Association Wants To Enact The One Bite Rule w/Dogs

ElizabethM11 (Wisconsin)
Posts: 16

Posted:

The association attorney has also mentioned implementing the one bite rule. Because many insurance companies refuse to pay out after the first bite claim, it could make the association liable should a dog bite a second time. To unburden the association of that liability, the association would like to enact the one bite rule. Should the association enact this rule, it would deny a dog the privilege of being here with its owner if it’s already bitten someone. In addition, anyone looking to purchase or rent with Meadowland Villa wouldn’t be allowed to bring their dog with them in the event it’s already bitten someone. There was some hesitation with committee members as to whether or not this rule should be enacted.

I'd like to be more knowledgeable about this before I can actually support it because right now I'm not so sure this is a good idea.

Does our association really need to enact such a rule?

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836

Posted:

Why is your HOA responsible for a dog bite in the first place? Am I missing something here? Animal bites are treated by animal control just like all other animal enforcement should be. The HOA may have restrictions on size/type. Pets are considered "Property". So property laws/rules would apply to them for the most part. It's the owner's who own the "property" and thus would be responsible.

Former HOA President

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

We put the issue on the owner and the County.

Our rule is if the County deems the animal dangerous, they must be muzzled when on common area.

If an animal bites, we request that the individual inform the County, as they have far more authority over this issue then the Association. If the individual does not want to inform the County (yes, there are those who don't) then the Associations hands are tied beyond sending a letter to the owner stating the Association is aware of the issue.

DouglasM6 (Arizona)
Posts: 724

Posted:

Do your governing documents say the HOA will mitigate bites? I'm with Tim on this being a county issue, not HOA.

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836

Posted:

Also want to include that dog bits are under the homeowner's policy not the HOA's. The HOA doesn't own the dogs. If a dog bites, it is to be reported to animal control. They take the report for history/records. Depending on the local laws, the dog may be tested for rabies, returned, removed, or euthanized.

The dogs known to bite the most a are small dogs. Not the larger or dangerous breeds as everyone ASSUMES. Your more likely to get bit by a Chihuahua than a German Shepard. Don't think the HOA is equipped to handle those kind of situations fairly. It's best left to the professionals, attorneys, and insurance companies to sort it all out.

Former HOA President

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Elizabeth

I agree with the other posters. This is not an associations issue. You are not Animal Control.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Is "the one-bite rule" something that is widespread? Have you read about it at other sources, Elizabeth? why do owners' insurance matter? Are you saying the HOA has insurance about dog bites?

As an elevator building with interior corridors, we have many rules about dogs. he county, after all, is not about to come into our building when a dog pees in an elevator or is off-leash in a hallway or other interior common area, or is in the pool area at all.

We have never had to do this, but would order an Owner muzzle a dog that has bitten someone on our premises. Another building nearby has penalized one owner by demanding the dog ride in a crate at all times on the premises. The owner has a wagon.

BenA2 (Texas)
Posts: 1,273

Posted:

I agree with the others. Also, implementing a rule such as this may create a duty you don't currently have. I'm not an attorney but an attorney explained to me once that making rules for something you are not responsible for can create a duty. For example, if a dog bites someone, in most cases an HOA would not be liable. The dog is the owner's responsibility and the HOA has no duty to protect residents from it. But, if an HOA has a rule that dogs with a bite history are banned, the HOA can be held liable if they neglect to keep all dogs with bite histories out.

I would ask your attorney for the pros and cons of having such a policy.

BenA2 (Texas)
Posts: 1,273

Posted:

I agree with the others. Also, implementing a rule such as this may create a duty you don't currently have. I'm not an attorney but an attorney explained to me once that making rules for something you are not responsible for can create a duty. For example, if a dog bites someone, in most cases an HOA would not be liable. The dog is the owner's responsibility and the HOA has no duty to protect residents from it. But, if an HOA has a rule that dogs with a bite history are banned, the HOA can be held liable if they neglect to keep all dogs with bite histories out.

I would ask your attorney for the pros and cons of having such a policy.

JanetB2 (Colorado)
Posts: 4,219

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 04/19/2018 4:46 PM
Elizabeth

I agree with the other posters. This is not an associations issue. You are not Animal Control.

True ... UNLESS the HOA has superceeded Local or State Statutes. This is why many, many, many times I keep stating the HOA’s should NOT supercede these laws. Most government laws (State, County, or City) will state for example “All dogs must be on a leash.” However, if you have the same verbiage in your CCR’s you will SUPERCEDE other laws. The HOA then makes themselves liable above and beyond the local laws when it comes to any LAWSUIT.

Local Government’s love idiot HOA’s who will supercede their laws. WHY ... because if there is ever an issue the local government will point their finger to the HOA. After all the HOA is easier to sue vs the local government. When my local government on any issue asks if I have an HOA and when state yes ... they try to tell me the HOA can implement in their CCR’s verbiage to take care of the issue. My response is why on earth would my HOA want to take on the LEGAL LIABILITY for any issue which YOU have any such liability via YOUR OWN LAWS on the books. If you passed those LAWS then YOU have the liability to enforce those laws.

Also, keep in mind the HOA is volunteers and are NOT properly trained Animal Control Officers. Leave the liability in their hands as properly trained professionals.

BenA2 (Texas)
Posts: 1,273

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JanetB2 on 04/22/2018 9:01 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 04/19/2018 4:46 PM
Elizabeth

I agree with the other posters. This is not an associations issue. You are not Animal Control.

True ... UNLESS the HOA has superceeded Local or State Statutes. This is why many, many, many times I keep stating the HOA’s should NOT supercede these laws. Most government laws (State, County, or City) will state for example “All dogs must be on a leash.” However, if you have the same verbiage in your CCR’s you will SUPERCEDE other laws. The HOA then makes themselves liable above and beyond the local laws when it comes to any LAWSUIT.

Local Government’s love idiot HOA’s who will supercede their laws. WHY ... because if there is ever an issue the local government will point their finger to the HOA. After all the HOA is easier to sue vs the local government. When my local government on any issue asks if I have an HOA and when state yes ... they try to tell me the HOA can implement in their CCR’s verbiage to take care of the issue. My response is why on earth would my HOA want to take on the LEGAL LIABILITY for any issue which YOU have any such liability via YOUR OWN LAWS on the books. If you passed those LAWS then YOU have the liability to enforce those laws.

Also, keep in mind the HOA is volunteers and are NOT properly trained Animal Control Officers. Leave the liability in their hands as properly trained professionals.

I agree an HOA can create a liability and it is usually better to use local laws instead, but the CC&Rs and HOA rules do not supersede or have any effect on laws. Laws are always superior to the CC&Rs and rules.

JanetB2 (Colorado)
Posts: 4,219

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By BenA2 on 04/22/2018 9:30 PM

Posted By JanetB2 on 04/22/2018 9:01 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 04/19/2018 4:46 PM
Elizabeth

I agree with the other posters. This is not an associations issue. You are not Animal Control.

True ... UNLESS the HOA has superceeded Local or State Statutes. This is why many, many, many times I keep stating the HOA’s should NOT supercede these laws. Most government laws (State, County, or City) will state for example “All dogs must be on a leash.” However, if you have the same verbiage in your CCR’s you will SUPERCEDE other laws. The HOA then makes themselves liable above and beyond the local laws when it comes to any LAWSUIT.

Local Government’s love idiot HOA’s who will supercede their laws. WHY ... because if there is ever an issue the local government will point their finger to the HOA. After all the HOA is easier to sue vs the local government. When my local government on any issue asks if I have an HOA and when state yes ... they try to tell me the HOA can implement in their CCR’s verbiage to take care of the issue. My response is why on earth would my HOA want to take on the LEGAL LIABILITY for any issue which YOU have any such liability via YOUR OWN LAWS on the books. If you passed those LAWS then YOU have the liability to enforce those laws.

Also, keep in mind the HOA is volunteers and are NOT properly trained Animal Control Officers. Leave the liability in their hands as properly trained professionals.

I agree an HOA can create a liability and it is usually better to use local laws instead, but the CC&Rs and HOA rules do not supersede or have any effect on laws. Laws are always superior to the CC&Rs and rules.

Better check your State Statutes ... because in my State the HOA can supercede local laws and the HOA then takes on the legal liability. For example if my local government allows chickens ... the HOA can disallow chickens in the CCR’s. The City Law is NOT superior to the CCR’s when an owner violates and has chickens. So therefore your statement would be incorrect in my State and also in many others.

GenoS (Florida)
Posts: 4,276

Posted:

Isn't Colorado sort of unique with its Home Rule laws? No wonder Perry Mason moved his practice to Denver in '85. The whole idea sounds like a make-work scheme to benefit lawyers.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

I hear the other posters here about not creating a duty. Yet for noe, I think there is always a duty to keep the HOA common areas safe. I grant that wen it is unsafe is subject to debate. To me it comes down to foreseeability. Is it foreseeable that a person could bring something dangerous onto a common area? Certainly, and I think most or all HOAs have rules on the point. Should that something be regulated with particularity? I think in some instances, yes. For example, when a dog has bitten once or shown signs of similar aggression. The following articles argue thusly.

"The Board of Directors of [a HOA has] a fiduciary duty to manage and operate the common areas, including making them safe and warning of any known dangerous conditions." --https://dogbitelaw.com/homeowner-association-liability-for-dog-bites/homeowner-association-liability-for-dog-bites

"... [S]ome common principles do apply across most states. One of those principles is that landowners do bear some legal duty to take reasonable actions to prevent injuries from occurring to people on the property, whether they be residents, invited guests, or even known trespassers (e.g. children who frequently come from outside a community to use its common areas)." -- https://goodlaw.legal/hoa-liable-dog-bite-common-area/

"Homeowner associations (HOAs) also called property owner associations (POAs) may be liable when a dog bites a person in a common area owned by the association. A homeowner association may be found responsible for the attack under several different scenarios. The board of directors of the associations have a fiduciary duty to the members to maintain the property. These duties include keeping the property safe and warning of known dangers." -- https://www.oharaattorney.com/news/homeowner-association-liability-for-dog-attack/

A case where the HOA ordered a dog tied up but the HOA was still found liable:
http://condolawguru.com/2012/07/dangerous-dogs-list-hoas-take-heed/

KellyM3 (North Carolina)
Posts: 2,239

Posted:

Check Wisconsin law as well as your local ordinances WELL BEFORE considering amending HOA rules to address pet behavior. This is the domain of your local animal control officer and police department.

In our case here in North Carolina, the dog is considered the private property of the pet owner w/ all restraints and burden of safety falling on that pet owner. Yes, there is a "one bite" rule on the books for legal purposes but it's the second bite that can cause a pet owner big problems, including having an animal registered as officially "vicious."

We even manage a dog park and our insurance company has no issue w/ it at all. We consulted with them prior to creating it and the laws can be pretty straight-forward. A dog belongs to the pet owner. It's not the HOA's business to tell a person where to walk (dog or not) when there's the effect of law enforcement overriding any rules.

KellyM3 (North Carolina)
Posts: 2,239

Posted:

Is it foreseeable that a person could bring something dangerous onto a common area?

No, not from the perspective of a common area that's owned by every property owner in the community and merely managed by a volunteer board of directors.

Should that something be regulated with particularity?

Not necessarily as, in this case, it's unreasonable to have board members patrolling common areas for "targeted resident pet owners."

"The Board of Directors of [a HOA has] a fiduciary duty to manage and operate the common areas, including making them safe and warning of any known dangerous conditions." --https://dogbitelaw.com/homeowner-association-liability-for-dog-bites/homeowner-association-liability-for-dog-bites

A dog walker, with an angry animal, is a transient situation. They temporarily walk the common grounds, then the "threat" leaves. Plus, the dog is considered "property" - as such is outside an HOA domain. Once again, a policy from an HOA will not inhibit a person's actions and is practically unenforceable.

"... [S]ome common principles do apply across most states. One of those principles is that landowners do bear some legal duty to take reasonable actions to prevent injuries from occurring to people on the property, whether they be residents, invited guests, or even known trespassers (e.g. children who frequently come from outside a community to use its common areas)." -- https://goodlaw.legal/hoa-liable-dog-bite-common-area/

Having residents informed to notify Animal Control/Police when incidents occur IS a proactive measure that HOAs can undertake to protect its residents and increase safety.

"Homeowner associations (HOAs) also called property owner associations (POAs) may be liable when a dog bites a person in a common area owned by the association. A homeowner association may be found responsible for the attack under several different scenarios. The board of directors of the associations have a fiduciary duty to the members to maintain the property. These duties include keeping the property safe and warning of known dangers." -- https://www.oharaattorney.com/news/homeowner-association-liability-for-dog-attack/

This is lawyer-speak and a bitten person, prone to filing suits, will sue the HOA regardless of the law. The HOA maintains the property. The offensive dog owner must "maintain their property" as well. The article above involves HOAs being liable for not addressing an aggressive animal encounter in any way shape or form, thus ignoring any advice or action.

A case where the HOA ordered a dog tied up but the HOA was still found liable:
http://condolawguru.com/2012/07/dangerous-dogs-list-hoas-take-heed/

The case you mentioned involves the HOA handling the vicious dog situation and not involving the police or Animal Control officials. In that case, the HOA DID NOT follow acceptable practices. Besides, the article above is written by a lawyer who recommends banning pets from condos. Not realistic or practical for most condos or HOA communities.

This is a great topic for discussion and my answers to the poster's questions are not meant to draw emotion but offer a counter-opinion on a complex topic. I've had experience dealing w/ creating a community dog park, managed by our HOA, as well as single bites and multiple issues w/ a dog.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By KellyM3 on 04/23/2018 8:09 AM
Is it foreseeable that a person could bring something dangerous onto a common area?
[snip]
This is lawyer-speak and a bitten person, prone to filing suits, will sue the HOA regardless of the law.

If it's not foreseeable, then why does the typical HOA have rules about not conducting dangerous activities on the common areas?

Regarding the addage, "Someone will always sue": To me, the issue becomes, among other things but significantly, foreseeability and who has the deep pockets. If a bite or viciousness had occurred previously, and the HOA knew about it, did it take actions to prevent this? For one, you and others are saying to put the ball in the court of either the county, ordinance, or whatever municipal animal control service that exists. Suppose the various governments do not act, and the HOA knows it. Should the HOA nag and nag some more to get action from the "experts"? Or should the HOA enact a 'one bite rule' (which is a little more complex than the sound bite version)? To me the point is to minimize liability and to ensure safety. I read about a kid mauled by a dog (it happens too often). If it were my kid, and I knew the HOA knew the dog had bitten someone before, I would want someone to pay. I would want my actions to promote safety. I would see the governing documents (or as noted, general case law) say that a property owner has a duty to ensure the safety of her or his property or in the case of HOAs, the common areas.

The matter-of-fact response KerryL1 wrote seems wise and makes the most sense to me. It is also consistent with what I see on the net.

I try to study the law on these matters and get it right. If someone has a better argument, contrary to my own, I will study it.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

I should have added, Augustine, that if there were a case of someone being bitten by a dog anywhere--exterior or interior of our towers--at our HOA, we'd urge the victim to contact animal control so the dog's on record, along with taking our own steps as an HOA.

JanetB2 (Colorado)
Posts: 4,219

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 04/23/2018 8:31 AM

Posted By KellyM3 on 04/23/2018 8:09 AM
Is it foreseeable that a person could bring something dangerous onto a common area?
[snip]
This is lawyer-speak and a bitten person, prone to filing suits, will sue the HOA regardless of the law.

If it's not foreseeable, then why does the typical HOA have rules about not conducting dangerous activities on the common areas?

Regarding the addage, "Someone will always sue": To me, the issue becomes, among other things but significantly, foreseeability and who has the deep pockets. If a bite or viciousness had occurred previously, and the HOA knew about it, did it take actions to prevent this? For one, you and others are saying to put the ball in the court of either the county, ordinance, or whatever municipal animal control service that exists. Suppose the various governments do not act, and the HOA knows it. Should the HOA nag and nag some more to get action from the "experts"? Or should the HOA enact a 'one bite rule' (which is a little more complex than the sound bite version)? To me the point is to minimize liability and to ensure safety. I read about a kid mauled by a dog (it happens too often). If it were my kid, and I knew the HOA knew the dog had bitten someone before, I would want someone to pay. I would want my actions to promote safety. I would see the governing documents (or as noted, general case law) say that a property owner has a duty to ensure the safety of her or his property or in the case of HOAs, the common areas.

The matter-of-fact response KerryL1 wrote seems wise and makes the most sense to me. It is also consistent with what I see on the net.

I try to study the law on these matters and get it right. If someone has a better argument, contrary to my own, I will study it.

AugustinD ... If my HOA did not supercede the local ordinances and if someone sued the HOA my response to a Judge would be:

Your Honor my HOA does not regulate pets as there are already many State, County, and City laws regarding pets. There is also no LAW which requires my HOA to supercede any local LAW! The members of my HOA are not properly trained in the handling of vicious animals and have left that to the properly trained professionals of our local Animal Control. When the dog bit the individual I did my duty and provided proper first aid as needed and also provided the individual with the telephone number for our local Animal Control who could send out and provide “properly trained” individuals to handle the situation. All Citizens your Honor are supposed to follow ALL laws ... and my HOA is not the Police who are responsible for ensuring that all LAWS are followed. Therefore, I respectfully request that all charges against my HOA be dropped as the HOA has not violated any LAWS or any of the CCR’s regarding this issue.

YEP ... If do not have something stupid such as all dogs must be on a leash in the CCR’s (and dog potentially not on leash where someone could come after the HOA) ... then where is there any violation where the HOA could be held accountable? Again ... people need to follow the law and the HOA is not the police or animal control. If you want someone to pay (if as you stated your kid was bit) ... it should be the “dog owner” (under the law) and not an HOA because they chose to supercede the law. Unfortunately because many HOA’s will supercede they then are looked at as a law suit money pit ... lots of owners can be held accountable for a larger payout.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JanetB2 on 04/25/2018 11:15 PM
... where is there any violation where the HOA could be held accountable?

From my reading,the plaintiff's legal argument would be that the Board had a confirmed report of a dog biting another (or acting aggressively towards others) on its common areas and did nothing. This translates to the Board knowing that an activity endangering the health of others was happening on its common areas and did nothing. The typical HOA's covenants prohibit dangerous activities taking place on its grounds. The HOA's failure to act is a failure to abide by the contract (a.k.a. the covenants).

I suppose the plaintiff might not always win. But as a director, I would not bank on it. If I am on a HOA board and I learn of a complaint of a dog that is documented to have bitten someone on the common areas, at a minimum I would instantly recommend that measures be taken to disallow the dog on the common areas. I would also recommend notifying the HOA insurer. This is for the well-being of the HOA's insurance and minimizing risk to the financial health of the corporation.

I do not think a policy is even necessary. The covenants prohibit dangerous activities. An owner of a dog that has bitten someone or shown aggressive behavior should be told that he or she cannot have such a danger on the common areas (or a muzzle is required, or similar). But it is probably better to have a short policy, so members and the Board are all on the same page.

I grant that whether "aggressive" behavior rises to the level that warrants prohibition of the dog on the common areas (or a muzzle et cetera) will depend on each case and may involve some subjectivity.

I concur that the county or animal control where the HOA is should simultaneously be notified and asked for counsel on how to document a dog who has behaved aggressively with the county or city.

JanetB2 (Colorado)
Posts: 4,219

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 04/26/2018 8:37 AM

Posted By JanetB2 on 04/25/2018 11:15 PM
... where is there any violation where the HOA could be held accountable?

From my reading,the plaintiff's legal argument would be that the Board had a confirmed report of a dog biting another (or acting aggressively towards others) on its common areas and did nothing. This translates to the Board knowing that an activity endangering the health of others was happening on its common areas and did nothing. The typical HOA's covenants prohibit dangerous activities taking place on its grounds. The HOA's failure to act is a failure to abide by the contract (a.k.a. the covenants). LOL ... My current CCR’s nor did my last CCR’s state anything about prohibiting dangerous activities. So ... If a homeowner or a local government had a confirmed report of a dog biting another (or acting aggressively towards others) at a city park or on an owner’s property and did nothing. If that dog later bites or mauled anyone who do you think should or would be held accountable? LOL ... the local government would state the Dog Owner ... unless on HOA property (if HOA regulate pets has a high probability the local government will throw your HOA under the bus) after all the City will do anything to transfer anger and blame elsewhere. The homeowner will state “not my dog” and was trespassing on my property ... which would put the issue back on the Dog Owner. Again ... If you take the State, County, and Local Laws by their “face value” where they state items such as “all dogs must be on a leash” and if anyone DID NOT have their dog on any such leash ... THAT individual is violating those laws. However, if the HOA has same statement ... they then take on that responsibility to enforce.

I suppose the plaintiff might not always win. But as a director, I would not bank on it. If I am on a HOA board and I learn of a complaint of a dog that is documented to have bitten someone on the common areas, at a minimum I would instantly recommend that measures be taken to disallow the dog on the common areas. I would also recommend notifying the HOA insurer. This is for the well-being of the HOA's insurance and minimizing risk to the financial health of the corporation. If I had a complaint of a dog biting anyone on common property I would contact my local PROPERLY TRAINED Animal Control Officers and report the situation. I would also obtain a copy of what the “Properly Trained” professionals did to contain the situation pursuant to the required LAWS ...... Show me any Federal, State, County, or Local, etc. LAW which REQUIRES the HOA to supercede???

I do not think a policy is even necessary. The covenants prohibit dangerous activities. An owner of a dog that has bitten someone or shown aggressive behavior should be told that he or she cannot have such a danger on the common areas (or a muzzle is required, or similar). But it is probably better to have a short policy, so members and the Board are all on the same page. Again ... my CCR’s and potentially others do not prohibit dangerous activities ... potentially it is the LAWS which are supposed to prohibit any such dangerous activities. WE in many HOA’s are not POLICE OFFICERS nor are we “properly trained” ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS. However, you potentially will have some HOA’s and BOD’s who are egotistical and will take on those responsibilities.

I grant that whether "aggressive" behavior rises to the level that warrants prohibition of the dog on the common areas (or a muzzle et cetera) will depend on each case and may involve some subjectivity. Agree ... I do not go by “he said / she said” I want “proof”. Show me a picture of the violation or provide numerous witnesses.

I concur that the county or animal control where the HOA is should simultaneously be notified and asked for counsel on how to document a dog who has behaved aggressively with the county or city. LOL ... counsel??? They will try to tell you that the HOA “can” or “should’ add items to your CCR’s to handle the situation. WHY ... because they know that you will then potentially “supercede” their laws and have higher liability. Local government LOVE these type HOA’s who will take responsibility off their shoulders.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JanetB2 on 05/01/2018 12:13 AM
LOL ... My current CCR’s nor did my last CCR’s state anything about prohibiting dangerous activities.

I guess a HOA that does not prohibit dangerous activites is off the hook. Though I would double check with the HOA's insurer. My HOA's CCRs explicitly prohibit dangerous activities on the common areas.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Dangerous and hazardous can mean the same thing. So, we call to hearing owners who won't clean up fluid leaks in the underground deeded parking spaces or we clean it and bill them $50. Why? Because when the car isn't there, residents walk across these spaces and fluid leaks are a slip hazard.

There are other hazards that HOAs need to take care of, too. like burned out lighting in common areas, protruding tree roots in common areas, etc. IF some complain about these hazards and the HOA does nothing to handle thm, the HOA could be sued for plenty is someone slips or trips and falls, or is assaulted in a dark area. Famous case re: the latter.

JimmmerW (California)
Posts: 1

Posted:

yes - as it was stated why would the hoa be responsible for a owner dog, we have a statement that owners who have animals are totally responsible for there animal 100 percent of the time. they are to have insurance on their responsibility of the animal - if found out they do not insurance, the board can have animal removed from property- We do not care what type of animal it is - small or large, hops or crawls the owner is 100 percent responsible -

JanetB2 (Colorado)
Posts: 4,219

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JimmmerW on 05/01/2018 8:25 PM
yes - as it was stated why would the hoa be responsible for a owner dog, we have a statement that owners who have animals are totally responsible for there animal 100 percent of the time. they are to have insurance on their responsibility of the animal - if found out they do not insurance, the board can have animal removed from property- We do not care what type of animal it is - small or large, hops or crawls the owner is 100 percent responsible -

Amen!!!

Why should XXX number of owners be responsible in a lawsuit for the actions of one owner ... or heaven forbid anyone on “common area property” who is NOT an HOA Owner who has their dog bite anyone. OH ... and that dog was on HOA common property without being on a leash which violated the HOA CCR’s. However, there was no owner or BOD member who enforced or removed that NON OWNER person from the HOA common property (LOL ... because your CCR’s do not allow them to have a dog NOT on Leash).

Most of you guys are not looking outside your HOA BOX and who else could have a dog on your HOA property. Do you govern the neighbor a mile down the road who is walking their dog across your “common area”.

ElizabethM11 (Wisconsin)
Posts: 16

Posted:

Apparently, the association board members are having their attorney draft the one bite rule and figure out a way to track suck information.

JenniferG11 (Texas)
Posts: 667

Posted:

Our docs say the board may remove anyanimal who is deemed potentially dangerous. Perhaps that sort of wording is helpful. Allows you to use discretion.