Washington: their own screening criteria are your best document
Applicants in this state are entitled to know what a landlord screens on before they apply. Very few people ever read that document, and it is frequently the single most useful piece of paper in the whole exchange.
Three places a refusal can go
Most states offer two. Knowing which is nearest to you is worth a few minutes.
Choosing one does not close the others, and where more than one set of rules covers the same facts, whichever gives you more governs that point. Nothing local can subtract from the national floor.
Why the screening document matters so much
A landlord here is expected to tell applicants what will be looked at and what will disqualify them. That produces something unusual: a written statement, made before anybody knew your circumstances, of the standards being applied.
Ask for it, and keep it. If a refusal later rests on a reason that appears nowhere in that document, the gap between the two is doing a great deal of work for you and very little for them.
It matters just as much when the criteria do mention animals. A published rule barring animals, or capping weight, or listing breeds, is exactly the provision a request seeks to have waived — so quoting it back is not an obstacle, it is the thing you are naming.
The same logic applies to order of application. Where a landlord is expected to take applicants in the order they applied, a request that suddenly slows your application down is measurable against a standard rather than against a feeling.
Five things to collect and do
All of it before anything formal, and all of it quick.
Two Washingtons, either side of the mountains
If a notice arrives instead of an answer
Washington gives renters protections governing the ending of a tenancy and the notice owed before it happens. Those sit apart from the animal question and have forums of their own, yet the two converge precisely when a landlord sets out to be difficult.
So a notice, or a steep increase, landing soon after you asked belongs in both places rather than one. The timing counts as a fact by itself, and it stays one however plausible the market explanation offered alongside.
Whichever route you take, pay what you owe throughout. A missed payment gives them a termination ground entirely unconnected to your request, and being right about the animal repairs none of it.
Questions from Washington
They never gave me any screening criteria.
Their criteria say no animals over twenty-five pounds.
Should I complain to the city or the state?
My housing came with a seasonal farm job.
Washington State Human Rights Commission
The state agency that receives and investigates housing discrimination complaints in Washington, alongside HUD.
42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619
The federal statute prohibiting housing discrimination, including on the basis of disability. Refusing a reasonable accommodation that a person with a disability needs to use and enjoy a dwelling is a form of discrimination under this Act.
24 CFR § 100.204
HUD's regulation implementing the reasonable accommodation duty, including the example of waiving a no-pets rule for a person who needs an assistance animal.
24 CFR § 100.202
Sets out the general prohibitions on disability discrimination in housing and limits inquiries into whether a person has a disability.
HUD Notice FHEO-2020-01
HUD's central guidance on assistance animals in housing: the difference between a service animal and a support animal, what information a housing provider may request, and how requests should be assessed.