renters vs. owners pet rules

Rules clearly state that renters may not have any pets. However, owners may, and do. Flagrant violations on the part of owners regarding their pets, (pets off-leash, failure to pick up after dogs, dogs left unattended and leashed outside) ). I recently rented my home to tenants who own pets (1 small dog, three indoor cats) based on the word of 2 board members who verbally told both me and my husband that pets were not an issue for renters. Tenants moved in, board members visually saw pets, said nothing. One month later, neighbor returned from up North, saw pets and filed complaint on the grounds that "rules are rules" and renters may not have pets. Two board members now deny saying pets were o.k. Tenants were ordered to remove pets, based on "no pets for renters" rule. Tenants refused. I was given a fine of $25 per day until all pets were removed, or the amount of $1000 was reached. This breaks down to 40 days. Before the 40 days was up, (and I did pay the fine weekly) a notice of eviction was sent by the Board's attorney to my tenants (they went to the wife's place of employment and served her there, as well as going to the home) that they were to vacate in 7 days. No one contacted me.
Two questions: Even though the rules state that pets are not allowed for renters, isn't this illegal, since it is discriminatory? Also, does an HOA have the legal right to evict my tenant against my wishes, without notifying me, and trying to force them out in 7 days?

The rules are in the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions. Clearly written. I questioned this because a few years ago, when I was not interested in renting, a newsletter had been circulated concerning the "no pet for renters" issue, and the discussion was "should we or shouldn't we". Not knowing the outcome, I asked the pres & vice-pres if we were enforcing the no pet rule. They both said no. Stupid me did not get this in writing!! However, I then advertised that pets were o.k., advised my realtor to do the same, and accepted tenants with pets. When pres and vice pres saw the animals, they said nothing.

Hi Lisa:

Possibly yes they can limit, but it is starting to become more of an issue with various legal challenges. Have not seen any case law information on this specific renter issue yet, but I really hate seeing HOA’s with non-equal rules. Personally the issue I have here is that you are the Owner of the unit and as long as rentals are allowed and owners are allowed pets, then it should be your choice whether or not to allow renters to have pets on your property.

This one personally irritates me because if other people in your building/association have pets it somewhat can be an issue of determining a selective enforcement of the rules. To me it is discriminating against an owner renting their unit being denied a privilege regarding their property for which they pay the same assessments as everyone else in the association and said property is being submitted to a different rule when rented. Either allow pets in all units or disallow in all units and don't take unit rights with subset regulations pertaining to only certain units.

The HOA potentially should not have the legal right to evict your tenant. If they think so then be sure to ask them for the State Law Statute giving them the authority … I have not looked, but would bet there potentially is no such authority. The association can go after the Owner as a member and owner of property for CCR violations. The rental agreement is between an Owner and the Tenant and falls under other Landlord Tenant State Statutes. Possibly if an association wants they could file a lawsuit and request the Court to evict a tenant as in this case:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1548336.html

We are not attorneys and you potentially may want to at least consult with one on your issues. Some will offer a short 20-30 minute consultation for free to determine if there are any legal violations or remedies.

Hi Ellie:

I did not find that, but remember it from the past and was looking … Thank you. While it is not case law it was from the FL regulation division and I did remember something about not allowing pets for rentals to be potentially enforceable.

Never mind you did address in a response that in CCR's. Therefore, those are potentially absolutely legally binding unless violates any law which supersedes.

IANAL, but i think the HOA has very little legal right to evict your tenants. Maybe Zero.

AS far as the pet policy, it is perfectly legal to discriminate on all kinds of basis. Eye color, rental status, hair color, musical preference, occupation, profession and type of car driven are all legal discrimination.

Race, creed, color, gender, veteran status, and religion are typically protected, however, from discrimination.

The HOA can NOT interfere with the contract of an owner. This means they can't put restrictions on renters or rental. The HOA is over stepping it's bounds by even having that rule. They HOA would also need to show you were they have a fine system in place for such violations.

I don't believe they can evict your tenant. There are such a thing called "Tenant's rights" which even owner's can't violate. It can take over a year to evict a non-paying tenant in some states due to the way laws are written for Tenants. Even if it was fair and square eviction you did to your own tenant, they should have atleast 2 notices for 10 days a piece excluding weekends and holidays.

The HOA is wrong on this and I would fight it. However, I would fight it with a group of other owners who feel the same way. That way it's more a majority issue than just yours. It will help to get a majority on your side to change that rule. Good luck!

Lisa, this is a crazy rule, but most likely valid and can be enforced. But if they want stupid rules why don't you play stupid with them.

Sign a options sale contract with your tenant. Something that basically says that they are buying your property for a set amount (make it high so they don't actually buy it ). Give them an option to pay you in monthly installments for as long as they like and in return you'll credit some percentage of that payment to their purchase price. The monthly installment equals to the rent amount. That will technically make them owners of the property and they can have their pet.

Having that contract lives you very protected as it's not recorded in the county if you make the purchase amount high enough they'll never exercise it it.

Lisa:

Even IF you were given written statements by the Pres. and VP they DO NOT alone have the authority to simply determine what rules will be enforced or which will be "overlooked". Their turn a blind eye approval would not supercede the property's rules.

As far as your case for discrimination IMO by your ownership you agreed to abide by the governing documents of the property. You stated you knew that such a rule existed and you knowingly violated that same rule. Good luck in court standing on those legs. You want to fight your own Board over a discrimination charge be prepared for a long, costly and bitter battle.

On its face the eviction order seems to out of line as you have a contract with your tenant not the Board. I would be very careful though because if the property's attorney saw fit to issue such an order (unless of course they are complete idiots) I would guess they understand they have some legal right to do so. Again, those answers would be found either in your documents or state law.

To fight this matter properly you will need a lawyer versed in HOA/condo law. Now whether that fight and the final cost of that battle will be worth it to you is your decision. Myself I would simply work to be in compliance with the rules and therefore provide myslef wih a stress free
existence.

The legal system will not always provide you with the perfect outcome you seek. It rarely does.

Two questions: Even though the rules state that pets are not allowed for renters, isn't this illegal, since it is discriminatory? Also, does an HOA have the legal right to evict my tenant against my wishes, without notifying me, and trying to force them out in 7 days?

If the rule was properly enacted AND properly noticed then no it is not automatically discriminatory. The eviction is another matter, as I read FL 720.3085 Payment for assessments; lien claims.— The only time the BOD has the power to initiate eviction proceedings is if you the homeowner are delinquent in your assessments and the tenant refuses to pay the assessment which is allowed under FL law.

2.(d)  The association may issue notice under s. 83.56 and sue for eviction under ss. 83.59-83.625 as if the association were a landlord under part II of chapter 83 if the tenant fails to pay a monetary obligation. However, the association is not otherwise considered a landlord under chapter 83 and specifically has no obligations under s. 83.51.

UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING IN YOUR CC&R'S THAT SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS IT.

CC&R's can NOT exceed or supercede county, state, or federal law. Meaning they may have such things written in them but they aren't applicable. Removing tenants is one of those areas. There are things such as "Tenant Laws" that even an owner can't touch. They are the ones with the contract.

Believe me, I've had the nightmare tenants that took me 5 months to remove from my property. I practically sold the house from under them to get them out. The HOA couldn't do anything as I was paying my dues on the property and we had no fine schedule set up to enforce. A HOA can't make erroneous fines to enforce rules if the CC&R's don't spell out what price they have to pay. It's a HOA falacy.

Sounds like a nosy neighbor stepped into this situation and initiated the actions. Which just dragged ALL the owners into this fight. Most likely against their will or knowledge as well. Simply put the HOA has over reached it's grasp and put itself in a bad situation. HOA's are NOT run by experts with legal knowledge. They are run by that nosy old crazy cat lady that lives down the street that attends meetings every week. So it's time to correct them and stop this at the bud. They can NOT evict a tenant nor can they do it behind the owner's back. Sorry but there's no other way to argue this but the HOA being wrong and going to the court house to correct it.

only a court of law can issue an eviction notice

(even the property owner can't, they may petition the court for one, or they may call local LE for 'trespass', but, they better be darn sure of their legal footing)

perhaps the HOA is ATTEMPTING to get an eviction notice issued by a court of law?

if so ... they will most probably lose, and 'eat' all the costs involved

do we not all speak english and know just a LITTLE common law?