Limits monthly pet rent to one percent of a rental unit's rent and prohibits nonrefundable pet fees, with certain exceptions.
relative to pet-related fees and rent in residential tenancies.
Pet rent is an additional expense to owning a pet that has become extremely expensive. I have one cat, ONE. And I have to pay $55 a month to have him in my apartment. This is in addition to the $250 non-refundable pet deposit I paid upon moving in. I hope we can pass this bill to cap the rising cost of pet rent.
Please keep this in mind, as you consider HB 1553. I am confident this Bill is a good one and will benefit our pet-friendly housing community: "Being unable to find affordable, pet-friendly housing is one of the top reasons people surrender pets to shelters or offer them to strangers on Craigslist and similar platforms. Either way, this consequence can be devastating to the pet in question, whether given to a stranger (who could be a violent criminal) or surrendered to a shelter, where they could be killed." Please SUPPORT HB 1553. Thank you!
There is a serious shortage of affordable housing. Tacking on ridiculously high pet fees onto the rent leads to pet surrenders to shelters which are already stressed to care for pets surrendered because of rising costs of living.. Caps on fees or a 1% fee based on the rent may help people keep their beloved pets.
As someone who rented property with a companion animal and paid a monthly fee, I understand that animal companions cost money and that the monthly charge helps cushion the landlord from damages caused by a pet in the case of eviction or refusal to pay damages. However, even 1% of rent extrapolated over an entire year is a significant cost in which damages can and are able to be repaired. Consider this a preferable alternative to either individuals being unable to obtain or keep adequate housing, or additional companion animals overcrowding shelters or being let out on the streets. Thank you.
I urge you to pass HB 1553 so pet owners who rent have more affordable options for housing. Thank you.
Vote ITL because: ~This will be very harmful to pet owners by driving many more landlords to just simply not accept pets. ~Does not allow recouping for extra management troubles when there is a pet ~1% of rent is insignificant to the cost of pet damage and extra management. This is a total joke. ~540-D:4 II expecting bad acting tenants are actually going to pay for their damage is also a joke. ~No distinguishing between different types and sizes of pets that cause different amounts of damage. ~Multiple pets cause multiple damage and multiple extra management effort ~A pet is a choice, not a right ~540-D:3 would defeat benefits of HB1336 for marginally qualified tenants ~540-D:3 deposit limit is already covered in present law and not needed. ~Service and support animals are already protected. The 540-D:4 I provision is unnecessary
Kitties and puppies are cute. But they scratch floors. They pee. They shed. And sometimes they vomit and poop especially when they are sick. They do these things no matter how sweet, how adorable, or how well loved they are. Responsible landlords need to consider these expenses when they determine pet rent. (A pet security deposit is not allowed in NH.) They do not need an arbitrary and low-balled cap imposed by the legislature. If HB1553 passes, landlords will likely ban pets or calculate a rent that passes pet damage costs along to all tenants.
Excessive pet fees disproportionately affect renters and families. Reasonable limits help keep housing accessible while allowing responsible pet ownership.
This limitation will cause more landlords to ban pets entirely
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.