Pets OK BC reaches 10000 in petition

[seewood]

maryjane48 wrote:Pets OK BC announced today that they have reached their goal of 10,000 signatures for their petition to change the no pets rental restrictions in B.C.Pets OK BC is a movement advocating for the abolition of unreasonable pet restrictions in rental housing across the province of B.C.“We think families with pets should have equal access to housing, equal opportunity, and not face discrimination when it comes to looking for a place to live,” says the organization’s Eliot Galan in an announcement on the Pets OK BC Facebook.

Seems obvious to me Eliot has not thought this through. Last I checked we live in a democratic, for the most part, society and just who is going to have the jurisdiction to enforce this stupid idea? What are the penalties? Just thinking about it says dumb.... Eliot must me seeking an NDP nomination somewhere.....

[Lady tehMa]

I understand people wanting to have a pet. I've had dogs as pets over the years.

But being a responsible pet owner, means thinking of that pet. I would love another dog - but until something changes in my life, that isn't going to happen. We own, but dogs are pack animals, and should not be left alone all day. I know of too many people who have pets but leave them alone for most of the day. Then they can't understand why their pet acts up and destroys things.

My point is that if I, as a homeowner, can see this - why can't renters? At what point are they responsible to the pet? As renters they are also responsible to take care of the property they are living in; despite what they may think, it is not theirs and they have not got the right to damage it.

[LTD]

$2000 dollar damage deposit, $5000 in flooring $20000 in landscaping having some ones pet destroy it, priceless

[flamingfingers]

It's totally and incomprehensible to try and force landlords to accept renters with pets!! It is THE LANDLORD'S private property and the landlord needs total control over HIS/HER private property. There may be issues about discrimination based on color or religious affiliation but I don't believe there are ANY constitutional issues that pertain to discrimination as far as pets are concerned.

[Catsumi]

The world seems to have gone crazy lately so maybe this will see the light of day and become law.

Oh joy! Barking, crapping and possibly even lethal monster dogs to deal with. Even grown adults are not safe from attack and being ripped to ribbons as were that couple who were caught by huge dogs as they tried to get into their apt from the hallway (Vancouver).

Once animals have inhabited a suite the smell will just not go away unless it is taken apart and carpets, drapes, and sometimes floors and walls are replaced.

What a sure fire recipe for neighbour battles.

[mikest2]

Certain to reduce the rental vacancy rate to zero !

[JLives]

Certain to reduce the rental vacancy rate to zero !

How so? Will people who own multiple properties stop renting them out? Not likely. Will properties be put on the market? Will people purchase less properties to rent out? Those sound like good things to bring cost of housing down.

[the truth]

My wife managed two large apartment blocks that allowed pets and after seeing the damage that was done we never allowed pets in any properties we owned and rented. Not everyone was bad but almost every pet apartment was damaged by pets some very badly. IF we were still renting and a law like that came in we would probably stop and sell the properties. You do not make enough money to put up with the possible damage.

agree 100%

[John Crawford]

Just spent $3800.00 moving furniture out, ripping up pee and poop impregnated carpet and underlay from my rental unit because I got soft hearted and allowed a couple to have a small lap dog in the unit.
No point in chasing them via the Residential Tenentcy Branch, as those beuracrats always come down down on the side of the tenants.

[Fancy]

I've seen first hand what renters with pets do to properties and I've seen first hand what some owners allow their pet to do in a home they own. Why take a chance if one doesn't have to?

[seewood]

Last December, pulled the cat *bleep* stained carpet out of my rental suite after legally evicting the tenant and replaced with vinyl plank. $1800.00 fix. Replaced the kitchen cupboards as several had mouse warrens in them, another $700.00
Because of the RTB, no way was I ever going to rent out the suite again as accommodation.

[common_sense_guy]

I think pets okay should mind their own business and stop trying to dictate what rules a landlord imposes for "his"own property that they took all the risk and responsibilities for in purchasing and owning

[common_sense_guy]

I don't believe you people. Children cause far more damage to rental units than animals do. Geez, I hope I never run into any of you animal-haters on the street. You'd probably grab my doggie's leash and strangle him with it.

you are incredibly out to lunch. Hence the reason nobody has liked your comment

[canteloupe]

I am a pet owner AND a landlord of a rental property. I have personally seen much more damage from tenants with children than from pets. A pet deposit can be equal to a damage deposit and should cover the cleaning of flooring as that is usually the only issue if any. I have had to completely tear my condo to the drywall and spend thousands of dollars in renos because of bad tenants with no pets. In my honest opinion, assuming that all pets will cause damage is very narrow minded and ignorant. You can't deny tenancy to a family with children, so why shouldn't the same human rights should apply to those with pets as family members?
People that argue "my property, my decision" are very naive of peoples' general rights. Under the tenancy act of bc you cannot limit what occupants are in your suite, only the number. You can limit whether they smoke inside as that is a law, but you can't tell your tenants who can reside in their home. It is technically their home while they pay rent to you.
I could very easily say I have had poor experiences as a landlord renting to single males or young adult couples, but it would be illegal for me to discriminate and say that I won't rent to people that fall into that category in the future because "all single males and young couples are irresponsible and cause damage" and people would say I'm being unfair.
Humans cause equal if not more damage than pets do and that is just a risk you take as a landlord trusting others to live in your home. I have always allowed pets in my rental and have only ever had to repair damage from the tenants or their children, so I wish people would stop stereotyping pet owners as irresponsible and grow up

[Leifer]

You can't deny tenancy to a family with children, so why shouldn't the same human rights should apply to those with pets as family members?

Because...as much as we love our pets....they are *not* people.
If it comes down to it....I would kill and feed my beloved dogs to starving people to keep them alive.
The opposite...is unthinkable.