by jcwitt

Created on: February 10, 2009

Charging pet owners a deposit fee isn't a matter of fair or unfair, but of liability.

Pets can cause serious damage to a home, whether it be a stained carpet, a scratched up door, or a lingering odor. Now I know that most people will house train their dogs, litter train their cats, and cage their rodents and birds...but accidents happen. Be honest, how many times have you been too busy to notice your dog whining at the door? Or what about that male cat you waited just a few months to long to have neutered. I know from experience, if these messes aren't cleaned up soon enough, and properly, there will be a stain or smell that stays behind.

It is for this reason that the pet deposit is necessary; to protect the interests of the owner. New carpet isn't cheap, and even if you can get just the affected area replaced, it is difficult to find a good, let alone perfect match. Even though some of these instances may be small, it will ultimately affect the profit of the apartment owners business; because that, whether you want to admit it or not, is exactly what an apartment complex is. Office or not, you are exchanging money with the landlord for a service, and that service is housing. If you move out and there is damage left behind you can't expect the owner to just shell out the money from his own pocket.

Another consideration is the health issue. Some people can be quite allergic to pet dander, and if the residents of an apartment complex can have pets, without any limitation, this could prevent one who is allergic from moving in, which once again will reduce the owners income. So, even if you may think it is unfair, you have to realize that if you rent an apartment, though you may call it your home, it is someones business and livelihood.

Finally, of course, comes the safety issue. Just because your pet is trained, doesn't mean it is not an animal; and animals, no matter how domesticated they may be, are creatures of instinct and dominance. Seeing two dogs fight I often hear the owners say "oh, they're just playing". With just a few minutes of research one will learn that this "playing" is more practice than anything else. It is how they learn to fight, and to kill. Though they may be mankind's companions, they are still creatures from the wild. Creatures who have no doubt that "survival of the fittest" isn't a theory, but a law of the world. This playing prepares them for the hunt, to defend themselves, and shows dominance over the loser. If, for some reason, an animal feels threatened it will attack, and this "playing" is how the learn to do it. With the justice system the way it is, such an attack can be partially blamed on the apartment owner if you have a decent enough lawyer, and once again will result in a loss of profit and income.

So, should pet owners be charged extra money to live an apartment? Yes, absolutely; though you may feel it is unfair, having a pet is a choice; and allowing a resident to own a pet in your apartment building is a liability. You can choose not to have a pet, but to expect a land owner to simply pay for any damage caused by your animal out of pocket, thus impeding on his right to free enterprise, is not just selfish, but ludicrous.

Learn more about this author, jcwitt.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.