "just as people would react" again is naive. A dog is a dog, not human, and operates on different triggers than humans, and believing they don't is potentially dangerous.
As far as "never responsible," insurance companies do not seem to agree with you as most landlord policies specifically will not cover incidents related to renting to someone with a dog listed as an "aggressive breed," most likely due to the number of lawsuits they had to cover for landlords in the past, and most of us require insurance to protect our interests. So I love my friends' pit bulls, but I couldn't rent to them.
There are a lot of myths surrounding Pit Bulls and showing prejudices toward Pit Bull owners simply furthers the problem. According the the ATTS (American Temperamental Test Society), Pit Bulls have a passing rate of 85.3% compared to the average of 77% for all dog breeds. (Schnauzers, on the other hand, have a passing rate of 66.1%.) During the first part of the 20th century, Pit Bulls were the most popular family dogs. Over the years people began to take advantage of Pit Bull's loyalty and willingness to please and thus began the Pit Bull fighting trend.
I am not saying that you should allow all dogs to be on your properties. There are dogs out there that are just going to be a liability, but basing your decision on breed and not the temperament of the individual dog is nothing more than bigotry.
Josh Gesler
I've never heard of a Schnauzer killing a person or tearing a child's face off. There are pitbull incidents on the news all of the time. A tree trimmer that I hired walked with a limp because he had been bitten by a pit bull on his heel. It did major damage and he sued the homeowner and received over $100K from the insurance company.
I don't know how you can classify this as "bigotry". We are talking about animals here, not people. What if the tenant had a pet rattlesnake, but it was "nice and never bit anyone". Would you allow that? How about a pet cheetah or alligator? There was a story on the news a while back about a girl who had her face chewed off by the family's pet racoon. She was completely deformed.