Pet deposit

[PayrollHRGuy]

The OP seems to also not have the written permission required by the lease to have a pet. But my post was just about what a reasonably intelligent human should do in a situation so there won't be a problem in the future.

 

[xylene]

reasonable person blah blah blah

Are landlords now bound to a reasonable person standard for mistakes that favor them? Asking for a friend.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

My post wasn't meant to suggest anyone was bound by anything. It was a suggestion the to OP and those that read this thread in the future to pay attention to what they are signing and ask questions if they don't understand. Much easier than sueing or getting sued later.

 

[HRZ]

Apparently pets were listed in application and IF the LLs agent gave OP the pet addendum filled in $0 $0 one sure could argue that agent bound LL to said deal it's not just a printed form but the specific markings of the parties as to the deal....LL/agent created the ambiguity if there is one

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Apparently they weren't because the OP has admitted that she doesn't have "written permission" to have the dogs.

 

[SiliconDawn]

I'm certainly not a lawyer but in my personal experience of renting in the past with pets the lease with the pet rent or pet deposit listed in it was the "written permission". I've never been given a separate page stating permission. If it wasn't allowed in the lease the LLs would always cross out the pet section or specifically write in "no pets" in that area. By specifically putting $0 pet deposit and $0 pet rent I, as a tenant, would take that to mean they were aware of the pets (especially if I wrote it on the application, not exactly trying to hide them) and that permission was granted with no extra cost. At least that's how it would sound to me as a tenant.

 

[HRZ]

I'm certainly not a lawyer but in my personal experience of renting in the past with pets the lease with the pet rent or pet deposit listed in it was the "written permission". I've never been given a separate page stating permission. If it wasn't allowed in the lease the LLs would always cross out the pet section or specifically write in "no pets" in that area. By specifically putting $0 pet deposit and $0 pet rent I, as a tenant, would take that to mean they were aware of the pets (especially if I wrote it on the application, not exactly trying to hide them) and that permission was granted with no extra cost. At least that's how it would sound to me as a tenant.

AS a LL, I'll bet that's how the local DJ would see it if I took it to her courtroom ...tenants get benefit of every LL or his agents ambiguity .