Can a landlord charge for a pet in Virginia, and what does the law require for an assistance animal?

Yes — no pet figure exists, but a pet deposit is a security deposit however it is named and counts inside the general deposit cap.

Virginia names the pet deposit inside the definition of a security deposit, which is any refundable deposit of money furnished by a tenant to secure performance of the rental agreement, as security for damages to the premises, or as a pet deposit (section 55.1-1200). A pet deposit therefore counts against the two-month cap instead of sitting on top of it, and it must be refundable. There is no separate pet-deposit figure, no per-animal multiplier and no pet-specific exemption anywhere in the act. A charge that is not refundable is not a security deposit at all: it is rent, and it is answered under pet rent and fees below. Nothing may be charged to keep an assistance animal, by way of a pet fee, a deposit or additional rent (section 36-96.3:1, subsection A), and a guide dog, hearing dog or service dog carries a second no-extra-compensation rule (section 51.5-45, subsection B).

Refundability: Refundable. A security deposit is only a refundable deposit of money (section 55.1-1200), so anything called a pet deposit must be refundable, and the money may be applied only to accrued rent including late charges, damage from the tenant's noncompliance less reasonable wear and tear, other damages or charges provided in the rental agreement, and actual damages for a breach of the agreement (section 55.1-1226, subsection A).

The general deposit cap it sits against: Two months' periodic rent, and the cap reaches a security deposit however denominated (section 55.1-1226, subsection A). The same two months is also the ceiling on the deposit taken together with any damage-insurance and renter's-insurance premiums collected before the tenancy begins (section 55.1-1208, subsection A, paragraph 7). The security-deposits page carries the general cap, the permitted applications of the money and the 45-day return.

Yes — pet rent or a pet fee may be charged, and no statute caps it.

Pet rent and pet fees are uncapped, and Virginia has no general bar on non-refundable fees for a pet charge to run into: the eight prohibited lease provisions include none, and the only fee bars in the act are the maintenance-and-repair bar and the payment-collection rule (section 55.1-1208, subsections A and C, and section 55.1-1204, subsection J). What Virginia requires instead is disclosure. A written lease must itemize, beginning on its first page, the security deposit, the rent due each payment period and any one-time charges due before the commencement date or included in the first rental payment, and immediately above that list the lease must state that no additional security deposits or rent may be charged unless they are listed there or added by a separate addendum signed after the lease (section 55.1-1204.1). A prohibited provision is unenforceable, and a tenant sued on one recovers actual damages and reasonable attorney fees (section 55.1-1208, subsection B). None of these charges may be imposed for an assistance animal.

Monthly pet rent: Monthly pet rent is rent, which the act defines as all money other than a security deposit owed or paid to the landlord under the rental agreement (section 55.1-1200). Nothing in the act caps it and no reasonableness standard applies to it.

A one-time pet fee: A one-time pet fee that is not refundable falls outside the definition of a security deposit and is rent as well, so it escapes the two-month cap. It must still be itemized beginning on the first page of a written lease as a one-time charge due before the lease starts or included in the first payment (section 55.1-1204.1). Since July 1, 2026 a landlord may not require a tenant to pay any fee for the maintenance or repair of a dwelling unit unless the tenant's violation of the act made it necessary (section 55.1-1208, subsection C); whether that clause reaches a recurring pet-cleaning charge is untested.

Not as a duty to have one — a disclosure condition attaches instead of a duty to have a policy.

No Virginia statute requires a lease to say whether pets are allowed, and none supplies a default when the lease is silent. What fires instead is a charge-triggered disclosure: once a landlord charges a pet deposit, pet rent or a one-time pet fee, that charge must be itemized beginning on the first page of the written lease, and the prescribed sentence above the list bars charging additional deposits or rent that are neither listed there nor added by a later addendum (section 55.1-1204.1). The duty comes from a general fee statute rather than a pet-specific one, so it fires on the money and not on the policy. The act's only substantive animal duty falls on the tenant, who must use reasonable care to prevent a dog or other animal in the possession of the tenant, an authorized occupant, a guest or an invitee from causing injury to a third party or damage to the unit or the premises (section 55.1-1227, subsection A, paragraph 15). No statute limits the number of pets, and no publicly financed or income-restricted housing class in Virginia is required to allow them.

Changing the rule mid-tenancy: A pet rule is a rule or regulation. One adopted, changed or given to the tenant after the lease is signed binds only if the tenant has had reasonable notice of it and it is not a substantial modification of the tenant's bargain; if it is a substantial modification, it is not valid unless the tenant consents to it in writing (section 55.1-1228, subsection B). Any pet rule must also satisfy the six conditions in subsection A, including that its purpose is to promote the convenience, safety or welfare of tenants or to preserve the property from abusive use, that it applies to all tenants fairly, that it is explicit enough to inform the tenant what is required, and that the tenant was given a copy when the lease was signed or when the rule was adopted. A court treats a violation of a reasonable rule as a breach of the rental agreement (subsection C).

Yes, for a pet — the only breed rule in housing is that an assistance animal may not be refused on breed.

Virginia law neither limits nor authorizes a private landlord's breed, size or weight rule for pets; such a clause is an ordinary rule of the tenancy, enforceable only if it meets the conditions in section 55.1-1228. The one breed rule in housing protects assistance animals. A housing provider may refuse one on dangerousness only where the animal poses a clear and present threat of substantial harm to others or to the dwelling itself that is not solely based on breed, size, or type and cannot be reduced or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation (section 36-96.3:2, subsection D), so a refusal resting on breed alone is not a lawful ground. There is no insurance or governing-document route out of that rule; instead, a substantial increase in the cost of the owner's insurance policy is one of the factors weighed in deciding whether an accommodation is an undue financial and administrative burden (subsection C). Virginia has no bar on breed-based insurance underwriting; what its insurance title has is a permitted conduct-based animal-liability exclusion on owner-occupied dwelling policies (section 38.2-2128), described in the notes below.

Size and weight: The same sentence reaches size and type: a refusal must rest on a clear and present threat of substantial harm that is not solely based on breed, size, or type (section 36-96.3:2, subsection D). The enacted words are breed, size and type, not weight, so a weight limit is reached only so far as it operates as a size rule. For ordinary pets no statute reaches breed, size or weight at all.

Yes — a state statute or rule sets what a landlord may request or what a certifier must meet for an assistance animal in housing. The operative rules are statutory. State law incorporates a federal statute or codified regulation by reference.

Two housing rules run in parallel. Under the Virginia Fair Housing Law, when a request for a reasonable accommodation establishes that the accommodation is necessary to give a person with a disability, who has a disability-related need, an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling, and imposes neither an undue financial and administrative burden nor a fundamental alteration of the operations of the person receiving the request, the request is reasonable and shall be granted (section 36-96.3:2, subsection A). The person receiving the request must offer to engage in a good-faith interactive process, and the requester is not required to accept an alternative accommodation if the one requested is also reasonable (subsection C). A request may be refused only on four grounds, namely that the person is not disabled, that there is no disability-related need, that the accommodation is an undue financial and administrative burden, or that it would fundamentally alter the operations of the person receiving the request, or on a clear and present threat of substantial harm that is not solely based on breed, size, or type and cannot be reduced or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation (subsection D). The animal itself must work, provide assistance, or perform tasks for the benefit of the requester, or provide emotional support that alleviates one or more identified symptoms or effects of the requester's disability. Separately, every person with a disability unrelated to the ability to acquire, rent or maintain property is entitled to full and equal opportunity to acquire housing accommodations, and a person with a guide dog, a hearing dog or a service dog is entitled to full and equal access with that dog and may not be required to pay extra compensation for it (section 51.5-45, subsections A and B). That title requires no modification of the property and no higher degree of care, and does not require renting to a person who would be a direct threat to the property or the safety of others (subsection C).

Who it binds: The fair housing duties in sections 36-96.3:1 and 36-96.3:2 inherit the chapter's exemptions (section 36-96.2): a single-family house rented by an owner who owns no more than three at a time, and then only if it is rented without the sales or rental facilities or services of a broker, agent or other person in the business of renting dwellings and without advertising; and rooms or units in a dwelling for no more than four families living independently where the owner actually occupies one of them. Neither exemption reaches a licensee of the Real Estate Board or a regulant of the Fair Housing Board, whether acting personally or professionally, and the ban on discriminatory advertising binds even an exempt owner (section 36-96.3, subsection A, paragraph 3). The separate right in section 51.5-45 does not inherit those exemptions: it reaches every housing accommodation except a single-family residence whose occupant or owner rents, leases or furnishes for compensation no more than one room in it. The practical consequence is that a tenant with a guide dog, hearing dog or service dog is protected against small landlords the fair housing law releases, while a tenant with an emotional support animal, whose only route is the fair housing law, is not. The money and lease rules bind every residential landlord (section 55.1-1201, subsections A and B).

Tiered. If the disability is obvious or otherwise known to the person receiving the request, or if the need for the requested accommodation is readily apparent or known, no additional verification about the disability may be requested. If the disability is readily apparent or known but the disability-related need is not, additional verification of that need may be asked for. Otherwise the person receiving the request may ask the requester for reliable documentation of the disability and of the disability-related need for an assistance animal, and must then evaluate the request and any reliable supporting documentation that verifies both (section 36-96.3:1, subsections B, C and D).

A treatment relationship is required.

Who may certify: Documentation may come from any person with whom the requester has or has had a therapeutic relationship, and the statute names four sources. The first is a mental health service provider as that term is defined for the professions title, which names a certified substance abuse counselor, clinical psychologist, clinical social worker, licensed substance abuse treatment practitioner, licensed practical nurse, marriage and family therapist, mental health professional, physician, physician assistant, professional counselor, psychologist, qualified mental health professional, registered nurse, registered peer recovery specialist, school psychologist or social worker, and a professional corporation or partnership all of whose members are so licensed (section 54.1-2400.1, subsection A). The second is an individual or entity with a valid, unrestricted state license, certification or registration to serve persons with disabilities. The third is a person from a peer support or similar group that does not charge service recipients a fee or impose any actual or implied financial requirement, and who has actual knowledge of the requester's disability. The fourth is a caregiver, reliable third party or government entity with actual knowledge of the requester's disability (section 36-96.3:1, subsection E). Two of the four need no license of any kind.

The relationship test: A therapeutic relationship, defined as the provision of medical care, program care, or personal care services, in good faith, to the person with a disability by one of the four permitted sources (section 36-96.3:1, subsection E). The test is relational and good-faith rather than temporal: there is no minimum length of treatment anywhere in Virginia law, and the two unlicensed routes turn on actual knowledge of the requester's disability.

The certifier's duties: Virginia places no affirmative duty on the person who supplies the documentation: no prescribed form, no license number, no written finding and no meeting requirement. It places one negative duty. None of the four permitted sources may provide fraudulent supporting documentation to evince the existence of a disability or a disability-related need for a person requesting a reasonable accommodation, and a violation is a prohibited practice under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (section 36-96.3:1, subsection F). The professions and occupations title carries no assistance-animal duty and no animal-specific ground of discipline; the boards' general power to discipline for violations of law and regulation is not an animal rule.

A landlord may ask for documentation only where something is not already plain. Where the disability is obvious or known, or the need is readily apparent or known, no further verification of the disability may be demanded; where the disability is apparent but the need is not, the need may be verified; otherwise reliable documentation of both may be requested, and the landlord must evaluate what is supplied. The writer need not be a licensed professional. A peer-support member who charges nothing, or a caregiver, reliable third party or government entity with actual knowledge of the disability, is a permitted source alongside the licensed ones. Virginia sets no minimum treatment period, no telehealth rule, no annual re-evaluation, no prescribed or prohibited form, no rule about medical records, no vaccination or animal-licensing condition, and no deadline for the landlord's answer, and it has no clause saying that an online registration or certificate is insufficient. Its guard against paid letters is structural: the unlicensed peer-support route is open only to a group that charges nothing, every source must act in good faith with actual knowledge, and a source who supplies fraudulent documentation faces the consumer-protection sanction described below.

No — a state bar on an extra charge reaches an emotional support animal on the face of the definition it hangs on; the bar is an express no-extra-charge clause, in a statute.

A person with a disability, or someone associated with that person, who keeps an assistance animal in a dwelling may not be required to pay a pet fee or deposit or any additional rent to maintain it (section 36-96.3:1, subsection A). Three limbs, and the third is the one most states leave out, so a monthly pet rent is barred as squarely as the move-in money. The keeper must still comply with the rental agreement and with the owner's rules that apply to all residents and do not interfere with an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling and the common areas. A guide dog, hearing dog or service dog carries a second bar, on extra compensation, that binds a wider set of landlords (section 51.5-45, subsection B). Nothing lets a landlord recast the bar as a refundable deposit: the fair housing clause bars a deposit by name, and a pet deposit is a security deposit under section 55.1-1200, so there is no escape by renaming. The bar has stood since 2017. The trap is that the landlord-tenant act's own charge rules carry no assistance-animal exception, so a landlord who reads only that act will not find this one.

The definition it hangs on: "'Assistance animal' means an animal that works, provides assistance, or performs tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability, or provides emotional support that alleviates one or more identified symptoms or effects of a person's disability … An assistance animal is not required to be individually trained or certified. While dogs are the most common type of assistance animal, other animals can also be assistance animals. An assistance animal is not a pet." (section 36-96.1:1).

Remedy: The Real Estate Board and the Fair Housing Board receive complaints, investigate, attempt resolution by conference and conciliation and, failing that, issue a charge and refer it to the Attorney General (section 36-96.8, subsection A). For the separate guide, hearing and service dog right, a circuit court may enjoin the abridgement of the right, order affirmative equitable relief, award compensatory damages, which do not include pain and suffering and carry no punitive award, and award a prevailing party reasonable attorney fees; the action must be brought within one year, and the claimant must begin it or send the defendant a written statement of the claim by registered mail within 180 days of the violation (section 51.5-46).

The tenant is liable for damage the animal causes like any other tenant, by express words.

The keeper of an assistance animal is responsible for physical damage to the dwelling if residents who maintain pets are responsible for such damage under the rental agreement, the owner's rules or state law (section 36-96.3:1, subsection A). That is parity, not a special exposure: a landlord who does not charge pet-keeping residents for animal damage may not charge the assistance-animal keeper either. Causes of action against a resident for other damages under Virginia law are preserved. The guide, hearing and service dog rule is stricter and unqualified: the handler is liable for any damage done to the premises by the dog (section 51.5-45, subsection B). The ordinary security deposit remains available for actual damage in the usual way.

An offense or sanction that reaches a misrepresentation made to obtain housing: a civil penalty and civil damages, reaching the certifier who signs. Penalty terms: a civil penalty of not more than $2,500 per willful violation, recovered for the Literary Fund (§ 59.1-206(A)); the state or local agency's reasonable investigation and preparation expenses, not to exceed $1,000 per violation, plus attorney's fees (§ 59.1-206(D)); in a private action, actual damages or $500, whichever is greater (§ 59.1-204(A)); and for a willful violation in a private action, up to three times actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater, plus reasonable attorney's fees and court costs (§ 59.1-204(A)–(B)).

Virginia's assistance-animal sanction runs against the person who writes the documentation, not against the tenant. None of the four permitted sources may provide fraudulent supporting documentation to evince the existence of a disability or a disability-related need for a person requesting a reasonable accommodation, and a violation is a prohibited practice under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (section 36-96.3:1, subsection F, which the consumer act's list of prohibited practices carries as its seventy-sixth entry in every version now in force). The sanction is civil: a penalty of up to $2,500 for a willful violation, investigation expenses of up to $1,000 and attorney fees, and a private action for actual damages or $500, trebled or raised to $1,000 for a willful violation. A prior warning is not an element, but a certified-mail notice followed by continued conduct is the ordinary way of proving willfulness. Virginia has enacted no criminal offense for faking an assistance animal in housing and imposes no penalty on the tenant. One offense looks like it and does not reach a dwelling: knowingly and willfully fitting a dog with a harness, collar, vest or sign, or using an identification card commonly used by a person with a disability, to fraudulently gain public access for the dog is a Class 4 misdemeanor, a fine of not more than $250, and it is tied by its own words to the public-places section rather than to the housing section (sections 51.5-44.1 and 51.5-44).

On the landlord's side: No offense or penalty falls on a landlord who refuses. The routes against a landlord are civil: a fair housing complaint to the Real Estate Board or the Fair Housing Board, which investigate, conciliate and may refer a charge to the Attorney General (section 36-96.8, subsection A), and, for the guide, hearing and service dog right, a circuit court action for an injunction, affirmative equitable relief, compensatory damages and attorney fees (section 51.5-46).

Where the words leave the reach open: The consumer protection act reaches only a supplier acting in a consumer transaction, a supplier being a seller, lessor, licensor or professional that advertises, solicits or engages in consumer transactions (sections 59.1-198 and 59.1-200, subsection A). A paid letter-writing professional fits that description squarely. An unpaid peer-support member or a caregiver, who by definition charges nothing, is hard to place inside it, so in practice the sanction reaches the paid tier of sources. The enhanced second-offense penalty of up to $5,000 is confined by its own words to other listed practices and does not reach this one.

Who enforces it: The Attorney General, an attorney for the Commonwealth, or an attorney for a county, city or town may petition the court for the civil penalty, which is paid to the Literary Fund, and a person who suffers loss may bring a private action (sections 59.1-206 and 59.1-204). A certified-mail notice from one of those attorneys that an act or practice is a violation, followed by continued conduct, is prima facie evidence of the willfulness on which the civil penalty and the trebled award depend (section 59.1-206, subsection B). The act's exclusions for landlord-tenant matters and for real estate licensees do not shield a documentation source, because the source's dealing with the requester is not the landlord and tenant transaction (section 59.1-199). An unintentional violation is a defense (section 59.1-207).

In part — state law preempts the kinds of local rule named as barred, and any power named is one state law grants.

Virginia keeps two local-power rules apart, and a pets reader meets the preempting one first. The landlord-tenant act supersedes all local ordinances and regulations concerning landlord and tenant relations and the leasing of residential property, so no Virginia locality may set its own pet deposit, pet rent or pet-policy rule for private rentals (section 55.1-1201, subsections A and E). The fair housing side is a devolution frozen in the early 1990s: an ordinance in effect on January 1, 1991 survives and may be amended consistently, and the window for new conforming ordinances closed on September 30, 1992 (section 36-96.21). Nothing in the fair housing chapter abridges the federal Fair Housing Act (section 36-96.23). No Virginia city or county carries a pet rule for rental housing of its own, and after the supersession clause none should be expected; a locality's animal-control and licensing ordinances are a different subject and are not a source of tenancy rules.

The whole landlord-tenant field occupied: The residential landlord-tenant act applies to all jurisdictions in the Commonwealth and may not be waived or otherwise modified, in whole or in part, by the governing body of any locality, its boards, commissions or other instrumentalities, and it supersedes all other local ordinances or regulations concerning landlord and tenant relations and the leasing of residential property. A local pet-deposit cap, pet-rent cap or pet mandate for private rentals is therefore outside a locality's power; a locality may still run a voluntary mediation commission and may enforce local property maintenance codes. Text: Va. Code § 55.1-1201 · (A), (E).

The fair-housing act preserves or devolves local ordinances: A county, city or town with a fair housing ordinance in effect on January 1, 1991 may continue to enforce it and may amend it so long as the amendment is not inconsistent with the state chapter, and other conforming local ordinances had to be enacted before September 30, 1992 and submitted for a substantial-equivalency determination. Both windows closed more than thirty years ago, so a locality may keep a grandfathered ordinance but cannot create a new one. Text: Va. Code § 36-96.21 · (A), (B).