- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 4 weeks ago by .
-
Topic
-
This week I had an editorial published in the SMH about the changes in the residential tenancy laws that will make it harder for landlords to refuse permission for their tenants to have pets. One reader took great exception to it and, as he thinks his view may not make it to the SMH letters pages, I reproduce his email to me here:
Dear Thompson (sic),
Read your missive in the SMH. this morning. Have written a response to the Herald with no possibility of of it being published.
Hope a few at the Heraldwill read it.
I find your position on animals as toys , possessions and your advocacy for keeping roaming animals in confined spaces and alone most of their lives as reprehensible and in need of rethinking.
I recommended a further reading by yourself and suggest as a start : Run,Spot,Run. On the “ETHICS of KEEPING PETS. “
By Jessica Pierce , The University of Chicago Press.
I’m thinking of writing my own rubbish .working title
Greyhounds on level 27. Dog shit in the lifts and on the carpetThe opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
-
Replies
-
With that sort of attitude, I’d accept the dog as a tenant but not the person!
I am a (good) landlord….and do not want to rent to someone with a pet. Therefore, will take property off rental market if necessary.Having downsized to apartment living, I can fully understand residents concerned about free for all with pets…yapping & barking being major problems, as well as not being properly trained.It is not as simple to “evict” an animal as it is made out to be. And can easily cause ill will amongst residents.We were always pet owners until downsizing.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.