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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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 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.
don’t spread this pro landlord bs
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.
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
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.
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.
Noise canceling headphones? Cheaper than parenthood or soundproofing
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.
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.
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”.
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.
“Help control the human population, have your children spayed or neutered.” (/s)
Maybe we shouldn’t dismiss the distinction so readily.
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
Just landlords gouging every cent.
Tough one. I’ve never wanted kids and my God are they so goddamn loud…
But, as more of my friends have kids I feel more and more for parents, it’s damned tough to raise kids and finding housing, especially in my city is brutal.
Still, not like a fee helps anyone beyond the landlord.
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.
Kids don’t pee in the same corner every day for years.
don’t you kind of hope that they do, though? most apartments only have one bathroom, and the toilet is always in a corner
You’ve clearly never fostered.
…
I lit my mom’s apartment on fire once. In my defense, I was four and left unsupervised while she took a nap.
Kids generally don’t spread rancid piss everywhere, though.
