Missy, a four-pound pocket poodle pictured above, was a beloved pet of a condo owner who had serious health problems, including a stroke.  One day her guardian was asleep and not breathing normally.  Missy climbed on her chest and proceeded to do mouth to mouth resuscitation. Her human already loved her dearly, but after Missy saved her life, the two were even closer.  (Read other stories about life-saving pets - click here.)

This is a dog that a heartless condo board insisted be removed.  Missy was placed with the woman's sister, who ended up not being able to take care of Missy because of travel requirements of her job.  Missy was taken back temporarily until another caretaker could be found.  The new guardians moved and her original guardian has no idea what happened to her.  It just broke her heart.  

As a result of the emotional anguish due to the loss of her beloved pet, Missy's human guardian's health began to suffer.  Her blood pressure skyrocketed to 210 (upper number), making her at risk for another stroke.  She cries every night for her dog.  This is just too sad.

In a related story (more to follow later), a south Florida condo board is being sued by the family of a man who was forced to give up his dog.  The board would simply not listen when he said her needed the dog for his health.  (..not sure at this point whether he presented a doctors letter - but then some boards illegally take it upon themselves to make decisions about a doctors letter.)  The man died from a stroke.  I wonder who will win...

Pappy	Sophie

Pappy and his companion Sophie were victims of a home owners association who wouldn't allow these sweet babies to be at their location anymore.

Petfinder had this ad to try to place them  "They are very small and they would like to remain together. Pappy is 10 and Sophie is 11 years old. They have been with the same owner all those years. They are very sweet and loving and don't deserve what has happened to them. They are very frightened right now being somewhere they aren't familar with and around people they don't know. They warm up to you once they know you. They are a cute little couple."

Unfortunately this is NOT the end of the story.  A request for a picture of Sophie brought this response from the shelter that listed the pair of dogs: 

Dog Saves Disabled Owner From Fire, Dies Trying To Save Fellow Pet Cat

It was heart-wrenching for Miss Pinky's "mommy" to consider removing her pet
because of heartless condo no-pet rules.

A man and his dog were walking along a road. The man was enjoying the scenery, when it suddenly occurred to him that he was dead.

He remembered dying, and that the dog walking beside him had been dead for years. He wondered where the road was leading them.

After a while, they came to a high, white stone wall along one side of the road.  It looked like fine marble. At the top of a long hill, it was
broken by a tall arch that glowed in the sunlight.

When he was standing before it he saw a magnificent gate in the arch that looked like mother-of-pearl, and the street that led to the gate looked like pure gold.
He and the dog walked toward the gate, and as he got closer, he saw a man at a desk to one side

When he was close enough, he called out, "Excuse me, where are we?"

"This is Heaven, sir," the man answered.

"Wow! Would you happen to have some water?" the man asked.

"Of course, sir. Come right in, and I'll have some ice water brought right up."

The man gestured, and the gate began to open.

"Can my friend," gesturing toward his dog, "come in, too?" the traveler asked.

"I'm sorry, sir, but we don't accept pets."

The man thought a moment and then turned back toward the road and continued the way he had been going with his dog.

After another long walk, and at the top of another long hill, he came to a dirt road leading through a farm gate that looked as if it had never been closed.
There was no fence.

As he approached the gate, he saw a man inside, leaning against a tree and reading a book.

"Excuse me!" he called to the man. "Do you have any water?"

"Yeah, sure, there's a pump over there, come on in."

"How about my friend here?" the traveler gestured to the dog.

"There should be a bowl by the pump."

They went through the gate, and sure enough, there was an old-fashioned hand pump with a bowl beside it.

The traveler filled the water bowl and took a long drink himself, then he gave some to the dog.

When they were full, he and the dog walked back toward the man who was standing by the tree.

"What do you call this place?" the traveler asked.

"This is Heaven," he answered.

"Well, that's confusing," the traveler said. "The man down the road said that was Heaven, too."

"Oh, you mean the place with the gold street and pearly gates? Nope. That's hell."

"Doesn't it make you mad for them to use your name like that?"

"No, we're just happy that they screen out the folks who would leave their best friends behind."

(source unknown)

My story - How Citizens for Pets in Condos Got Started

My name is Maida Waldner Genser.  I retired and moved down to Florida with my husband in 2004.  We lived in a condo in Michigan and had no idea that condo living in Florida was so restrictive. 

I needed a hip replacement and looked (back home and also all over the country, via the internet) for a place we could afford to live.  We needed a place all on one floor, where we could have our two pet cats who we rescued from an animal shelter.  A realtor down in Florida found a bunch of places that (supposedly) fit our requirements, so we took a trip down to see some properties.  We were given condo documents for the place we chose, and also a form for the "interview."  The idea of having to be interviewed to buy a home should have been the first clue that something was not right about this deal, even if this process is par for the course in Florida.  Someone should have told us right then what we heard later:  "When you move into a condo, you lose your constitutional
rights!"  But remember, we came from a condo in Michigan.  We had NO IDEA!

The condo papers said you could have one pet.  The interview form had a space to fill in information about that pet.  (I had two, so I was already in trouble, but the buying and selling realtors assured us that a lot of people in this condo community have pets; they just hide them.)  We did not interview BEFORE putting our nest egg down - one of the problems with the whole real estate process down here.  We made an offer; it was accepted; and we signed a contract with the seller.  We had already returned home to Michigan when we received a call from the buying realtor saying the board wanted us to come back to have an interview before we could move in. 

We refused.  We couldn't afford another, unplanned trip down to Florida, especially with all of the moving expenses coming up.  We had to concentrate on getting our home sold up in Michigan and packing to move - quickly.  I had to be set up someplace as soon as possible where I could have surgery that was already overdue.  So, what we did was fill in the interview form and say we would go to the interview after we moved down.  I filled in information about one of the kitties.  The realtor called us back.  There was a problem.  The board member who was in contact with our realtor said the policy had changed to no pets, but don't worry, just fill out a new form and don't mention the pets.

That is how we ended up moving in with our cats, prior to any interview.  It was very difficult for us to do what was required because of health problems, but we did what we had to do and got ourselves down here.  I dreaded the interview, but the board members who interviewed us did not put a special check mark next to "no pets" on the form we had to sign, and did not ask us outright about pets.  (They did have a special check mark next to no trucks, G-d forbid someone would do something as terrible as choose one of the nice-looking, longer-lasting small pickups that are so much more popular these days.)  So, we signed our life away, when we signed the form on the day of the interview. 

I went ahead and had my hip replacement down here.  While I was just weaning myself off of a walker to a cane, we received that fateful letter saying that we needed to get rid of our "cat."  (Evidently, whatever busybody was spying through our windows only saw one of the cats.)

It would have been a real hardship to move at that point, with no equity built up at all, and the huge moving costs we experienced.  We also had to pay for a lot for help packing and unpacking due to our infirmities.  I could barely walk or bend.  How could we think about moving again so soon?  Even so, I told the board we would move before getting rid of our two cats.

We got letters from our next door neighbors saying they did not mind the cats and also got a letter from my therapist in Michigan.  I told people at social/club meetings for our building that we might have to move.  Neighbors were supportive.  They told us there were other people in the building with cats. 

I met with the board.  I told them that, based on our previous condo living experience, we assumed that the board would be reasonable and that the no-pet rules were "soft" rules, meant to be used when animals created a nuisance.  I just could not believe they would go after someone whose pets were not causing any kind of problem.  I found it incredible that someone would take the initiative to report on us for no reason, especially when other people had pets.  Not only the realtors, but other unit owners told us that.  The board asked me to tell them who had pets so they could go after them, too.  I told them I refused to turn in people and cause other people to go through the same anguish.  (While it was against my ethics to use other people to make my case, I can understand how people can be desperate enough to keep their beloved pets that they fall for these tactics.) 

The board still gave us a hard time. 

We thought about starting a petition, but were afraid that that would cause more trouble if we tried to go door to door.  All we would need was one anti-pet person to report us for trying to find support.  We checked with lawyers and had some names for backup in case we went that route. 

One thing we did, that we thought would help, was to submit my husband as a candidate to fill an announced board opening.  Since he had good management experience and was involved on committees in our last condo, he was accepted.  Amazingly, we received two letters in one week:  One letter welcomed my husband to the board.  The other said that we either had to remove the cats or move out within two weeks.

What I finally ended up doing was to get a "doctor's letter" from a local psychiatrist who was licensed in Florida.  And that is how we won our case.  Based on this ordeal, and knowing how many people were hiding pets in fear of being caught (my what criminals!), I started Citizens for Pets in Condos.

This is not the end of the story.  After we won our case, the board restored language that came from a amendment that had passed ten years ago saying no pets into the documents.  (Remember the documents at the time we moved in did NOT have the no-pet clause).  I noticed a problem with the advance copies of the rules, and questioned the board at the public meeting where the board voted to restore the language from the amendment.  I specifically asked whether the wording in the rules document was exactly word for word as in the amendment, with no changes added.  The board president publicly answered that the wording was the same as the amendment that was voted in by the unit owners.

I maintain that the way the no pet rule was added back was illegal, because they added language that was NOT in the amendment, effectively adding that visitors could not bring pets.  That is not what the amendment specifically said.  Those added words are something that should be legally interpreted in a court of law.  I sent a certified letter to the board to ask about this added language.  In a meeting with the board president and the management company representative, I was told that the condo lawyer had added the clause about visitors.  The lawyer should have known better.  Wording of amendments is not supposed to be changed. 

In the same certified letter, I also questioned an unfortunate choice of words in the section that was added (ie., wording that was not in the amendment that passed a vote of unit owners.)  The added section said [EXACT wording and spelling]:

       "If a pet becomes obnoxious to resident; in any way the owner must cause the problem to be corrected;  [no problem
       so far, other than the illiterate language used, but here comes the kicker...] and if not corrected the owner, upon
          written notice by the Association, well be required to dispose of the pet at t he discretion of the Board."

The objectionable wording was "dispose of the pet," as if a beloved family member was something you could just discard like garbage!  The manager saw no reason for my objection.  He said that they looked the wording up in the dictionary and found it to be suitable, totally missing the negative connotation that would be more than obvious to any pet-lover.

I never received a formal written response, as promised and required by law. 

Still not the end of the story:

I attended hearings for several pet owners who were challenged as I had been.  They both had doctor's letters from mental health professionals.  The board chose to question the letters by asking these distraught people to appear before the "fining committee" to make their case.  The head of that fining committee had made public statements that the only kinds of pets covered by doctor's letters are seeing-eye dogs or other such dogs required for physical disabilities.  I came to observe and informed the people who were brought in to be questioned about the right to have an emotional support animal.  The committee also did not seem to know that the terms "depression" and "anxiety," when used by a medical professional, are clinical terms, not subject to their interpretation or prying.  With my assistance, both cases were won to allow pets. 

A few days later, I received a letter from the board dropping me from the finance committee.  (That is an interesting variation on typical board retaliation.  I have heard several stories about boards retaliating when unit owners raise questions about other problems in their community by asking them to remove pets that have been in their units for many years.)

contact Maida

"I hope that someday they can understand that it's not Just a Dog."

Touching Story - Why Dogs Don't Live As Long

An old man bent and twisted with age, finally passed from this earth. He
found himself on a path through a dark woods. The further he got down the
path the lighter it became, as he finally came out of the woods he saw a
bridge in the distance.

Knowing this is the bridge to paradise, he starts to walk faster. Just
before he starts to cross the bridge every animal he had ever known
gathered around him with joyful barks, meows and chirps, they led him over
the bridge to the gate where God waited.

God smiled at the man, and silently opened the gate for him. The man
confused asked God, Don't I need to tell you about my life, and why I
should be allowed here.

God glanced at all the animals playing around the man's feet, and said,
and said, " No my son they've already told me".

-anonymous

We get letters requesting help (click here to see some), but there is not much we can suggest other than telling people to get a doctor's letter, if they qualify.  People should not have to be sick to keep their pets.  It is society that is sick, not people who only want a soft furry animal to pet and cuddle.