If this way of thinking became more widespread, all it would achieve would be the addition of child fees, not the removal of pet fees.
I bet you could take it to court and get all those fees removed, since the precedent has already been set.
Apartments charging pet fees: 🫸
Apartments charging child fees: 🫸
Landlords being charged with crimes: 👍
Landleeches being charged at with the nearest blunt object: :3
They would absolutely charge a “children fee” if they were legally able to.
You all understand that the children fee is literally paying for enough space to house children? Do your cats have their own room? ;)
My cat has their own apartment. They just let us live there.
My cats think that my rooms are their.
No, you think the cat’s room still belongs to you.
Yeah, but all of them. ;) no matter how much room you own.
Fees for children would be illegal discrimination under fair housing laws.
They would charge extra if it was not illegal
This goes for everything…
Maybe they would if they could, but they can’t so they don’t. I’m struggling to find the part OP thinks is a “scam”.
The fact that pets cause less damage to the property than kids, but you have to pay more fees if you have a dog.
Because it’s illegal to discriminate against tenants with children, such as by charging additional fees. Whether pets or children are more destructive is beside the point.
Who is more destructive is exactly the point. This is also how insurance companies work. Anyways, pet fees are a scam and should not exist either.
I’m struggling to find the part OP thinks is a “scam”.
The part where it’s illegal to charge extra for children but not illegal to charge extra for pets.
They’re right, it’s bullshit and it shouldn’t be allowed.
I think it’s a false equivalence. A human child is not the same thing as a pet animal. Framing the issue purely in terms of how much damage potential they have seems to be dismissing that distinction for no good reason.
dismissing that distinction for no good reason
Any reason is a good reason to dismiss that distinction. Pets are family. We don’t love them less than human family, or at least decent people don’t.
Still, if like takes a shit on you and you have to give up your pets, that’s a little less traumatic than losing your kids.
All I’m hearing is you’re the kind of monster who’d abandon a family member when things get hard.
“Help control the human population, have your children spayed or neutered.” (/s)
Maybe we shouldn’t dismiss the distinction so readily.
Excuse me, but the bigger scam is the entire Landlord concept
Social housing, which is “owned” by the community as a whole, is the answer. Not only for people who are not yet ready to own, but also for housing in general.
Vienna is a prime model for this, where social housing is frequently much cheaper than ever owning a home. Most families that start out in social housing cling to it their entire life because it is just so much more financially responsible.
This sounds like someone that has never seen what cats can do to a property when the owner doesn’t take care of them.
Piss drenched carpet and moldy walls are a pain in the ass to fix.
You ever seen what half-arse parented kids will do? All of the above + holes and pest infestations
If you don’t like what the kids can do, wait until you see what the grown-ups can accomplish.
Grew up low income in a comission area, currently live next to a halfway house i’m wellllllll aware
That’s how onr apartment of mine got flooded. Kid 2 floors up was playing with the plumbing
I worked retail for many years and I consider children pests as well
As someone who rents our previous two places out (at cost, don’t shoot me) cats are by far the worst. Dogs might chew on things and be generally destructive, but there is no way to get cat smell out of a place quickly. Even if the cat doesn’t actually piss on the floor, just that lingering litterbox smell takes months to fade in my experience.
If you run into the issue again, an enzyme cleaner works quite well in my experience. Nature’s Miracle makes a decent one, I’ve had to use it before
When the owner takes care of them too. I’m sure their downstairs neighbors disagree on what the cat does all night.
… oh, wait, the post was about the day, they may agree on that.
I’m sure their downstairs neighbors disagree on what the cat does all night.
Sleep?
Cats are crepuscular, which means they’re most active at dusk and dawn.
I’ve had indoor cats for 19 years, and most of the time after the kitten phase, they basically slept through the night.
A cat might get up for midnight snacks or get the zoomies every now and again, but adult cats sleep up to 16 hours a day so they really shouldn’t be up all night.
I have done a lot of residential work over the years a lot of sales work a lot of things where I’ve been in a lot of people’s houses. Nothing smells worse than a person with cats who even goes a week or two without taking care of their litter box. And that smells sticks in everything. I have pets and I agree that a pet deposit is something needed because damn they do a lot of damage.
But isn’t that literally what the deposit is for? You don’t just assume someone will have excess damage when renting.
And sure, have a higher deposit for pet owners. But why am I paying a monthly cat fee on top of a one time “non-refundable pet deposit”.
But isn’t that literally what the deposit is for?
The deposit is for the damage you expect done by the human.
The pet deposit is for the damage you expect done by the pet in excess of the human.
I don’t begrudge any of this on its face. Where I have issue is landlords to refuse to give the deposit back, regardless of the condition of the unit after you leave.
But why am I paying a monthly cat fee on top of a one time “non-refundable pet deposit”.
Because if you can’t find a landlord with more generous terms.
The pet deposit is for the damage you expect done by the pet in excess of the human.
Sure, I agree with charging a separate pet deposit. But a lot of times it’s just a fee being called a “non-refundable deposit”.
Because if you can’t find a landlord with more generous terms.
At least in my area, it just seems like a standard charge apartments do now. If anything, corporate rental properties seem to be charging these fees more than landlords. Private landlords either say no pets or just have a larger deposit. Which indicates that it’s about generating additional revenue for these corporations, not purely covering pet damage.
How do you go a week without cleaning the litter box?!?
Having said that, my cats do do a fair amount of damage to the carpet and some doors with their claws, so an extra fee makes sense.
They also do a fair amount of damage to furniture; but that generally isn’t the landlords.
A lot of times it’s due to a disability or a mental illness
Last time I was charged a pet fee, I asked them “So if my wife gets pregnant, do we need to plan to pay extra on the rent?”
The leasing agent looked at me like I was crazy and said “Of course not, that would be ridiculous!”
And then she realized… Like I could literally see it flash across her face. She dropped it.
Nice, in Poland landlords wants to be sure if you dont have kids, because they wont rent you apartment.
When my gf moved to me, my landlord increased my rent by 20%. Rent only, Im not talking about bills
Interesting, I’ve known people to increase rent for just a guy or guys living, vs a couple because they don’t keep things clean
His argument was that the equipment breaks down faster
Just landlords gouging every cent.
I once toured an apartment that charged pet fees and for dogs REQUIRED A DNA TEST so they could fine you for not picking up poop.
Someone out there is dna testing literal dog shit.
No one is actually doing that, they’re charging a fee to do nothing until someone complains enough that they’ll send out a strongly worded letter hoping the person not picking up their dog poop will admit to it out of fear.
I lived in a complex that required such samples from dogs. They still never did anything about all the shit lying around
Same here. lol
Wholeheartedly support, I wish my apartment complex did that. Dog poop all over the place.
All it takes is one untrained dog with separation anxiety to chew through walls and tear trim off of door frames to trigger rules like this.
Or one elderly pet with severe incontinence peeing in the closest carpeted corner instead of the litter box.
With that said, children certainly have a much greater capacity for damage, especially when they get older. Infants? Not so much.
Yes and what does that fee have to do with it?
Security Deposits are already double rent, and the entire legal system including property insurance still exists.
The $100/month isn’t going anywhere except to profit.
I vaguely recall reading that such child fees would likely be illegal (in the US)? I think it might also be illegal to exclude families with children from being eligible to rent a given location. Don’t quote me on either, though, because I don’t have sources on hand.
In Brazil is illegal for landlords or apartment buildings to charge or prohibit pets on their units. They are some laws around, like it should be as big as you can charge it on your arms, can’t use the common areas unless designated pet areas and can’t be loud at night.
In Florida you are allowed to age restrict a community to 55+ only, which is effectively a child ban plus anyone younger than the moon landing.
It’s provincial here in Canada but I vaguely remember some building having a no child rule and then losing a court case when the strata tried to evict folks who ended up having kids.
I would love to live in that utopia. No children allowed in an entire suburb would be heaven.
Do people being outside really cause you that much of an issue? My neighborhood has tons of kids. They’re just there existing. The closest thing to being bothered is just making sure I don’t back in to anyone if they’re playing. Which isn’t that hard, nor does it add any issues to my day since you know I look behind me when I back up.
If you had said apartment complex or condominium I’d get it, but like in a suburb everyone has their own detached home.
I don’t mind all kids, but it’s highly dependent on the children and the parents involved, and especially in anything aside from single family homes, you can’t really tell what you’re going to get. If it were an option, I would pay extra for an apartment in a child free building just to completely avoid the possibility of having my peace and quiet at home ruined because the building gets new tenants who let their kids run wild and make insane noise at all hours. Kids can be incredibly disruptive if they have inconsiderate parents who never tell them to behave when they act out, of which there are far too many.
If the just existed quietly then that would be fine, but kids are loud
In the US, many mobile home communities require tenants be over the age of 55.
I’ve seen weird rules too, like 50% of the household must be over 55. So like if your spouse is younger but you are older than that is okay. This pretty effectively does a good job of restricting children just based on math and family dynamic without explicitly stating “no kids”.
One of my parents used to live in such a community. It was quiet as hell at night.
So restrictions like that are clearly legal and not considered ageism. (I might have considered living in that same community if I were old enough.) But apparently restricting children would be illegal?
Fair housing act makes it illegal to deny housing or charge more based on having children.
Senior aged restricted housing is legal because seniors vote. The exception is a different law and explicitly makes it okay.
It’s also illegal here in the UK. Additionally it’s now also illegal to refuse to let to someone who has a pet on the basis of that pet*, however, if two parties applied for the same property but only one had a pet, then how could anyone possibly be able to prove why the party with a cat wasn’t accepted…
_ *if it’s not currently law, it’s on its way through to being so.
It’s not legal to charge pet fees if it’s for a service animal so it’s probably related to that in some.
For services animals they cannot even enforce size or breed restrictions. I have in laws that used this to get a pit bull for their child with Down Syndrome. It wasn’t a fee dodge, the apartment had a blanket no pet policy.
Society rather wants people to have kids and not pets for self-preservation reasons
Encouraging renters to have kids is a rare long-term investment strategy by the landlord class
Don’t give them ideas
Children are members of society. They’re imperfect, but still. As other members of society, we have a duty to at least tolerate them.
I find it very sad that some people treat them like a different species. You wouldn’t hear people say, without being countered, “I don’t want to see old people” or “I don’t want to have to interact with women”. It’s fucked up, you don’t choose the other members of society.
I do agree with you as a childfree person who doesn’t like children. Most of the time I blame/hate their parents instead. Like the parents of the kids upstairs. One of them has a “band”. For the past year he’s been trying to learn 3 songs almost every day in the evening. It’s incredibly annoying to listen to this musically untalented kid when I’m tying to relax. Put some goddamned headphones on him, for fuck’s sake.
Have you ever met your upstairs neighbors? Talking to someone is the only way to let them know you want something. Maybe they aren’t aware of how audible their kid is to other people in the apartment complex
Yes! They (or at least the SAHM) are rich assholes who could have bought a house, but instead chose to buy an apartment in a building so the breadwinner’s job is 5 min away. They let the kid play with the windows open so the entire neighborhood can enjoy the sounds of the same 10 notes on repeat.
deleted by creator
Noise canceling headphones? Cheaper than parenthood or soundproofing
Why does your intention to do nothing take priority over his intention to do something?
A worrying number of people have somehow become detached from the fact that children - even the tiny, shitting, screaming ones, are fully equal people to them.
Your comment is disingenuous at best. How would you like to listen to a kid trying to learn the same 3 songs for a year, almost every day, and failing at note 10 each time? Why is my moment of peace after work so valueless that it can’t be respected with a SMALL change of the kid using headphones to reproduce the sound of his instruments? I’m not saying
don’tstop. I’m saying have the common sense to understand your child isn’t the next Mozart and put some headphones on him. I already can’t enjoy a nice sunny day on the weekends on my balcony without them running and screaming above me. At least give me a break after work.(edit: incorrect double negation)
- You want something to happen - silence
- You are aware of how it can happen - something in someone’s ears
- You have the power to make it happen - earphones and earplugs are incredibly cheap
- You instead want someone else to do something about it - him not you.
You are 2026
Has it occurred to you I don’t live alone and would like to hear my partner? Or should I adjust all the time to someone else’s whims when they could reduce their noise towards all inhabitants of the building?
Has it occurred to you
Would you be offended if I said absolutely not?
Go buy some soundproofing off AliExpress and/or go find something you enjoy doing without the expectation that those around you think you’re good at it.
Found the entitled parent.
People just don’t want to be annoyed. It’s in the same vein as ‘I don’t want to see drunks’. Spoiled kids and the uncontrollable alcoholic are almost identical in how annoying they can be. On that note, ‘I don’t want to see someone’s racist, demented grandpa piss on the doormat’ would also be pretty popular. Would be better for everyone involved if human kids were raised in creches by professionals instead of whichever rando managed to have unprotected sex at the right/wrong time.
Our experience with children being raised in a group setting by professionals is too full of rampant abuse for this to become an acceptable reality. Even those programs that haven’t propagated systematic physical and sexual abuse soon fell into dangerous neglect through lack of funding or corruption and embezzlement.
As if children raised by ‘parents’ aren’t abused on the regular, sexually and otherwise?
The post isn’t criticising the kid, it’s criticising that they have to pay extra for their cat.
My cat is a member of society too. And she’s a better person than any human of any age
No, it’s a cat.
I know antropromorphization is at an all time high right now. But no, your cat is not people.
Both are animals. And a cat is at least as intelligent as a 4yo. Even some 8yo kids can’t claim that.
One is human, which is what you are.
One is an animal that you attempt to humanize by thinking of them as having human-like emotions.
By comparing them to a human 4-year old, you show your own delusion.
Humans are also animals
Not the point though, is it?
No, that’s entirely the point
That’s awfully speciest of you.
