It is possible, but per the ADA law, they don’t have to tell you. They legally can say that they have no animals and then show up with one. And many people actually do that to avoid people that are legitimately discriminating against disabled people.
I guess all the signs in bars/restaurants saying that “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason…” Do not apply to service dogs, LOL. As it shouldn’t.
I think it’s disgraceful for people to abuse this policy. I traveled a lot with my dog and paid handsomely for accommodations that allowed it OR stayed in some not-so-nice places, that I’d rather not stay, in order to be able to have my dog.
3 Likes
I stopped reading after this, I just couldn’t. You legit tell @faheem off with the biggest no I’ve ever seen and accuse him of ‘stereotyping’ (when what he said was just a very reasonable misunderstanding, and then say
‘normal life’ - meaning the person with the disability leading to them benefiting from an assistance dog does not have a ‘normal life’ without it (not just stereotyping but very discriminatory language and um wrong, what’s ‘normal’ very few people on this forum seem to be lately 
unless acting like the Kardashian’s is the new normal)
And then
‘Wheelchair bound’ - really??? a person with a mobility disability might use a wheelchair, they are not bound in or to it.
Please don’t call others out when you appear to need educating yourself
2 Likes
Fun fact! In Wisconsin (or at least in my part of the state) the health department requires a “minimum 12” foldover" of a flat sheet to cover the top of the duvet/comforter/thingamajig. This is because it is not required to wash said duvet/comforter/thingamajig between guests and thats supposed to minimize contact with the guest. I now cringe every time I walk into a hotel room and see the dreaded foldover 
6 Likes
Can we dial down the hostility a little, please? You have completely misread my post. I am saying that just because you can’t see a person’s disability, doesn’t mean there isn’t one. That is an assumption that most people make. And the comment that people with service dogs likely wouldn’t be traveling because they are so disabled is a perpetuation of that stereotype- that you have to be a certain level of sickness or physically handicapped before people will see your disability as valid. My exact words were, “They are not just for people who are wheelchair bound or paralyzed or something like that.” I didn’t say anything about all people using wheelchairs as being wheelchair-bound. My point is that a lot of people use service dogs for very significant disabilities that you would never know they had by looking at them.
I honestly don’t think that is required anywhere. Most hotels don’t wash their comforter/bedspread things between every guest.
6 Likes
Ugh. I had assumed that most hotels/motels didn’t always wash that top layer. I just didn’t know until I started hosting that it wasn’t at least encouraged! Blech
This is a tricky one. Because of Federal Equal Access Laws, it’s probably not up to you to prohibit Service Animals since it’s not a shared space. You may be in violation of Federal Law which could get you in serious trouble. Believe it or not there are disabled people who actively seek out business owners in violation of the laws and slap them with expensive lawsuits. Not sayin’ this person was, but you need to find out for sure. Airbnb should certainly know the law since they could also get sued. Of course, they can afford lawyers, can you?
The “shared space” requirement is AirBnB’s, not federal law. This is our family home that we are renting out, and the law (at this point in time) doesn’t apply. I’m sure at some point, the law will address short-term/part-time vacation rentals, but for now, it’s a gray area.
2 Likes
The Fair Housing Act does not apply to "Transient occupancy,” such as a brief stay in a motel. It’s meant for long-term rentals.
Wow, super helpful. Thanks.
Since you so graciously offered to have me read the Fair Housing Act myself instead of share your knowledge with the forum, I did. Here you go.
§3602. Definitions
As used in this subchapter—
(b) “Dwelling” means any building, structure, or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more families, and any vacant land which is offered for sale or lease for the construction or location thereon of any such building, structure, or portion thereof.
RESIDENCE. As in, they live there. So again, the Fair Housing Act does not apply to a vacation rental, as people are using the residence for VACATION, not RESIDENCE.
Now, you will notice how every subsection of this act specifies discrimination in regards to DWELLINGS.
§3604. Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices
As made applicable by section 3603 of this title and except as exempted by sections 3603(b) and 3607 of this title, it shall be unlawful—
(a) To refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.
(b) To discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.
(c) To make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination.
(d) To represent to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin that any dwelling is not available for inspection, sale, or rental when such dwelling is in fact so available.
(e) For profit, to induce or attempt to induce any person to sell or rent any dwelling by representations regarding the entry or prospective entry into the neighborhood of a person or persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
(f)(1) To discriminate in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer or renter because of a handicap of—
(A) that buyer or renter,1
(B) a person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after it is so sold, rented, or made available; or
(C) any person associated with that buyer or renter.
Perhaps now that you have read it, you will understand and retain this knowledge. 
omg, if you know something that the rest of us don’t, by all means, share.
I’m not owner-occupied. It’s a whole-house rental. But I also don’t think that an AirBnB rental fall under the same category as a hotel where you’re renting a bazillion rooms at once.
2 Likes
That’s just nuts to me! So the guy doing all the suing is “offended”? He just sees dollar signs. And this is for people renting their own homes that are not child proof…is he going to go after all the adult only resorts next?
But, what about “equal access” to public places? I think this is a gray area that could end up in court. If you’re opening your home to the public it may apply. Sooner or later it’s going to come up.
1 Like
and then again…it may not apply.
Fact is, until laws are tested in a court of law,
and make the way all the way up to the Supreme Court…
all laws and language is Open to Interpretation.
There is no right or wrong answer…it will someday be interpreted as such by a court of law, and perhaps challenged, and challenged again.
The goal is simply to try to avoid being the test case or house that ends up on the receiving end of the lawsuit.
That means applying the written law as you deem the correct way, and / or answering or dodging in such a way as remains comfortably within the parameters of the legislation.
This argument amongst owners has been going on for years now. Let’s all not try to be right…rather help each other to maintain individual standards without circumventing the absolutes of the law.