This is me and my husbands first out to market rental, potential tenant inquires if we allow pit bulls.  We have another tenant that we inherited at purchase of property that has a pit bull and poodle.  Property is a three unit with fenced in yard.  Two questions/concerns:

1. How do you handle large dogs with bad reputations (pit bulls, rottweilers, etc.)? We are advertising the listing as pets allowed and pet rent will be applied (rent tbd).

2. The pit bull from existing tenant can be aggressive but ultimately friendly, the concern is existing tenant's dogs and potential tenant's dog being in the backyard at the same time (I'd have this concern with any two dogs, regardless of breed).  I want to include a rider/addendum in the Lease that states all pets must be on leash when in the backyard and that the yard is not a dog run and we'd post signage that states dogs must be on leash. 

Is there any other concerns/issues I should have? 

For what it is worth, property is in Chicago, IL. 

I've advertised apartments before that permit dogs, but will say "No bully breeds" - in the posting. I still get people with bully breeds that will call to inquire - and sometimes I'll handle it case by case. I avoid pit-bulls however. When I inherited them, I required tenants to get insurance - as a primary concern is liability in case of attack on another tenant. Definitely have a lease rider/addendum. 

Best of luck!

@Jen W. have you checked your insurance policy? A lot of policies won't cover properties if there is an "aggressive breed" on the premises, and typically pit bulls are on that list of "aggressive" breeds. If your policy is similar then I would deny the potential tenant AND you also need to figure out something regarding your current tenant, the last thing you want to happen is for your insurance policy to lapse due to this. Good luck!

@Jen W. - Like Kevin said, check your insurance policy.  I think State Farm is the only one that will cover "attack breeds" (pits, husky, ect)

No tenant is ever worth voiding my insurance, so I don't accept them

@Kevin S. As far as I know we do not have an "aggressive breed" clause in our policy but plan to double check. Provided there isn't one, do you have any other recommendations? 

@Jen W. I would definitely double-check your policy, and I would also call your insurance agent/company to triple-check.

Assuming there's no issue with insurance, the biggest thing I would suggest is to meet the dog ahead of time, see how it reacts to strangers, look for any signs of misbehavior or aggression. I would also charge a non-refundable pet deposit in addition to your normal deposit. As for your thought about the requirement of always being on a leash, you can add this but be prepared for renters to ignore this and let their dogs out in the backyard off leash. My biggest concern would be noise, I'd make sure to have some sort of clause about excessive noise and include loud, continuous barking speicifically as an example in the clause.

Thank you, everyone, for your thoughts and advice! 

My biggest concern after not voiding insurance is making sure we are not liable for anything that could happen from a tenant not abiding by the terms of their lease (addendum). After that is noise, which is also something I'd add to the addendum. 

Originally posted by @Jen W. :

Thank you, everyone, for your thoughts and advice! 

My biggest concern after not voiding insurance is making sure we are not liable for anything that could happen from a tenant not abiding by the terms of their lease (addendum). After that is noise, which is also something I'd add to the addendum. 

 if those dogs attack and injure someone and they are living on your property your going to be in major issues if someone sues.. no question about it.. 

there was a case here last month in Vegas family pitt  never did anything then for some reason it attacked the older lady in the house son comes to rescue has to shoot the dog bullet goes through dog and into her leg.

now she has severe bites and a bullet wound ..  I know I know many are sweet dogs and that's OK for those who owner occ and want to take the risk.. but I personally see zero reason why a landlord would take on this risk..  I used own a German Shepard and they are excluded from many policies as well. and she was a wonderful dog.. But she did bite one person who came into our house uninvited the person sees this 80 lb dog coming at her she turns and runs and gets bit on the @$$  that one cost my insurance company 6k and the dog was then excluded from the policy.. .. 

Originally posted by @Brie Schmidt :

@Jen W. - Like Kevin said, check your insurance policy.  I think State Farm is the only one that will cover "attack breeds" (pits, husky, ect)

No tenant is ever worth voiding my insurance, so I don't accept them

 Huskies are considered "attack breeds?"  Huskies are among the most mild mannered dog breeds I've ever encountered.  I have to imagine insurance companies' issues with huskies is that they can damage property.  I'm going to check my insurance policies.   

Originally posted by @Kevin S. :

@Jen W. I would definitely double-check your policy, and I would also call your insurance agent/company to triple-check.

Assuming there's no issue with insurance, the biggest thing I would suggest is to meet the dog ahead of time, see how it reacts to strangers, look for any signs of misbehavior or aggression. I would also charge a non-refundable pet deposit in addition to your normal deposit. As for your thought about the requirement of always being on a leash, you can add this but be prepared for renters to ignore this and let their dogs out in the backyard off leash. My biggest concern would be noise, I'd make sure to have some sort of clause about excessive noise and include loud, continuous barking speicifically as an example in the clause.

 be careful with phrases like "non-refundable deposit" the word deposit implies it is refundable, which makes the phrase an oxymoron and opens you up to a tenant dispute. the phrasing, non-refundable fee would be better.

also, I don't think it is a good idea to call something a pet deposit. I would prefer to simply increase the general deposit. you open yourself up to a tenant dispute their as well since a tenant may claim you have no right to use it by claiming that specific damage was not done by a dog.

I tell them I require them to get liability coverage for aggressive breeds.  There are a few providers.  Typically, they move on, which is preferred.

No pitbulls. Find another tenant.

We had one tenant with pit bulls. Never again. Scared hell out of the neighbors and chewed hunks out of the basement staircase treads. And it was a struggle getting them (the dogs) out. 

I guess you'd say these dogs were also "aggressive but ultimately friendly." Well, what if one day they start out aggressive and don't feel like being friendly in the end? 

These fierce breeds can be very sweet dogs, and I have known a lot of German Shepherds and Dobermans that were. But you never really know a dog unless you own it, so the safe answer is , "No." 

If you're going to be in the property business, you have to make a lot of decisions based on, "What's in it for me?" I don't see what's in it for you, ever, to rent to a guy with a pit bull.

You owe it to tenants to provide a clean, functional, well-maintained living space. You don't owe it to them to accommodate their potentially unpredictably murderous beasts.  

You have a tenant already there with a pit, so perhaps you're stuck with that dog by the terms of the lease. I'd say don't renew that lease. 

Ok, let's remove the pit bull from the mix and say it is another tenant with a non "aggressive breed" how would you handle that situation knowing that there are other dogs on premises? Any differently than signing an addendum, asking for renter's insurance, and hoping everyone abides by the rules (tall order, I know). 

The reason I'm leaning more toward allowing a dog of any breed (assuming no insurance violation) is because it is not prime rental season in Chicago and we want as little vacancy as possible. 

FWIW - We don't require security or pet deposits, Chicago tenant/landlord laws are very pro tenant, and any deposit is difficult to manage and can get a LL in a lot of trouble if mismanaged, we'd require a pet fee plus monthly pet rent for any dog or cat. 

Yes, I've heard nightmare stories from Chicago landlords. In the absence of a deposit, I would be leery of having any kind of pet on the premises...maybe a cat or some goldfish. Is it not possible to attract tenants without pets? Might even be worth knocking the rent down a bit to increase the tenant pool, to avoid the whole situation.

I guess it also depends on where you are and what kind of tenants you can attract. If they are mostly responsible people who can be tracked down and sued for damages after they leave, that's one thing. If they are people who come and go and can't be traced, that's another. 

In general, I think lowering the rent a bit is a better way to fill a vacancy, than accepting policies and tenants you'd rather not have.   

Off topic, I know, but...amazing how these laws to "protect tenants" probably serve to drive landlords out of the business, reduce the choice of housing, drive up rents, etc etc etc. I know nothing I hear is making me eager to move to Chicago and invest my life savings in rental properties.  

We have more common sense in Maryland, and liability is on the dog owner and not the landlord.

Originally posted by @Jeff Burdick :

Originally posted by @Brie Schmidt:

@Jen W. - Like Kevin said, check your insurance policy.  I think State Farm is the only one that will cover "attack breeds" (pits, husky, ect)

No tenant is ever worth voiding my insurance, so I don't accept them

 Huskies are considered "attack breeds?"  Huskies are among the most mild mannered dog breeds I've ever encountered.  I have to imagine insurance companies' issues with huskies is that they can damage property.  I'm going to check my insurance policies.   

 Depends on the company but here is what my agent gave me

• Pit Bulls & Staffordshire Terriers
• Doberman Pinschers
• Rottweilers
• Chows
• Great Danes
• Presa Canarios
• Akitas
• Alaskan Malamutes
• German Shepherds
• Siberian Huskies
• Wolf-hybrids
• Or a mix of any of the above

@Jen W. I would NEVER allow an aggressive breed in a multifamily property. Regardless of what signs you post or what verbiage you put in your lease, you will be held responsible when someone is hurt. It was ultimately your choice to allow the dog.

My advice is look up the prohibited breeds by insurance carriers and do not allow any of them. They do major risk analysis to determine what breeds are not worth it. Most every case of dogs killing humans is a pit bull. In my local state park a pit bull ripped a small dog breed to pieces and attached the owner who tried to stop him. The dog was on a leash, but "got away". Scary stuff.

For your existing tenant, I would increase rent a healthy amount during the next renewal.

One other bit of advice, I would hide your last name on BP so a perspective tenant doesn't see you discussing this.

When I was a new landlord, I thought vacancy was the worst thing that could happen. I have since learned that renting to a bad tenant is worse than letting a property sit vacant. That being said, allowing pit bulls will rent your place fast.

@Jen W. - I allow dogs in my unit.  I actually have a vacancy right now in my 3 unit and I explain that the first floor has 2 dogs and the second floor has two dogs and the property is totally fenced in and they all run around the backyard.  They are all nice and playful, but if you are scared of dogs this is not the right property for you.

I have two showings this week and both sets of prospective tenants also have 2 dogs, so I tell them that I won't approve an application until the dogs do a meet and greet.  It has not really been an issue for me for years, but I will rely on what my existing tenants say.  

@Jen W. I've only had single family rentals and I allow dogs, any breed. I require insurance for any tenant with a dog, regardless of breed. I would probably not allow pets in a multi. It will be harder to rent to non-pet owners if there are dogs on the property.

Personally I have a no dog policy but we occasionally make exceptions if it’s a small breed. In addition to the liability issue with bigger and more aggressive breeds they have a habit of scratching up furniture and fixtures. And what they do to the carpet....

One thing to consider when requiring that the dog is on a leash is that large aggressive dogs on  a leash are very hard to control.  I live on a street with a neighbor 2 doors down that has 3 pit bulls.  They rent, but the landlord has nothing, houses are in and out of foreclosure and are dumps.  

These dogs have attached an elderly lady and then a month later an elderly man, then trapped a handicapped man on his boat dock.  They have bitten several dogs, mine included, and killed a few cats.  They are a pack and aggressive.

They have leashes, but when they want to attack they pull free of their owner and do what they are going to do.  The owners chase after them, get bitten and hurt getting them off whatever they are attaching, so there is less injury...but it happens over and over.

They still have their dogs because they are on a leash and the owners are trying.  

NOW they have to do more than have them on a leash.  The dogs will be put down if they attack again and the dogs "must be on a leash and under the control of the owner."  It raises the stakes by adding "under the control of the owner".  And now the dogs are walked one at a time.

You might want to add that the dogs are to be under the control of the owner to the leash requirement.  Maybe add "an owner over 18 years old must remain with the pets" also, sp the dogs are not left with a visiting nephew, etc.

Originally posted by @Russell Brazil :

We have more common sense in Maryland, and liability is on the dog owner and not the landlord.

I'm not  sure how other laws are in your state, but we need more states like Maryland when it comes to common sense. I'm all for making everyone responsible for their own behavior. 

As for the OP's question, I love dogs, so I'm a little partial to allowing them. The issue with pitbulls is the insurance coverage. I have a pitbull mix and a tenant of mine also has a pitbull with insurance (State Farm) to cover the dog. I would definitely require the insurance (even though as I stated, I don't agree with the LL being responsible for tenant's dogs). I would also make sure the dog is friendly with the current tenant's dog, because even though you may put it in your lease that they need to be leashed, chances are they will both want to let their dogs use the fenced in yard. I would require this regardless of breed. 

@Jen W.

I purposely obtained an homeowners insurance policy with breed restrictions. First, insurance companies make their money by assessing for increased liability and charging appropriately or setting restrictions. I believe I am limiting my liability by adhering to the breeds they restrict. Secondly, people love to give sob stories, lie about the breed, give lengthy monologues about how “well-behaved” their particular dog is, or not disclosing initially then calling it an ESA after lease signing. My insurance gives me an easy way out of renting to people with these breeds.

If you do allow them: make sure you have a vet certify the age, breed, and current vaccinations. This keeps people from calling every bully breed a “lab mix”, and further covers you Incase something happens.

Next, I “require” they carry renters insurance with dog bite coverage. I only look at their initial policy, so they could cancel it the second after signing the lease. But I still think this limits my liability should something happen.

Finally, I have an addendum that asks questions about past behavior (past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior). Has your dog ever bit anyone? Has your dog ever acted aggressively? Has anyone ever filed a complaint against your dog with any formal agency? Again, they could lie, but it would help you in court if anything happened.

Finally, I would NEVER allow two of these breeds. They can form a pack mentality and gang up on other dogs/humans. And personally, I’ve never been desperate enough to rent to a bully breed. It’s too much liability. It also makes me question the type of person who gets a breed that makes it very difficult to find a home when they are still renting ... seems like an impulsive and irresponsible choice.

@Jen W.   Fellow investor from Chicago here.

I have restrictions on large dogs and Pit Bulls.  I tell them that the dog is an insurance liability.

In our city, Pit Bulls are quite popular pets.