Refusing pets illegal?

[Brier]

Saw this in our local paper this morning:

"Chiens et chats ne peuvent être exclus des locations de vacances"

The link is:

http://www.charentelibre.fr/2011/02/04/chiens-et-chats-ne-peuvent-etre-exclus-des-locations-de-vacances,1019814.php

It seems that some court has ruled in a test case that it is illegal to

refuse to accept pets in holiday accommodation. Apparently this has been

the law for some time in long term lets but they have now decided that

it also applies to holiday accommodation. Any such clause in a rental

contract is deemed "abusive".

The article is a bit vague. Has anyone else heard or read anything about

this? It could set the cat among the pigeons, so to speak!

[idun]

Well if this is the case then I think the law is an ass, OK if it will not accept a s s, then maybe the law is a donkey instead. Actually A S S is an animal and not a rude one.

We used to travel with our dog and would always confirm that a hotel or gite would accept animals. Some didn't, some did and that was perfectly OK with us. It should always be OK with the pet owner. Like it should always be OK if places refuse children too.

[Jazzer]

As a pet owner ourselves, we do not even allow our little dog in the gite. Several couples have enquired before booking because they are allergic to animal hairs etc. Could we be sued if someone with an allergy became ill after a visit, However good your cleaning system, you can not guarantee total eradication of hairs etc.

[woolybanana]

Well, I heard a snip on the radio which definitely said that pets could not be refused in holiday lets.

[Nimportequoi]

http://www.europe1.fr/Consommation/Location-l-animal-familier-ne-peut-etre-interdit-399545/

Yes, it's true, but then many French people ignore laws anyway, so I'm not sure this will be any different.

[AnOther]

Does this mean that you cannot even stipulate in your advertising that pets are not allowed, you can say no kids can't you ?

Be interested to see the list of what animals are considered pets though, I can imagine all sorts of claims of discrimination if someone turned up with say a pot bellied pig or a llama !

Who'd be gite owner, sheesh !

[Théière]

[quote user="AnOther"]Does this mean that you cannot even stipulate in your advertising that pets are not allowed, you can you say no kids can't you ?

[/quote]

No kids! then the baby goats will have to stay at home this summer [:P]

What next??????????????

Can you ban pets from the pool? maybe that could be an out, on elf n safety grounds [I]

[zeb]

[quote user="AnOther"]Does this mean that you cannot even stipulate in your advertising that pets are not allowed, you can you say no kids can't you ?

[/quote]

I don't think it's even legal in France to stipulate no kids..

[Polly]

Court ruling here

http://www.courdecassation.fr/jurisprudence_2/premiere_chambre_civile_568/109_3_18843.html

Media reports here:

http://www.europe1.fr/Consommation/Loca ... it-399545/

http://lci.tf1.fr/economie/consommation ... 61010.html

http://www.charentelibre.fr/2011/02/04/ ... 019814.php

For non-French readers, the Cour de Cassation, (the supreme court), has determined that owners of

holiday lets can no longer include clauses in their letting contracts

refusing family pets, by ruling that the law of 1970, which forbids landlords of year-round lets banning pets (other than dogs legally categorised as dangerous), also applies to holiday accommodation.

This wasn't a tin-pot case, it was fought in dept Isère by the consumer group Que Choisir? against Clévacances. The legal eagles at Clévacances and Gites de France are earning their keep this weekend as they assess the judgement.

I've seen steam coming out of owners ears on other fora today, you lot are late getting here! I'm not going to repeat all the arguments, no doubt there'll be plenty of fors/againsts/suggesters of ways-around/unbelievers popping up here.

As with any law, criminal or civil, there are sanctions for any transgressions which are sucessfully challenged in the Courts. It's up to owners whether or not they abide by the law.

For anyone wanting to bother with challenging a gite owner rather than finding pet-friendly accommodation, if you google around you can find useful model letters to landlords which could easily be adpated to a holiday let case. For example :

Madame, Monsieur,

Nous avons signé un bail de location de (...) ans, pour le logement que j'occupe (adresse).

Depuis mon entrée dans les lieux, le (date), j'ai réglé mes loyers à échéance et j'occupe l'appartement en « bon père de famille », comme il est stipulé dans le règlement de copropriété de l'immeuble.

Je vous fait part de mon étonnement, à la réception de votre courrier du (date), m'interdisant la présence d'un chien chez moi. Ce chien, de race (précisez), n'est pas considéré comme dangereux par la loi du 6 janvier 1999 et, faute de preuve contraire, ne gêne en aucune façon les voisins.

En aucun cas, conformément à la loi du 9 juillet 1970, vous ne pouvez m'interdire de posséder un animal dans le local d'habitation que vous me louez.

Si vous persistez dans votre demande, je m'adresserai à la justice.

Veuillez agréer Madame, Monsieur, l'expression de mes salutations respectueuses.

signature

[crossy67]

How would you get on if you were to charge extra for the pet, like a specialist cleaning charge.  You could charge e1000 a week cleaning, that would put off pet owners.  I don't know how a court could dispute that pets can and do often leave premises needing extra cleaning so why not charge for it?

[Théière]

Depends on what pet, the budgie is ok what if Hanibal wants to bring and elephant, any legal guideline? The problem is with the pool as animals frequently defecate in water, so shocking of the pool would be mandatory so an increased cost would be fully justified in my book.

[Polly]

[quote user="Théière"]Depends on what pet, the budgie is ok what if Hanibal wants to bring and elephant, any legal guideline? The problem is with the pool as animals frequently defecate in water, so shocking of the pool would be mandatory so an increased cost would be fully justified in my book.[/quote]

The judges did not deliberate upon the meaning of 'animaux familiers' so we don't have a defintion of family pet. Now, where did that python go, in the skimmers? Has it's head popped up in the pool house yet?

Meanwhile, is that a nappy I spy on the pool steps?

[Polly]

[quote user="crossy67"]How would you get on if you were to charge extra for the pet, like a specialist cleaning charge.  You could charge e1000 a week cleaning, that would put off pet owners.  I don't know how a court could dispute that pets can and do often leave premises needing extra cleaning so why not charge for it?

[/quote]

No legal ruling on it, so try it and see would seem to be the answer!

If you did charge a fortune for cleaning, pet owners could rightly expect the place to be IMMACULATE on arrival and boy, could they make you work for that money a fortnight later (just by asking their kids to 'do your worst').

[Théière]

It needs to be kept in proportion, some pet owners have got used to UK regulations on clearing after their dogs, I know I have, so they should do likewise when in your house or garden. It's having a good look around at the end and checking pool liners and covers for damage. It seems an unfair rule though, some people don't choose to own pets, why should they be forced to accept them in their French house.

[Catalpa]

If this ruling is allowed to stand - the EU courts may challenge it as it is a French law not an EU law - it may be possible to make the property unattractive to pet owners by a) charging for the pet separately as you would an extra person - eg pets, 50 euros per night per animal, b) applying a separate and mandatory cleaning charge (say 500€) to return the accommodation to a pristine condition fit for those who suffer from animal-related allergies - thus convincing those who do that you take their needs seriously, c) requiring all pets to be muzzled outside the property and d) requiring them to be on leads on the property and suggesting that spot checks will be carried out during the rental period.

As a pet owner, I'd go elsewhere.

I recently tried to find accommodation via GdeF for acquaintances who were visiting the area with their dog. In an area with a high proportion of holiday homes, both French and British owned, I was surprised by how few took pets. I'd rather assumed that most French-owned rentals would. They don't. Accordingly, I think GdeF and Clévacances will fight the ruling and this being France, what chance does a mere consumer organisation have? [:D]  

[Catalpa]

[quote user="Polly"]If you did charge a fortune for cleaning, pet owners could rightly expect the place to be IMMACULATE on arrival and boy, could they make you work for that money a fortnight later (just by asking their kids to 'do your worst').[/quote]

Putting aside the fact that many owners do provide IMMACULATE accommodation and that in itself can be a reason that they do not accept pets, proposing that a holidaymaker would choose to pay the "fortune" and then require their kids to trash the place during their stay rather lacks logic. More logical to choose accommodation that did not charge a fortune for cleaning in the first place.

And apart from any higher than normal cleaning charge, renters of most holiday accommodation hand over a refundable damage deposit from which deductions can be made if the renters "do their worst". A vindictive holidaymaker could pay dearly for satisfying any urge for spiteful behaviour.

But perhaps that's your experience of responsible pet owners, Polly. [6]

[Polly]

Catalpa, I was just postulating a scenario (an extremely unlikely one) for the purposes of debate and general enlightenment through such a debate.

[dave21478]

Its simple - If you don't want to accept pets, then don't. Include an "Are you traveling with animals?" field in your initial booking request on the pretense of needing to know for insurance reasons and if they say yes, then those dates are unavailable aren't they? No, they are definitely not available, sorry.

And I can promise that if anyone sent me a letter like the one listed on the previous page, they would not be staying.

[Catalpa]

[quote user="Polly"]...I was just postulating a scenario (an extremely unlikely one) for the purposes of debate and general enlightenment through such a debate.[/quote]

Reasoned debate and general enlightenment rarely comes through examination of extreme - and unlikely - scenarios.

[pachapapa]

[quote user="Catalpa"][quote user="Polly"]...I was just postulating a scenario (an extremely unlikely one) for the purposes of debate and general enlightenment through such a debate.[/quote]
Reasoned debate and general enlightenment rarely comes through examination of extreme - and unlikely - scenarios.
[/quote]

Do you mean I will not be taking Schrödinger's cat on a gite holiday this year?

[cooperlola]

How true, Catalpa, and people's pets do seem to bring out extremes in both sides!

I reckon that Dave has this right and that property owners who want to avoid confrontation just need to tackle this in a different way.  In fact I rather doubt that many pet owners would really push this very far but would prefer to find a truly pet friendly place than stay somewhere they are clearly not welcome.  I suspect that high deposits for people with pets and unreasonable cleaning charges, on the other hand, may well result in the more radical pro-animal types taking such people to court.  Better to be subtle, I suspect.

[woolybanana]

Under this law, it would be illegal to ask questions about pets, as it would be illegal to ask questions about race?

[dave21478]

Maybe, maybe not. However, I would still ask anyway. Joe Average will reply one way or another, and if they have pets and I were so inclined, I would find an excuse not to rent to them. If they refused to answer, I would assume they have pets / are an arrogant twat and still find an excuse to refuse the rental.

People need to grow a pair here..... its your house, you have the final say over who stays in it, not some paper-pusher at the other end of the country.

[Polly]

You've widened the debate here, Dave: if you're running a business such as a holiday let or & a B&B you cannot legally refuse to accept guests on the basis of their race or disability for a start!

[cooperlola]

Would you have to give two male dogs a double kennel?