Can An Emotional Support Animal Be Denied
- Overview
- More information
- Detailed discussion
- Related information
Persons with disabilities have an equal right to housing as those without disabilities. It is illegal for a landlord to deny housing to a person because that person, or someone associated with that person, has a mental or physical disability. Medical professionals accept long recognized that animals can assist persons with physical disabilities, such as assisting blind or deaf persons. Recently, medical professionals have discovered the profound furnishings that animals tin provide for persons with mental disabilities. Unfortunately, if a person rents housing, landlords are given the right to restrict a tenant's ability to keep an fauna in his or her rental unit. However, federal laws allow persons with certain special needs, such as the mentally disabled, to keep an animal in a rental unit despite a "no pets" provision. This is because disabled persons are entitled to reasonable accommodations under federal statutes. Courts take held that a waiver of a "no pets" provision is a reasonable accommodation for a mentally disabled person who needs an emotional back up animal to lessen the effects of his or her disability. If a landlord fails to allow an emotional support beast in rental housing for a person who qualifies under the statutes, the landlord violates the statutes and could owe amercement to the disabled tenant. To qualify under the statutes, a person must have a qualifying disability, the landlord must know that the tenant has a disability, waiving a "no pets" policy must exist necessary to allow the tenant an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling house, and the landlord must refuse to waive the "no pets" policy. Mental disabilities, such as mental retardation, mental disease, and special learning disabilities, authorize under the federal statutes. Also, the mental damage must touch on the person's ability to perform major life activities such as caring for one's cocky, walking, or working. The tenant must request a waiver of the "no pets" policy from the landlord, explaining that he or she has a mental disability and needs the emotional back up animal to lessen the effects of the disability. A annotation from a physician to this result is ofttimes used to inform the landlord of the disability and request the accommodation. Mere emotional distress that would result from having to requite up an beast because of a "no pets" policy will non qualify under federal constabulary. Instead, at that place must be a link between the beast and the inability. Even if a person qualifies for a reasonable adaptation nether the statutes, a landlord does not have to waive a "no pets" policy if doing so would cause a swell financial or administrative burden, if a "no pets" rule is a cardinal part of the housing program, or if the disabled person is non able to follow general rules of tenancy. Withal, to engagement, a landlord has not been able to reject waiving a "no pets" policy to a qualifying mentally disabled person because of any of the above reasons. In improver, if a tenant compromises the safety of other tenants or their holding, or if the beast poses a danger to other tenants, the tenant does not qualify under the statutes and the landlord does not have to allow the tenant in housing or waive a "no pets" policy.Brief Summary of Emotional Support Animals and Housing Laws
Kate Brewer (2005)
Medical professionals have long recognized that animals can aid persons with physical disabilities including blind or deaf persons. Recently, medical professionals have discovered the profound furnishings that animals tin can provide for persons with mental and emotional disabilities. When provided with an emotional support animal, depressed patients show decreased depression and children with severe attention deficit hyperactivity disorder prove an increased attention span. Despite this, the answer to the above question depends on whether a person is receiving federally subsidized housing or whether he or she has a documented disability to get a private landlord to waive a "no pets" policy. Unfortunately, if a person rents housing, landlords are given the right to restrict a tenant'southward power to keep an animal in his or her rental unit. Yet, federal statutes, including Department 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Sec. 504") and the Federal Off-white Housing Amendments Act of 1988 ("FHAA"), require that persons with disabilities have an equal right to housing as those without disabilities. It is illegal for a landlord to deny housing to a person with a disability because that person, or someone associated with that person, has a mental or physical disability. Under the statutes, disabled persons are also entitled to reasonable accommodations so that they tin can equally apply and relish the home. Courts accept held that a waiver of a "no pets" provision is a reasonable accommodation for a mentally disabled person who needs an emotional support creature to lessen the effects of the disability. If a landlord fails to let an emotional back up animate being in rental housing for a person who qualifies nether the statutes, the landlord violates the statutes and could owe amercement to the disabled tenant. To qualify under both statutes, the tenant must establish that he or she has a qualifying disability. Mental disabilities, such as mental retardation, mental illness, and special learning disabilities, are qualifying disabilities under both statutes. Besides, the mental harm must affect the person's ability to perform major life activities such equally caring for one's self, walking, or working. In addition, nether Sec. 504, the tenant must be "otherwise qualified" to receive the benefit, the tenant must be denied the benefit solely because of the disability, and the programme must receive federal financial assistance. Courts have held that "otherwise qualified" means that the tenant must be able to come across the requirements of the program in spite of the handicap. As well, the tenant must be able to run across the general rules of tenancy, such as cleaning up afterwards the fauna and walking the animal in designated areas. Lastly, only housing government that receive money from the federal authorities, such as public housing projects, are subject area to Sec. 504 provisions. Unlike Sec. 504, the FHAA applies to both public and private housing. Under the FHAA, in improver to establishing a qualifying disability, the tenant must also plant that the landlord knew of the tenant'due south disability, waiving the "no pets" policy was necessary to allow the tenant to every bit use and savour the dwelling, and the landlord refused to waive the "no pets" policy. Also, the tenant must request a waiver of the "no pets" policy from the landlord, explaining that he or she has a mental disability and needs the emotional support creature to lessen the effects of the disability. A note from a physician to this event is often used to inform the landlord of the disability and asking the accommodation. Mere emotional distress that would result from having to give up an animal considering of a "no pets" policy volition not qualify under federal police. Instead, at that place must be a link between the animal and the disability. Under both statutes, a mentally disabled person must come across two standards when arguing a waiver of a "no pets" provision as a reasonable adaptation: (1) the accommodation must facilitate the disabled person'south ability to function; and (2) the accommodation must pass a toll-benefit balancing examination that takes both parties' needs into account. The former can be established by bear witness showing that the handicap requires the companionship of the animal, the disabled person has an emotional and psychological dependence on the animal, or that the brute lessens the furnishings of the disability by providing companionship. The supporting evidence often comes from a medical professional. The latter requires an analysis of the benefits to the tenant equally compared to the burdens placed on the landlord. Generally, there are minimal burdens placed on a landlord if required to waive a "no pets" policy. Peculiarly because the number of mentally disabled persons who can authorize for waiver of a "no pets" provision is pocket-size, nearly landlords have been unsuccessful in arguing a deprival of a waiver of a "no pets" policy because of extreme burdens. In addition, there must be no other reasonable alternatives to lessen the effects of the disability, other than the beast. Courts have not restricted the types of species that qualify as reasonable accommodations. Examples of species that have been allowed equally reasonable accommodations include dogs, birds, and cats. Likewise, courts have held that animals do not need to take professional preparation or be certified as an emotional support animal. Evidence establishing the nexus between the inability and the animal is sufficient. Even if a person qualifies for a reasonable adaptation under the statutes, a landlord does not take to waive a "no pets" policy if doing so would cause a bang-up financial or administrative brunt, if a "no pets" rule is a fundamental part of the housing programme, or if the disabled person is not able to follow general rules of tenancy. Notwithstanding, to engagement, a landlord has not been able to reject waiving a "no pets" policy to a qualifying mentally disabled person considering of whatsoever of the above reasons. In addition, if a tenant compromises the safety of other tenants or their property, or if the animal poses a danger to other tenants, the tenant does not qualify under the statutes and the landlord does not have to allow the tenant in housing or waive a "no pets" policy. Given the known benefits of emotional support animals for persons with mental disabilities, it is of import for the legal community to help mentally disabled persons and then that they are aware of the their rights and ensure that those rights are enforced.Overview of Emotional Support Animals and Housing Laws
Kate Brewer (2005)
Related articles
Related cases
Related laws
Related Links
Source: https://www.animallaw.info/intro/emotional-support-animals-and-waiver-no-pets-rules-landlords
Posted by: millerwifyin76.blogspot.com
0 Response to "Can An Emotional Support Animal Be Denied"
Post a Comment