• Pyr@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      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.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours 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