10 dumb reasons for refusing a dog

This column first appeared in Domain. You can read all the original posts and responses HERE.

When the strata reforms come into force next year, instead of the rule that says you can’t have a pet without permission, it will say you can have a pet unless permission is specifically refused.  Then, as now, permission must not be unreasonably withheld.

And before the anti-pet brigade start straining at the leash, existing by-laws will stay the same.  This will apply only to new schemes or schemes that change their by-laws accordingly.

But what is unreasonable? Flatchatter Wolf, writes that, having established that there was no anti-pet by-law and that pets had never been refused in his pre-purchase strata checks, he bought a flat then sought permission to bring a rescue dog into his home.

However, when he applied to the executive committee for permission, he was refused on the grounds that “we have never had dogs”.

Now, that may be a statement of fact but it’s not a reason.  Any reasonable person looking at the by-law, then failing to find any record of permission for dogs being refused, might reasonably (that word again) assume that dogs were not banned.

So Wolf went back to the committee and pointed this out.  Its rusted-on members responded with 10 reasons dogs weren’t allowed, none of which had been discussed at the meeting.

Here they are: dogs were inappropriate in apartments; the dog would bark and make noise; the dog will soil or damage common property; Occupational Health and Safety concerns; potential dog smell; the building had elderly people, children and veggie gardens; wear and tear on carpet in common property; the dog would frighten people; strata insurance liability would be affected; concerns about providing external service providers with keys to walk to the dog.

You can read my responses to each of those ridiculous statements here but suffice it to say that there are laws to deal with nuisance animals, even when they’ve been permitted.

However, taking this to new lows of ludicrousness, a Tribunal adjudicator agreed with the committee. The spirit of the old CTTT clown show lives on in NCAT.

Meanwhile the committee tried to push a dog banning by-law through a general meeting but lost the vote.

See, you can ban pets from a block, provided 75 percent of voters at a meeting agree.  About half of Wolf’s neighbours didn’t so there is still no dog ban.

You can read the whole shaggy dog story here, including the result of Wolf’s NCAT appeal on the Flat Chat Forum.