this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2025
451 points (99.6% liked)

Funny

12458 readers
1658 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fibojoly@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Monthly pet rent?! Is this a pet sitter?

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I don't think ita unreasonable to do so, but it should not be in addition to the deposit. Should be one or the other.

Like, over time it's more likely for damage from pets to build up and can easily get over $250 after a year or two.

But good luck getting over $250 damage in 2-3 months.

So I would see it reasonable to charge per month per pet, in the assumption that there will be damages to fix building up over time.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

deposit is the only acceptable thing here… rent? no way! you don’t pay rent per person in the house. the landlord is losing nothing per month for your pet

the potential damages come from the additional deposit/bond

[–] HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So a pet should have a deposit or added rent but not a child? Or a second tenant? Is none of this the point of an overall damage deposit

Slippery fuckin slope.

[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

landlord can't legally charge more for children

Hmm I wonder why, maybe because they tried and people were sensible enough to push back.

load more comments (4 replies)