Assistance Animal Regulations

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) states that disabled persons may live in accommodation with their service animals, even where pets are not usually allowed.

Service animals are supposed to be extremely well behaved due to their extensive training, and thus are not considered as pets. However, when tenants claim ordinary pets are service animals, this puts the landlord, staff, and other residents in a multidwelling building in danger.

Emotional Support -vs- Service Animal

Emotional Support Animals Do Not Have the Same Rights as Service Animals. Service animals are trained specifically to assist with an individual’s disability and are recognized by the ADA. Emotional support animals, however, are not ADA approved animals and therefore are not exempt from certain restrictions such as access to public places or private establishments in the same way that service animals are.

The Fair Housing Act protects owners of emotional support animals to live with their ESA in most housing situations.

• Service Pet - protected by the Americans With Disabilities Act
• Emotional Support Pet - protected by the Fair Housing Act

The Americans With Disabilities Act has a precise definition of a service animal: a dog or a miniature horse that has been trained to perform a specific task for a person with a disability.

Fair Housing Act

A housing provider may not ordinarily inquire as to the nature and severity of an individual's disability (see Answer 16, above). However, in response to a request for a reasonable accommodation, a housing provider may request reliable disability-related information that (1) is necessary to verify that the person meets the Act's definition of disability (i.e., has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities), (2) describes the needed accommodation, and (3) shows the relationship between the person's disability and the need for the requested accommodation. Depending on the individual's circumstances, information verifying that the person meets the Act's definition of disability can usually be provided by the individual himself or herself (e.g., proof that an individual under 65 years of age receives Supplemental Security Income or Social Security Disability Insurance benefits10 or a credible statement by the individual). A doctor or other medical professional, a peer support group, a non-medical service agency, or a reliable third party who is in a position to know about the individual's disability may also provide verification of a disability. In most cases, an individual's medical records or detailed information about the nature of a person's disability is not necessary for this inquiry. Once a housing provider has established that a person meets the Act's definition of disability, the provider's request for documentation should seek only the information that is necessary to evaluate if the reasonable accommodation is needed because of a disability. Such information must be kept confidential and must not be shared with other persons unless they need the information to make or assess a decision to grant or deny a reasonable accommodation request or unless disclosure is required by law (e.g., a court-issued subpoena requiring disclosure).

State and Local

In Lincoln Nebraska the Lincoln Commission on Human Rights initiated its own complaint against a Lincoln housing provider allegedly charging renters deposits and monthly fees for companion animals.

The Commission hired an Omaha organization to test the housing provider, with callers posing as possible renters and asking questions about companion animal policies.