• henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The policy here at my area does what used to be called the Japanese No. That is to say that pets are permitted, as is everything, in exchange for an exorbitant fee.

    Good business sense, but in this case, cruel.

    • radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Enter emotional support animal paperwork. A hundred bucks and an autism diagnosis saves me $40 a month in pet rent and a several hundred dollar pet deposit. Landlords hate this!

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Landlords hate it because you force them to incur extra expenses in wear/tear and cleaning. I’m saying this as a person that’s on the spectrum, has owned cats all my life, and has had a cat that destroyed subflooring in an apartment by peeing outside of the litterbox. It was literally $1000 in damage to replace the carpet–this was 20 years ago–and the damaged subflooring, and that was above and beyond the deposit that we’d paid.

        • radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          And yet landlords corporations today have no problem charging “market value” for an individual apartment which fluctuates on a daily basis based on nothing more than what they think they can pump you for. I have no problem with them using some of their own ill-gotten gains for repairs.