An Assistance Animal, a Two-Per-Bedroom Policy, and a Voucher Refusal
Lourdes is the property manager for Palmetto Grove, a 120-unit apartment community. The owner's written policy says: maximum two persons per bedroom; no pets; minimum income three times rent; criminal background check on all applicants. Ms. Chen, a tenant in a two-bedroom unit with her 9-year-old daughter and 4-year-old son, submits a request for a reasonable accommodation for her son, who has autism. She asks to keep a 60-pound assistance dog and provides a letter from her son's pediatrician stating the child is disabled and the dog helps with safety and transitions. Lourdes denies the request, saying 'no pets' and 'the dog is not a service animal because it isn't trained to perform a specific task.' A week later, a single mother with three children applies for a two-bedroom unit; Lourdes denies the application because five people exceed the two-per-bedroom policy. Another applicant with a Section 8 voucher is told, 'We don't accept vouchers.' A current tenant asks if the 'dog situation' will be resolved because her child is allergic.
1. Evaluate Lourdes's denial of the assistance animal request. What may she ask, and what may she charge?
Read the worked answer
Assistance animal analysis
Lourdes applied the wrong legal standard. The Fair Housing Act requires reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities, including assistance animals. An assistance animal is not a pet. It may be a service dog trained to perform a task, but it may also be an emotional support or comfort animal that provides therapeutic benefit. The pediatrician's letter states that the child is disabled and that the dog helps with safety and transitions. That is reliable documentation supporting both the disability and the need. Lourdes may not demand a specific task, professional training, certification, or a particular form.
Because the disability and need are documented, Lourdes should approve the accommodation, waive the no-pet rule, and waive any pet deposit or pet rent. She may charge for actual damage caused by the animal if the lease allows damage charges, but she cannot impose a pet fee. She may not deny the request because the dog weighs 60 pounds or because of breed unless the animal poses a direct threat to health or safety that cannot be reduced by reasonable measures.
The other tenant's allergy complaint must be handled separately. Lourdes should not deny Ms. Chen's accommodation because of another tenant's allergy. She can discuss reasonable measures with the allergic tenant, such as avoiding common areas at certain times, but the assistance animal is not a pet that can be banned.
2. Analyze the occupancy denial and the Section 8 voucher statement under fair housing law.
Read the worked answer
Occupancy and voucher issues
A two-persons-per-bedroom occupancy standard is generally accepted as reasonable under HUD guidance, but it is a presumption, not an absolute rule. The policy must be applied consistently, consider the size and configuration of the unit, and allow exceptions as a reasonable accommodation. Denying a single mother with three children a two-bedroom unit solely because five people exceed the two-per-bedroom policy may be familial-status discrimination if the policy is applied rigidly or if the unit can safely accommodate the family. Lourdes should document the actual square footage, bedroom sizes, and any health or safety limits. A blanket denial is risky.
The Section 8 statement is a separate problem. Federal fair housing law does not list source of income as a protected class, so a federal claim is weak. But many Florida local ordinances, including some county and city codes, prohibit source-of-income discrimination. Lourdes must know the local ordinance. Even where no ordinance applies, a blanket 'we don't accept vouchers' statement is poor practice and can be used as evidence of discriminatory intent or disparate impact. The owner should remove the blanket statement and apply neutral income and screening criteria to all applicants, including voucher holders.
Both denials should be re-evaluated before the applicants are turned away.
3. What should the broker and owner do to correct policies, train staff, and avoid retaliation?
Read the worked answer
Policy, training, and retaliation
The broker and owner should adopt a written reasonable-accommodation policy with a designated coordinator, a standard request form, and a clear process for documentation. The policy should distinguish assistance animals from pets, state that pet fees do not apply, and explain that requests are evaluated individually. It should also state that occupancy limits are presumptively reasonable but may be exceeded as an accommodation when safety and unit size allow.
Staff training should cover the fair housing protected classes, familial status, disability, assistance animals, and local source-of-income rules. Lourdes and the leasing staff should practice applying the policy to hypothetical requests. The owner should remove the blanket voucher ban unless local law clearly permits it, and should review all screening criteria for disparate impact.
Retaliation is a separate risk. Ms. Chen requested an accommodation and the other tenant complained about the dog. Neither may be evicted, harassed, or treated differently because of those actions. The broker should document the accommodation approval, keep medical information confidential, and tell the allergic tenant only what is necessary. If a fair housing complaint is filed, the owner should preserve all records and consult counsel. Prompt correction, consistent application, and good records are the best defense.