#Km91#@sh.itjust.works to Funny@sh.itjust.works · 5 days agoWe are good up to Leopards. Sorry about the Tiger.sh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square35fedilinkarrow-up1459
arrow-up1459imageWe are good up to Leopards. Sorry about the Tiger.sh.itjust.works#Km91#@sh.itjust.works to Funny@sh.itjust.works · 5 days agomessage-square35fedilink
minus-squarePyr@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up2·4 days agoI don’t think ita unreasonable to do so, but it should not be in addition to the deposit. Should be one or the other. Like, over time it’s more likely for damage from pets to build up and can easily get over $250 after a year or two. But good luck getting over $250 damage in 2-3 months. So I would see it reasonable to charge per month per pet, in the assumption that there will be damages to fix building up over time.
minus-squarePup Biru@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-24 days agodeposit is the only acceptable thing here… rent? no way! you don’t pay rent per person in the house. the landlord is losing nothing per month for your pet the potential damages come from the additional deposit/bond
minus-squareHertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·3 days agoSo a pet should have a deposit or added rent but not a child? Or a second tenant? Is none of this the point of an overall damage deposit Slippery fuckin slope.
minus-squarejumping redditor [they/them]@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up0·2 days agolandlord can’t legally charge more for children
minus-squareHertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 days agoHmm I wonder why, maybe because they tried and people were sensible enough to push back.
I don’t think ita unreasonable to do so, but it should not be in addition to the deposit. Should be one or the other.
Like, over time it’s more likely for damage from pets to build up and can easily get over $250 after a year or two.
But good luck getting over $250 damage in 2-3 months.
So I would see it reasonable to charge per month per pet, in the assumption that there will be damages to fix building up over time.
deposit is the only acceptable thing here… rent? no way! you don’t pay rent per person in the house. the landlord is losing nothing per month for your pet
the potential damages come from the additional deposit/bond
So a pet should have a deposit or added rent but not a child? Or a second tenant? Is none of this the point of an overall damage deposit
Slippery fuckin slope.
landlord can’t legally charge more for children
Hmm I wonder why, maybe because they tried and people were sensible enough to push back.