ADVERTISEMENTS


Dognition.com - How well do you know your pet?

Give The Bark -- The Ultimate Dog Magazine



Introducing the New Havahart Wireless Custom-Shape Dog Fence

Fine Leather Dog Collars For All Breeds

Heartspeak message cards


Mixed-breed DNA test to find out the breeds that make up you dog.

Bulldog Leash Hook

Healthy Dog Treats

Free Shipping - Pet Medication


SitStay, Good for Your Dog Supplies

books on dogs

Keep your dog, lose your parking space

trumpvillageResidents who have snuck dogs into a no-dogs-allowed Brooklyn housing co-op are being told to get rid of their dogs, or face monthly $100 fines and the loss of their parking spaces.

The co-op board notified residents of  Trump Village of the new enforcement policy in a notice last month.

“I think it’s totally ridiculous,” Marylyn Langsdorf, 66, who lives with her 6-pound Yorkshire terrier, Chelsea, told the New York Daily News. “I think the whole point is to just get money from us.”

Langsdorf and other residents with dogs have already been fined, but they’ve yet to have their parking spaces revoked.

About 1,700 residents live in the three-building complex, and a dozen already have contacted a Manhattan attorney who specializes in pet-related tenant rights.

“It’s a way to extract money from these folks and scare the hell out of them to give up dogs they’ve had for years,” said attorney Maddy Tarnofsky.

Warren Hirsch, a spokesman for the Trump Village co-op board, said “a small number of residents have surreptitiously smuggled in dogs in defiance of the rules and regulations binding them. They have thumbed their noses at their fellow cooperators and dared the co-op to do something about it.”

(Photo: Langsdorf, left, with Chelsea, and another dog-owning resident; New York Daily News)

Comments

Comment from Pat
Time March 15, 2010 at 9:32 am

I know for an animal lover this is going to sound strange, but why would someone move into a building that prohibits dogs with a dog? I have to assume that they had to sign a contract before moving in and that they knew the rules.

Comment from Miss Jan
Time March 15, 2010 at 11:08 am

To anyone contemplating residing in any purchased or leased residence which is overseen by a co-op board or homeowners association: read up on the litigation first. Regulations can be changed in the blink of an eye (or a closed-door meeting) by Boards, without notice. Pets may be permitted when you move in but one pet-hater on the Board is all it takes. Please educate yourself before moving in to a place where your reasonable use of your residence is subject to often retaliatory control by others who may have quite an agenda – in one bit of litigation I worked on five years ago the HO Board was willing to pursue EVEN TO THE APPELLATE LEVEL trying to prevent a much-decorated war veteran, retired career military officer, from displaying the American flag. capricious, controlling behavior of co-op and homeowners association boards (or even where there are illegally restrictive covenants running with the land in stand-alone homes in subdivisions) does not start and stop with pets but can be as egregious as punishing a homeowner for a crying baby.

Comment from justine
Time March 15, 2010 at 3:28 pm

This is such a horrible situation. I wish everyone involved the best. I could never part ways from my furry kids. Though if you must, please consider going to a local shelter at Wet Nose Guide (www.wetnoseguide.com)

Comment from Eighteenpaws
Time March 15, 2010 at 5:32 pm

If I read this properly, this is about people who knowingly broke no-pet rules but also about people who already had pets when the new rules were imposed. The former is silly and futile (and unfortunate for the pets involved), but for co-op management to impose the latter is inexcusable, and yes, clearly a money-grabber for them. I have seen this before among my own friends. I also fear that one day, despite my totally fenced, wooded acres for my dogs, my town will impose some “maximum dog” rule, as they have callously discussed. When they simultaneously impose “maximum resident” or “maximum children” rules per household, with no provisions for existing situations, then perhaps I will better empathize.

Write a comment