💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

JillS2 (Florida)
Posts: 2
Posted:
I am a member of a HOA board about 6 months into our transition from developer control. We are currently addressing a number of violations that were allowed to proliferate while the developer was still controlling the previous board. One of those issues are homeowners who have pit bull or rottweiler dogs in defiance of deed restrictions.

One of these homeowners is contesting the violation letter by saying that his rottweiler is a service dog needed for "emotional support." He has a letter from a doctor saying that this dog is necessary, although we are not allowed to know the nature of the disability due to HIPPA privacy laws. In light of that, our lawyer is saying that any legal fight to have the homeowner remove the dog would end in the homeowner's favor and we would be stuck with costly legal fees.

If the dog's only crime was to be a rottweiler, the board might be inclined to let it go at that. However, the dog has exhibited alarmingly aggressive behavior. When the dog is outside (leashed), he has lunged and acted aggressively towards pedestrians. More disturbing is the fact that the dog saw the neighbor's cat across the street. The neighbor's young daughters were playing with their cat in their own yard. The dog charged the door and pushed through it while someone in the owner's home was opening the door. The dog mauled and killed the cat in front of the girls before the owner could restrain the dog. Residents, board members included, are terrified that this dog is aggressive, not properly restrained, and a menace to the neighborhood.

Our lawyer is suggesting that we propose dropping our violation notice and any resulting actions if the owner agrees to keep the dog leashed and muzzled while outside, and if the dog is outside unleashed and unmuzzled an ex parte order will be issued for an injunction to remove the dog, with the owner being responsible for all resulting legal fees.

I'm concerned that (1) the owner has already proven that he and/or his family cannot control the dog, and (2) the dog has already shown aggression. We are asking residents to report ALL aggressive behavior directly to Animal Control (including threatening pedestrians) and pursue the aggressiveness that way.

What else can we do? Has anyone had experience removing a "service" animal? (I'm sorry - I love dogs and own a 150 lb dog myself - but I have trouble accepting this untrained vicious dog is a service animal.) Can anyone enlighten me on Florida laws on service animals? Must they be certified as service dogs? I think our lawyer is already writing this off as a lost cause.
RaymondC (Minnesota)
Posts: 64
Posted:
You are on the right track. In the end, there is probably little you can do as an association to limit this situation. However, there are legal complications for folks who keep vicious dogs. The neighbors with the mauled cat should press charges, and so should anyone intimidated by the dog outside it's own property.

ADA does not grant immunity from low. Finally there is no reason the family of the mauled cat cannot sue for damages and psychological trauma.

This issue is for the legal system and not the board.

Good luck.
DeborahW1 (Michigan)
Posts: 10
Posted:
In regard to the dog killing the cat, were the police notified? They should have been and a police report filed.

And if the resident is claiming the dog's a service dog, look up the ADA guidelines for service dogs, from what I remember they must be trained as a service dog, you just can't call a dog a service dog.

Good luck.
CharlesW1 (Georgia)
Posts: 826
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By RaymondC on 12/18/2007 6:50 PM
You are on the right track. In the end, there is probably little you can do as an association to limit this situation. However, there are legal complications for folks who keep vicious dogs. The neighbors with the mauled cat should press charges, and so should anyone intimidated by the dog outside it's own property.

ADA does not grant immunity from low. Finally there is no reason the family of the mauled cat cannot sue for damages and psychological trauma.

This issue is for the legal system and not the board.

Good luck.

JillS2

I agree 100% with what RaymondC has posted. There is no reason the board shouldn’t feel sympathy for this family or members of the community.

I understand the family (attacked cat) may not have been seriously injured in the attack however, I strongly feel that the girl should at least get some professional help, She has been traumatized, by what she witnessed, that is damaging to the strongest of people!

This involves the safety and well being of everyone in the community, if he (owner of the dog) will not comply then the LAW needs (STEP IN) to make it safer for all the residents.PERIOD!

Chuck W.


Charles E. Wafer Jr.
GeraldT4
Posts: 1,022
Posted:
JillS2 - Adopt a rule that no pet or animal can be left outside unattended by the owner or the owner's guest. As for the service animal, let it go so long as there is a current doctor's note on file with the Association.
JanM (Texas)
Posts: 142
Posted:
We had the exact same thing happen only the dogs were pit bulls and they killed 5 cats. We then adopted a rule that after Sept.1, 2007, no "new" pit bulls were allowed in our HOA. The people who already owned them before that date would be grandfathered in. We also had a pet registration requirement that is kept at the office to help keep track of pets that get loose and are easy to ID.
BradP (Kansas)
Posts: 2,640
Posted:
Jill:

I would search for a new lawyer...emotional support does not qualify under ADA and service animals. If that was the case you could argue that all animals provide that to people, in a sense they do because they become your friends.

Couple things to look at, in the municipality you live in are pit bulls and rottweillers legal to have? We have an ordinance in ours banning pit bulls. Second issue, if this dog is exhibiting the behavior you say it does why have the police or animal control not been involved to date? Getting them involved now is good. If it killed a cat there would have been options to perhaps have the dog put to sleep because of its aggression.

I don't like the proposal your lawyer gave, it is weak and to me sets a precedent of as long as the animal is chained and muzzled it is fine, but we all know that won't happen all the time.
JC3
Posts: 290
Posted:
Quote:
By BradP

I would search for a new lawyer...emotional support does not qualify under ADA and service animals.

That is correct. ESAs do not qualify as service animals. Also, do remember, that it is NOT the animal that has rights, it is the _disabled person_, AND that person has to be disabled under the guidelines of the Americans with Disabilities Act:

Definition of Disability (ADA)
(2) Disability.--The term "disability" means, with respect to an
individual--
(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially
limits one
or more of the major life activities of such individual;
(B) a record of such an impairment; or
(C) being regarded as having such an impairment

A: The ADA covers a wide range of individuals with disabilities. An individual is considered to have a "disability" if he or she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment. (that's NOT for the neighbors or the board or mc to decide)
Major life activities include such things as caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. To be substantially limited means that such activities are restricted in the manner, condition, or duration in which they are performed in comparison with most people.
The ADA also protects people who are discriminated against because of their association with a person with a disability

One state definition: 3. "Service dog" means a dog which has gone through a formal training program, which assists its owner in one or more daily living tasks associated with a productive life-style and which is sufficiently conditioned to be of no danger to the health and safety of the general public.

The ADA does not allow businesses (HOAs are businesses)to require certification papers or special types of ID as a condition of granting access to a service animal team. The ADA would take precedence over any state or local law which provides less protection for the civil rights of disabled persons than does the ADA.
See the ADA Business Brief on Service Animals published in 2002
> at _http://ada.gov/svcabrpt.pdf_ (http://ada.gov/svcabrpt.pdf) .
>
> Under the ADA, if a business is unsure if a dog is a pet or a service
> animal, the business may ask,
"Is that a service animal?"
Businesses are also permitted to ask a customer "What tasks does your animal perform?" The TRAINED tasks the animal performs have to mitigate the disabled person's disability. (ie, you, a deaf person, cannot claim my mobility dog, because my mobility dog has not been trained to hearing tasks, so does not mitigate your hearing problem. However, if your hearing dog is also trained to do mobility work, I could claim him as a service dog, because I need his trained help with mobility.)
They cannot ask for special ID or what the person's disability is.

A business can also ask if a person is disabled, but not how.
Some states have enacted additional protections.

Here's another definition of SERVICE ANIMAL"--(note, not only dogs are service animals. Each state, town, county, and the ADA have definitions, probably similar.
Service animal" means any guide dog, signal dog or other animal
individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an
individual with a disability, including guiding individuals with impaired vision, alerting individuals with impaired hearing to intruders or sounds, providing assistance in a medical crisis, pulling a wheelchair or fetching dropped items.

Quote:
By BradP

if this dog is exhibiting the behavior you say it does why have the police or animal control not been involved? Getting them involved now is good. If it killed a cat there would have been options to perhaps have the dog put to sleep because of its aggression.

If it were a service animal doing the same damage, call the cops or animal control. That dog is a danger. Do you not have dangerous dog laws, aside brom breed bans?

TorinA (Colorado)
Posts: 8
Posted:
Not to sound like a lawyer, but the first thing is that the ADA does not apply to residential communities. An exception lies if a particular residential facility (like a clubhouse) is rented out to the public. Then for that use, the ADA would apply. Otherwise, when you talk about disabilities law in the context of HOAs and condos and other residential environments, you are talking about the Fair Housing Act under federal law, not the ADA. States and counties may have their own laws as well. A nice article summing up the current law on the issue of whether an animal can qualify as a service animal for "emotional support" is by Stephen Marcus, a lawyer out of Braintree, Massachusetts. I found it on CAI's website. While the law is in flux and you never know what will happen once you enter a court room, I do not find it unreasonable that a court would prohibit a particular animal even as a service animal if it were aggressive to others. The fact that it may be a service animal does not mean it has carte blanche to tear the place up. Do you think if the dog bit someone and the county tried to quarantine or destroy it (as they can do in my suburban county in Maryland) a federal judge would stop the county because the animal was a service dog? I doubt it. So I agree with whomever suggested a new lawyer. It needs to be looked into in more depth. I think the association is likely to prevail if it can show the aggressive nature (as it seems to be able to do). Remember, the association is not attempting to outlaw service animals, only a dangerous service animal with known violent propensities.
JC3
Posts: 290
Posted:
You're right, The Fair Housing Act does relate to housing including hoas.
My response was based on what is and is not a service animal. I'm not very familiar with the fair housing law, but would guess that the definition and guidelines would be the same. A quick search results in this:
http://www.dlrp.org/html/topical/housing/housing-service.html

Service Animals in Housing: Even though service animals are NOT (emphasis mine) specifically mentioned in the Fair Housing Act and its regulations, it is likely that the Act would at times require that service animals be allowed in a housing facility in order to afford a disabled individual fair use and enjoyment of the facility.

So, back to the guidelines in the ADA. At the least, those guidelines would be considered.

Fair Housing Act: Service Animals
Regulation: 24 C.F.R. § 100.204 - Reasonable accommodations.

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford a handicapped person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling unit, including public and
common use areas.

So, is the PERSON disabled under the ADA?
Is the dog task trained, as defined in the ADA?
And
Call the cops anyway--a dangerous dog is a dangerous dog, task trained as a service animal or not.

As to state and county law, The law which provides the greater access prevails. (see above, dangerous dogs.)

Quote:
Posted By TorinA on 12/19/2007 2:32 PM
...the ADA does not apply to residential communities.

Otherwise, when you talk about disabilities law in the context of HOAs and condos and other residential environments, you are talking about the Fair Housing Act under federal law, not the ADA. States and counties may have their own laws as well...
Remember, the association is not attempting to outlaw service animals, only a dangerous service animal with known violent propensities.

from original post:
Quote:
Posted By JillS2
One of those issues are homeowners who have pit bull or rottweiler dogs in defiance of deed restrictions.

One homeowner is contesting the violation letter by saying that his rottweiler is a service dog needed for "emotional support." He has a letter from a doctor saying that this dog is necessary, although we are not allowed to know the nature of the disability due to HIPPA privacy laws.
What else can we do? Has anyone had experience removing a "service" animal? (...I have trouble accepting this untrained vicious dog is a service animal.) Can anyone enlighten me on Florida laws on service animals? Must they be certified as service dogs?

JillS2 (Florida)
Posts: 2
Posted:
Thanks everyone for your replies. You've all given me a lot of good information and support. We are pursuing this issue through the residents reporting the dog to Animal Control, and in the meantime we are actively looking for a new lawyer.

Thanks again.
JC3
Posts: 290
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By TorinA on 12/19/2007 2:32 PM
A nice article summing up the current law ...whether an animal can qualify as a service animal for "emotional support" is by Stephen Marcus... I found it on CAI's website. While the law is in flux and you never know what will happen once you enter a court room, I do not find it unreasonable that a court would prohibit a particular animal even as a service animal if it were aggressive to others. The fact that it may be a service animal does not mean it has carte blanche to tear the place up...Remember, the association is not attempting to outlaw service animals, only a dangerous service animal with known violent propensities.

Under appropriate circumstances, the law requires admittance of Emotional Support Animals (ESAs) in housing. That does NOT make them Service Animals, (SA) (which must be permitted) and those ESAs are not generally permitted in even the public areas of the community.
Saying, "he makes me feel better" does not qualify the animal as a Service Animal.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posted:

Yes Jill,
And how can "he makes me feel better" work when he just killed a neighbors cat that was playing with little girls? Animal control should have been called immediately because they would have impounded the dog and have it gone thru evaluation as for it's temperment.
To the owner--how did you feel after this episode with your emotional support animal? Not very good I would assume.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Have to say this in reply to thread. Got no problem with all that is said and all good advise.

However, I am not sure how much the board should be taking on here. Is is a board function to be all things to all people. In the instance here I believe the board should try to adopt laws for the safety of the community. They should make all owners aware of any situation that may be a danger to them. But they can not get in the business of being parents to all members.

It is an explosive situation waiting to happen and the way to stop it is through the courts by the owners, not the Board. Enforce the rules as written.....absolutely, keep the people informed........absolutely and with strong language.......................absolutely, offer to be a "center" for advice to concerned..................absolutely.

In the end, the Board can not be expected to taake over owner responsibility and action to safe guard each family, individually.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posted:

Robert,
You are absolutely right here about Board responsibility. This Board did try to take some control but the owner has postured in fight mode. The Board is not responsible for what the dog did. The Board cannot fight a Federal or State law on dogs with special health classifications. The only option that they have is to pursue the dog being aggressive and work with the County to have this animal evaluated. I would be going after that angle because their Rule or wherever their animal statement, is not thourough enough to force it's removal. But NO!! service animal has the right to endanger other animals and possibly the little girls who were out with the cat.
JC3
Posts: 290
Posted:
In response to RobertR1 "In the end, the Board can not be expected to taake over owner responsibility and action to safe guard each family, individually."
I agree with him. People turn to the board with various problems. A board is made up of people with varied backgrounds, and even so, may not know the answers, at least initially, to many questions posed to them, hence fora like these, for a greater knowledge base, or even ideas on where to go for information.

The information given (here) can be checked, and if found correct, can be passed on to the inquirer, or, the information itself can be given and the inquirer can verify it himself. Homeowners often ask the board if they don't know what else to do, or perhaps think the board has authority in certain circumstances.

As a board member, as a dog owner, and as a service dog owner, I am very interested in knowing about loose and dangerous dogs in the area.

Knowing the definitions of terms goes a long way to understanding and resolving situations. There's a HUGE difference between ESAs and SAs and the laws regarding them, and what constitutes disability under the ADA re SAs.

No, it is not the board's function to be all things to all people, but when we set up as THE BOARD, we do have at least some responsibility to help out, even if all we can do at the time is ask appropriate questions and support appropriate action on the part of the homeowner: in this case, call animal control, call the cops, check the Americans with Disabilities Act, call the ADA hotline at their 800 number, which should be in the phone book, and online.

In some cases, it may be that the contract is being broken, and the board can step in. Perhaps that is the case here. The only legal way I know to determine if the person is disabled and the dog is an SA is to go to court, but there may be less expensive ways.

The more knowledge WE have, as individuals and as board members, enhances our lives.

I would like to add this here, for you to be aware of.
At least some people claim the animal to be an ESA rather PSA (psychiatric Service Animal) because they don't want the stigma that goes along with that. PSAs also require training re the ADA, and a dangerous dog is still a dangerous dog. The owners of the cat should be encouraged to take steps.

If there is _legitimate_ question as to the dog being a service dog of any kind, perhaps the board needs to look into it to see what they can do.

I hope you keep us informed as to what you find out, what transpires.

JC3
Posts: 290
Posted:
I keep reading this--I really need to go to work!
Jill said, "...homeowners is contesting the violation letter by saying that his rottweiler is a service dog needed for "emotional support." He has a letter from a doctor saying that this dog is necessary, although we are not allowed to know the nature of the disability due to HIPPA privacy laws."

Many (most) doctors don't know the difference between esas and sas, and probably do not know that an esa is not an sa.

The doctor can write a letter about a service dog, (but not need for, AFAIK) (my own did) however, that has absolutely no legal status AFAIK. I carry it with me because it does help if I am challenged, it is almost a last ditch effort. I also carry the ADA business brief, and a paper with basic federal, state, and local dog law, which I pull out first. Second, I have an email account set up just for that larage complete file, because even cops have computers in their cars and can access the information. Mine rx says only my diagnosis, then "service dog for assistance and ambulation"--note there is nothing regarding _NEED_.

Quite frankly, if challenged, even though not required, and a violation of law, I love to show my dog off, and might tell or show some tasks he does for me.

Only if necessary would I bring out my dr note, because it has no actual legal status.
JC3
Posts: 290
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DonnaS
Robert, You are absolutely right here about Board responsibility. This Board did try to take some control but the owner has postured in fight mode. The Board is not responsible for what the dog did. The Board cannot fight a Federal or State law on dogs with special health classifications.

BUT you CAN ASK the person if he is disabled (under the ADA,) and you CAN ask what trained tasks the dog does for him.
Under the ADA, if a business is unsure if a dog is a pet or a service
animal, the business may ask these three questions:
"Are you disabled" (Meaning under the guidelines of the ADA, see * below)
"Is that a service animal?" (Defined in ADA, and probably in your state and local law.)
"What (trained) tasks does your animal perform?" The TRAINED tasks the animal performs have to mitigate the disabled person's disability.
They cannot ask for special ID or what the person's disability is.

The only option they have is to pursue the dog being aggressive... I would be going after that angle because their Rule or wherever their animal statement, is not thourough enough to force it's removal.

1. You might call in a cop to ask those questions in an investigation of the cat killing, or to be with you when you ask. The owner is maybe less likely to lie if a cop is there. You will have to educate the cop that ESA's are NOT service animals, so you will have to have the info on hand, including the ADA hotline number, and bear in mind their business hours. (Don't have the cop there at 5:30 when the hotline closes at 5, for instance, though the cop could check his statements at a later time)
(Go to http://www.iaadp.org/tasks.html for a pretty comprehensive list of tasks (psi is not listed there, but can be found elsewhere). The ADA requires tasks, plural, I think, but that may mean only two or three tasks.)

2. Call your dog control, and ask if that dog has been approved for a service dog license. Remember, not everybody will have one, but maybe most people would. I didn't for the first 2 years because I didn't know of them.)

3. Talk to his neighbors and friends, find out through casual or pointed questions if the person is disabled (re the ADA) Remember many disabilities are invisible, and people may not know of them. Many people don't advertise the fact they are disabled.

4. Does the person have any other indication of disability, handicap sticker, for instance, or any modifications to the house yard, or vehicle? The absence of either is also not an indication he is not disabled.

*Definition of Disability (ADA)
(2) Disability.--The term "disability" means, with respect to an
individual--
(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially
limits one
or more of the major life activities of such individual;
(B) a record of such an impairment; or
(C) being regarded as having such an impairment

A: The ADA covers a wide range of individuals with disabilities. An individual is considered to have a "disability" if he or she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment. (that's NOT for the neighbors or the board or mc to decide)
Major life activities include such things as caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. To be substantially limited means that such activities are restricted in the manner, condition, or duration in which they are performed in comparison with most people.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here