Service Animals replacing Service Dogs

As most people know there is a growing trend to recognize that dogs are not the only species of service animals. In Hoosierland it appears that HB 1603 is likely to be enacted, changing "dog" to "animal" and adding mental disability to physical disabilities.

This means that more associations may see residents using rabbits, hamsters, goats, pigs, birds, etc. as service animals for which reasonable accommodations will need to be made.

Just a heads up.

If you check the HUD website under FHA, you will see plenty of cases where people have filed discrimination cases and are being charged. I would say the "general public HOA" should try to get used to seeing what they may not want to or consider unsightly for a reasonable accomadation request or any other that may warrant a discrimination charge. Still under investigation by HUD here for discrimination.

This is a double wammy of ADA violations. You can not charge a fee for a service animal's presence. End of story.

You also can not require a doctor's note. End of story.

You can ask what tasks the animal has been trained to perform. To be a service animal it must have training for a specific function. For some more information see:
http://www.ada.gov/svcanimb.htm

As a note, doctors are not qualified to speak for the validity of a service animal. They can only speak as to the validity of a disability. And requiring a doctor's note could be a violation of the person's medical privacy.

Here is the website of charges from HUD recently:
http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/enforcement/hudcharges.cfm#disability

and a couple of cases with a highlighted paragraph or two.

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/enforcement/WynnCharge.pdf

This case has to do with a dog used for emotional support and a physician that states they believe the dogs eleviates the patients symptoms.

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/enforcement/SWIBvBUSHEECHARGE.pdf

On or around September 26,2007, Complainant Michelle Swib ("Complainant") filed a verified complaint with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (the "HUD Complaint"), alleging that Respondent Darryl Bushee ("Respondent") violated the Fair Housing Act as amended in 1988,42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. (the "Act") by making a discriminatory statement expressing a limitation on renting to individuals with disabilities who use service animals, a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c); by representing that the subject property was unavailable due to a discriminatory policy prohibiting all dogs, including service dogs, a violation of 42 U.S.c. § 3604(d); by refusing to show or rent the subject property to her based on her daughter's disability, a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(1); and by refusing to modify his "no dog" policy as to enable her to rent the subject property, a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).

It is unlawful to refuse to make reasonable accommodations in the rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B); see also 24 C.F.R. § 100.204.

Complainant is the mother of two minor children, Aisha and Isaac Wood. Aisha has a mental disability resulting from childhood sexual abuse, perpetrated by a family acquaintance. She requires the assistance of a service dog to engage in major life activities. At all times relevant to this Charge, Complainant was in possession of a physician's note stating that the service dog must be accommodated to support Aisha's "chronic psychological condition."

I think this dog case is a “service” dog. I have heard of these dogs and believe they are “trained” to work with autistic children
http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/enforcement/mostajo.pdf

Juan, you are confusing service animals and pets. Service animals are not pets by federal statute.

"Discrimination of a Service Animal is discrimination of the disabled."
Service Animals

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government.

Service animals perform some of the functions and tasks that the individual with a disability cannot perform for him or herself. "Seeing eye dogs" are one type of service animal, used by some individuals who are blind. This is the type of service animal with which most people are familiar. However, there are many different kinds of service animals that assist persons with many other kinds of disabilities in their day-to-day activities. A few examples include:

+ Alerting persons with hearing impairments to sounds.
+ Pulling wheelchairs or carrying and picking up things for persons with mobility impairments.
+ Assisting persons with mobility impairments with balance.
+ Alerting persons with seizures.
+ Condition signal assistance.

Juan,

If you were intending to be offensive you hit the mark. A bona fide service animal is not a pet. I would suggest that you spend a couple minutes looking past yourself and learn more about them.

To others:

1. A service animal by definition has been trained. Further it is legal to ask what training the animal has been given.


2. You may not require a person to present proof of the animal's status.


3. You may not charge for the animal's presence. You may require registration if you register other animals. You must waive the fee for a service animal.


4. State laws regarding vaccinations do apply to service animals.


5. If a service animal causes property damage the handler is legally responsible.


6. You have every right to expect the handler to clean up after the service animal.

As a note, nothing is really being changed except a clarification of original intent. There was never an intent (at the federal level anyway) to limit service animals to dogs. I have read about monkeys being used to aid some wheel chair bound people. And this makes sense as a monkey is much better equipped to retrieve a dropped credit card (or a host of other items) then a dog.

I worded that wrong. Intead of "placing limits on service animals" I should have said "making sure it was a service animal and not just being snuck in to a No Pet association".

Joe

It appears that several here may be under a common misunderstanding regarding pigs.

Pigs are actually very clean and very intelligent animals. They are no more carriers of disease than dogs or cats.

I've never heard of one being a "service animal," however. But if they are being trained that way, well, looks like some people may have to adjust some thinking regards to them.