Landlord Atlas

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

Verified September 21, 2026 All West Virginia topics →

West Virginia puts no ceiling on a pet deposit or a pet fee, and no ceiling on a security deposit at all, but it decides which rules apply by whether the money comes back: a refundable pet deposit is a security deposit and carries the whole deposit article with it, while a pet fee escapes only where the parties expressly agree in writing that it is nonrefundable.

Cited to W. Va. Code § 37-6A-1 (2), (3), (14) and 22 more cited sources · Verified September 21, 2026

Pet rent is not regulated. Against an assistance animal, though, the state is one of the strictest in the country: a request for a reasonable accommodation may not be conditioned on a fee, a deposit, or any other term or condition applied to residents with pets, which puts pet agreements, pet riders and breed or weight clauses out of reach as well. The rules cover an animal with or without specific training or certification that provides emotional support, so an emotional support animal is inside them. A landlord may ask for documentation from a professional treatment provider of the need for the animal, and that documentation is enough if it says the animal will provide some kind of disability-related assistance or support; a landlord may not ask for medical records or for access to the person's doctor. Denial takes credible evidence of a direct threat or substantial property damage, judged on the individual animal's actual conduct. Faking a service animal is an offense in public places but not in housing. One thing to watch for: the fair housing act moved to a new set of section numbers in February 2024, so older citations to it now lead nowhere.

West Virginia pets & assistance animals at a glance

Which law governs West Virginia's money answers sit in chapter 37 article 6A, the security-deposit article, whose definition section decides whether a pet charge is a deposit or a fee. The assistance-animal answers sit in the West Virginia Fair Housing Act, which has been at chapter 16B article 18 since February 8, 2024, when an act reorganizing the Office of the Inspector General repealed the old articles and re-enacted them section for section at the new citation. The definition of an assistance animal is in section 16B-18-3 and the documentation, denial and charge rules are in section 16B-18-5. A legislative rule made under that act, series 71-9 of the code of state rules, in effect since February 5, 2025, carries the same rules in its own words and adds a charge bar of its own. The misrepresentation offense is elsewhere, in chapter 5 article 15, and reaches public accommodations rather than housing. Local power comes from the municipal and county chapters.
Where in the state the answers differ One exemption in the Fair Housing Act reaches the assistance-animal rules: the rental of a room or rooms in a rooming house occupied by the owner as a place of residence and containing no more than four rented rooms. The two familiar small-owner exemptions, for a single-family house rented by an owner who has no more than three and for a building of no more than four families where the owner lives in one of them, apply in West Virginia solely for the purposes of familial status, so they do not take the disability rules away. That makes the state duty reach landlords the federal act does not. Religious organizations' non-commercial housing and bona fide private clubs are also outside the act. The deposit article has no exemption of any kind and reaches all residential rental premises used for dwelling purposes, manufactured homes included.
Which landlords are covered Every residential landlord. The security-deposit article applies to all residential rental premises or units used for dwelling purposes (section 37-6A-6), with no unit threshold and no owner-occupancy exemption, and its only limit is transitional: it does not reach agreements for the payment of security deposits entered into before the article took effect in 2011. A dwelling unit expressly includes a manufactured home, so a park tenancy's pet deposit rides the same rules. On the assistance-animal side the Fair Housing Act reaches all dwellings except an owner-occupied rooming house with no more than four rented rooms, a religious organization's non-commercial housing and a bona fide private club; the small-owner exemptions that would otherwise apply are limited to familial status and do not reach disability.
Pet deposit

Yes, with no statutory limit.

West Virginia has no pet-deposit statute and no ceiling on a security deposit of any kind, so there is nothing for a pet deposit to count toward. What the state does have is a definition that decides the question by refundability. A security deposit means any refundable deposit of money furnished by a tenant to secure performance of the rental agreement or as security for damages to the leased premises, and it does not include rent, a pet fee or an application fee, provided that the parties expressly agree, in writing, that the pet fee or application fee is nonrefundable (section 37-6A-1, subdivision 14). So a pet deposit the landlord will give back is a security deposit, and the whole article follows: the return and itemization duty, the records duty, the rule that the rights cannot be waived by the rental agreement, and the remedy for noncompliance. Without that written agreement, a charge called a pet fee is simply a security deposit under another name. The article sets no amount limit anywhere, only rules about returning the money and accounting for it. Nothing extra may be charged for an assistance animal, which is answered under assistance animals below.

Refundability: The parties decide, and the choice decides which rules apply. A refundable pet deposit is a security deposit and carries the whole article with it. A pet fee escapes the article only where the parties expressly agree, in writing, that it is nonrefundable (section 37-6A-1, subdivision 14).
Pet rent and pet fees

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

West Virginia is one of the few states whose security-deposit definition uses the words pet fee, and it uses them to create a lawful nonrefundable charge rather than to limit one. There is no ceiling on the amount, no reasonableness standard, and no general bar on nonrefundable charges; the definition section is the opposite of such a bar, because it authorizes exactly two named nonrefundable items. The condition is strict in its own way: the parties must expressly agree in writing that the charge is nonrefundable, and the rights the deposit article gives cannot be waived by the rental agreement. One drafting detail is worth knowing, because it decides arguments: the phrase however denominated appears in this article on the application-fee definition and not on the security-deposit definition, so a pet charge is caught not by what it is called but by whether it is refundable. Monthly pet rent is not addressed at all.

Monthly pet rent: Unregulated. No West Virginia statute or rule addresses a recurring monthly pet charge, and the general tenancy article contains no animal word at all.

A one-time pet fee: Lawful and uncapped, and it may be nonrefundable, but only on a written agreement that says so expressly. A pet fee is one of only two charges West Virginia names as capable of being nonrefundable, and the other is an application fee. Without the writing the money is a security deposit and must be accounted for like one.
Pet policy in the lease, and changing it mid-tenancy

No — no statute requires a lease to state a pet policy, and no written-rules provision governs one.

Nothing in West Virginia law requires a lease to address pets, supplies a default when the lease is silent, limits the number of pets, or governs a pet rule adopted during a tenancy. West Virginia did not adopt the uniform residential landlord and tenant act, so its general tenancy article has no written-rules or house-rules section, and that article contains no pet, animal or dog word anywhere in it. The deposit article names a pet fee only inside its definition of a security deposit and imposes no pet-policy duty. No West Virginia housing class must allow pets, and the state housing agency's own rules carry nothing on the subject. A municipal ordinance may reach the keeping of animals, which is answered under local authority below.
Breed, size and weight restrictions

Yes.

No West Virginia statute reaches a landlord's breed, size or weight rule, and none preempts a local breed ordinance either. The word breed appears in ten sections of the Code, every one of them agricultural or about wildlife, including the dog head-tax registration form and the commercial dog-breeding provisions, and none of them in a housing provision. Municipalities may regulate or prohibit the keeping of animals and counties may adopt dog-control ordinances, and nothing in the state's dog article contains a breed clause in either direction, so a local breed ordinance is neither authorized by name nor barred. One weight figure does exist in West Virginia law, and it is easy to report backwards: it sits inside the definition of an assistance animal, which reaches an animal weighing less than 150 pounds, and it is a limit on what the accommodation duty covers rather than a limit a landlord may impose. Because rules about animals are themselves subject to the accommodation duty, a breed or weight clause in a lease is an accommodation question for any animal the definition covers rather than something carved out of a breed rule.
Assistance animals: the state instrument and who it binds

Yes — a state statute or rule sets what a landlord may request or what a certifier must meet for an assistance animal in housing. Both a statute and an administrative rule under it speak to it.

Refusing to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices or services when they may be necessary to afford the person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling is a discriminatory housing practice, and rules, policies, practices or services regarding animals are expressly made subject to that duty (section 16B-18-5, subsection (f)). What follows is one of the most complete state blocks in the country. A person with a disability may be required to submit documentation from a professional treatment provider of the disability-related need for the assistance animal, and that documentation is sufficient if it establishes that the animal will provide some type of disability-related assistance or emotional support. The person may not be required to submit or give access to medical records or medical providers, or to provide detailed or extensive information about physical or mental impairments. The accommodation may be denied only on credible evidence that the animal is a direct threat to the health or safety of others, or would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others, in each case only where the problem cannot be eliminated by another reasonable accommodation, and a direct-threat finding must rest on an individualized assessment using objective evidence about the specific animal's actual conduct. And a request may not be unreasonably denied, conditioned on payment of a fee or deposit or other terms and conditions applied to applicants or residents with pets, or answered after unreasonable delay. The act separately provides that it does not require a dwelling to be made available to someone whose tenancy would be a direct threat, with the burden of proving the threat on the landlord. This block has been law since June 6, 2014, and moved to its present citation, word for word, on February 8, 2024.

Who it binds: All dwellings, with one exemption that reaches the disability rules and two familiar ones that do not. The prohibitions on discrimination in the sale or rental of housing apply to all dwellings except as the act exempts, and nothing in the operative section other than the interference provision applies to the rental of a room or rooms in a rooming house occupied by the owner as a place of residence and containing no more than four rented rooms (section 16B-18-4). The exemptions for a single-family house rented by an owner who has an interest in no more than three, without a broker and without a forbidden advertisement, and for rooms or units in a building of no more than four families where the owner lives in one of them, are by their own words available solely for the purposes of familial status, so they leave the disability rules and the assistance-animal block in place. That is broader coverage than the federal act, which exempts those owners outright. A religious organization's non-commercial housing and a bona fide private club's lodgings are also outside the act (section 16B-18-8). Enforcement is by the Human Rights Commission, with a private action available within two years.

The rule's currency: West Virginia Code of State Rules series 71-9, Rules Regarding Housing Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities Who Utilize Assistance Animals, a legislative rule of the Office of the Inspector General made under sections 16B-17-8, 16B-18-5, 16B-18-13 and 16B-18-20. Its own opening section states a filing date of February 5, 2025, an effective date of February 5, 2025, and that the rule terminates and has no further force or effect on August 1, 2030. The Secretary of State's register of rules lists it as active. It replaced an identically worded rule of the Human Rights Commission that had been in effect since May 4, 2012; the filing memorandum accompanying the move certifies the changes as formatting, citation and title-number updates with a sunset date added.
What counts as an assistance animal The statute and the rule define the term differently, and neither repeals the other. Assistance animal means any service, therapy or support animal, weighing less than 150 pounds, with or without specific training or certification, 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 (section 16B-18-3, subdivision (p)). The words with or without specific training or certification are doing real work: they put an untrained animal inside the term, and they are why a landlord may not demand proof of training. The 150-pound figure is the only weight limit in any state's assistance-animal definition. The rule's version is wider on two axes: assistance animal means any service animal or emotional support animal, with or without specific training or certification, which is kept and used by a person with a disability to perform or assist in performing one or more major life activities or to ease or ameliorate the effects of the person's disability, and it carries no weight limit and names an emotional support animal outright. A third and much narrower definition, a guide dog, signal dog or other animal individually trained to do work or perform tasks, lives in the white cane law and governs public accommodations rather than housing.
Documentation a landlord may request, and what a certifier must meet

One thing may be required and nothing else: documentation, from a professional treatment provider, of the disability-related need for the assistance animal (section 16B-18-5, subsection (f), subdivision 10). The rule asks only for supporting material documenting the need. Two demands are barred outright, and they are listed below. No other inquiry is authorized.

A treatment relationship is required. The text states what documentation is sufficient rather than who may certify. A landlord may not require medical records, a diagnosis or its severity.

Who may certify: A professional treatment provider, and the phrase is not defined anywhere. It appears once in the whole West Virginia Code, in this section, with no list of professions, no license requirement and no cross-reference to the professions chapter. What the words do carry is a treating relationship: the provider must be one who treats, not a stranger or a seller. The rule is looser still and asks only for supporting material documenting the need.

West Virginia's documentation rule runs the opposite way from most states'. Instead of narrowing what counts, it says what a landlord must accept: documentation is sufficient if it establishes that the assistance animal will provide some type of disability-related assistance or emotional support. The source must be a professional treatment provider, an undefined phrase that appears nowhere else in the Code and that names a treating relationship rather than a license class. Two demands are barred: a landlord may not require a person to submit or give access to medical records or medical providers, and may not require detailed or extensive information or documentation about physical or mental impairments. Since the definition covers an animal with or without specific training or certification, proof of training or a certificate cannot be required either. There is no rule about online certificates or registries of any kind, no re-certification interval, no form requirement, no vaccination rule and no minimum treating period. The landlord's answer is governed by timing rather than form: a response may not be unreasonably delayed, and no number of days is set. Nothing in West Virginia law places a duty or a penalty on the professional who writes the letter.
Charges for an assistance animal

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 and an administrative rule.

A request for a reasonable accommodation may not be unreasonably denied, conditioned on payment of a fee or deposit or other terms and conditions applied to applicants or residents with pets, and a response may not be unreasonably delayed (section 16B-18-5, subsection (f), subdivision 10). The legislative rule says the same thing in its own words: where a reasonable accommodation regarding animals is required, it is unlawful to condition it on the payment of additional fees or deposits. Three things make this one of the widest bars in the country. It reaches a fee and a deposit alike, so a pet deposit, a nonrefundable pet fee and pet rent are all out. It reaches other terms and conditions applied to residents with pets, so a pet agreement, a pet rider, a pet-liability waiver, a pet insurance requirement or a breed or weight clause cannot be applied to an assistance animal either. And the definition it hangs on covers an animal with or without specific training or certification that provides emotional support, so an animal kept for emotional support is squarely inside it. The statutory rule has been in force since June 6, 2014 and the parallel rule since 2012. A separate charge bar in the white cane law reaches only public accommodations and conveyances and does not answer a housing question.

The definition it hangs on: "Assistance animal" means "any service, therapy or support animal, weighing less than 150 pounds, with or without specific training or certification, that works, provides assistance, or performs tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability, or provides emotional support that alleviate one or more identified symptoms or effects of a person's disability" (section 16B-18-3, subdivision (p); the grammatical slip is in the enacted text). The rule's own definition reaches "any service animal or emotional support animal, with or without specific training and/or certification" (series 71-9, section 2.1). An animal kept for emotional support is inside both.

Remedy: A discriminatory housing practice is taken to the West Virginia Human Rights Commission, which investigates the complaint and whose administrative law judge may order relief; a person may also bring a civil action within two years (sections 16B-18-11, 16B-18-13 and 16B-18-14). The act states no separate fine for charging.
Damage caused by an assistance animal

The rule puts it plainly: a person with a disability who keeps or uses an assistance animal is responsible for seeing that the animal lives in the home without disturbing the property or the quiet enjoyment of the property owner or the person's neighbors, and is liable for any damage caused by the animal (series 71-9, section 3.5). There is no carve-out for ordinary wear and tear and no provocation exception. The statute adds nothing on damages; it uses prospective substantial damage to the property of others only as a ground for denying the accommodation in the first place. The provocation exception a reader may have seen belongs to the white cane law and governs public accommodations.

Landlord immunity: West Virginia gives a landlord no immunity from suit. What the rule does instead is allocate the risk by naming the person who keeps the animal as the one responsible for it and liable for the damage it causes, which is why a landlord who may not charge for the animal is not left carrying its costs.
Misrepresenting an assistance animal

None in housing — the only offense is scoped to public accommodations and does not reach housing.

It is a misdemeanor in West Virginia to falsely represent that an animal is a service animal in order to obtain a right or privilege the white cane law protects, punishable by a fine of up to two hundred dollars or up to ten days in jail or both, rising to a thousand dollars or thirty days for a second or later offense (section 5-15-9). The offense does not reach a rented home. It is written by reference to the white cane law's own list of places, which runs to public buildings, streets and sidewalks, common carriers, hotels, restaurants, professional offices, hospitals and other places to which the general public is invited, and a dwelling is not among them. The definition it uses is narrow in a second way: a guide dog, signal dog or other animal individually trained to do work or perform tasks, which would not reach an untrained animal kept for emotional support even if the place matched. The West Virginia Fair Housing Act creates no misrepresentation offense of its own, and nothing in the criminal code does either, so a false claim made to a landlord is handled as a matter between the parties rather than as a crime.

The landlord-side offense: The same chapter punishes the other side more lightly: a person who denies a person with a disability accompanied by a service animal the rights the white cane law gives commits an offense carrying a fine not to exceed fifty dollars and no jail (section 5-15-8). That is one quarter of the maximum fine for faking an animal, and it too reaches public accommodations rather than housing.
Can cities add their own rules

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

The preemption that reaches a local pet-money rule is the rental-regulation limit in section 8-1-5a, subsection (k): a municipality may regulate rental activity only by rules that apply uniformly to all properties, so an ordinance capping pet deposits or pet rent in rentals alone would fail. Beyond that uniformity rule, West Virginia leaves pets in housing largely to local government and preempts nothing about breed. Municipalities may regulate or prohibit the keeping of animals, counties may adopt dog-control ordinances, and the landlord-tenant articles carry no preemption clause of any kind. On the fair-housing side the picture is narrower than it first looks: the express municipal power to ban housing discrimination covers race, creed, color and national origin only, so it does not reach disability, while the Fair Housing Act's own savings clause lets a local law protect the same rights the act protects and invalidates a local law that would permit what the act forbids. One state limit does bound what a city could do here even though it is not a pet provision: municipalities may not prohibit or effectively limit the rental of a property or regulate the duration, frequency or location of such rental, and where a municipality regulates activities that arise when a property is used as a rental, the regulation must apply uniformly to all properties without regard to whether they are rented (section 8-1-5a). An ordinance capping pet deposits or pet rent only in rentals would run into that uniformity requirement, while a general animal-keeping ordinance applying to every property would not. No West Virginia city has a pet-in-housing ordinance in the locality records.

Another express preemption: Municipalities may not prohibit or effectively limit the rental of a property, or regulate the duration, frequency or location of a rental, and may regulate activities that arise when a property is used as a rental only by rules that apply uniformly to all properties whether or not they are rented (section 8-1-5a, subsection (k), in force June 7, 2019). A municipal ordinance capping pet deposits or pet rent in rentals would be a rental-specific regulation and would fail that uniformity condition; a general animal-keeping ordinance applying to every property would not. Text: W. Va. Code § 8-1-5a · (k).

Localities may regulate the keeping or licensing of animals: Every municipality has plenary power and authority to regulate or prohibit the keeping of animals or fowls, and to provide for the impounding, sale or destruction of animals kept contrary to law or found running at large (section 8-12-5, subdivision 25). That is the grant a municipal pet-number, nuisance or breed ordinance rests on, and nothing in the Code withdraws it. Text: W. Va. Code § 8-12-5 · (25).

Localities may regulate the keeping or licensing of animals, a second instrument: A county commission may adopt and enforce ordinances, rules and regulations, not inconsistent with the state dog article, that it considers necessary or convenient for the control and management of all dogs in the county, with a penalty power in the same section (section 19-20-6). The article itself contains no breed clause and does not preempt a local breed rule. Text: W. Va. Code § 19-20-6 · (b), (c).

The fair-housing act preserves or devolves local ordinances: A municipality has plenary power and authority, by ordinance, to prohibit discrimination in the sale, purchase, lease or rental of housing accommodations within its limits, and to fine violations, but only on the basis of race, creed, color or national origin (section 8-12-9). Disability is not in that list, so this section gives a West Virginia municipality no power to legislate on assistance animals. Text: W. Va. Code § 8-12-9.

The fair-housing act preserves or devolves local ordinances, a second instrument: Nothing in the Fair Housing Act invalidates or limits any state or local law that grants, guarantees or protects the same rights the act grants, but a local law that purports to require or permit conduct that would be a discriminatory housing practice under the act is invalid to that extent (section 16B-18-18). A locality may match or exceed the state's protection for an assistance animal; it may not fall below it. A political subdivision may also set up and fund a local human relations commission, and the state act's reading controls where the two conflict. Text: W. Va. Code § 16B-18-18.
Housing classes with their own pet rule No manufactured-home park, publicly financed, public-housing or senior-housing rule departs from the answers above
Insurance and dog breeds No statute restricts an insurer's use of dog breed in underwriting
How state law refers to the federal rules State law adds nothing to, and refers to nothing in, the federal rules
Changes already signed into law No signed act is waiting to change these answers
Leading court decisions In re Kenna Homes Cooperative Corp., 210 W. Va. 380, 557 S.E.2d 787 (Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia; 2001; residential setting; bears on the assistance-animal rule): In a residential cooperative that phased out animals except trained and certified dogs, the court held that both the federal and the state fair housing acts require a service animal to be individually trained and to work for the benefit of a person with a disability before it is a reasonable accommodation, with the burden of proof on the person claiming the need, and that where a disability is not apparent to someone untrained in medical matters a landlord may require a second concurring opinion from a qualified physician the landlord selects. Both holdings were displaced by statute afterwards: the definition enacted in 2014 covers an animal with or without specific training or certification, and the same act bars requiring a person to submit or give access to medical records or medical providers. No West Virginia court has revisited the decision since, so it stands abrogated by statute on its face rather than overruled, and its citations to the old articles no longer resolve.

Cite this page: "Landlord Atlas, West Virginia Pet & Assistance Animal Laws (verified September 21, 2026), landlordatlas.com/laws/pets/west-virginia/" — free to cite and quote with a link (how these records are verified). Everything above is cited in the citations section below.

West Virginia assistance-animal documentation at a glance

Each row is what the state's own statute or rule says about that slot; a row that reads not stated is a slot no state text addresses. The full text of each slot, with its section, is in the table above.

Slot What the state's text says
Who may certify, and on what test A professional treatment provider, and the phrase is not defined anywhere. A treatment relationship is required. The text states what documentation is sufficient rather than who may certify.
The certifier's minimum relationship period Not stated
Telehealth Not stated
Online registration or certificate Not stated
Form Not stated
Medical records May not be required
Written answer from the landlord Not stated
Annual re-evaluation Not stated
Proof of vaccination or licensing Not stated

Federal law on pets and assistance animals, in every state

The federal layer for the pets and assistance-animals topic, carried once for the whole site. It is a dated history rather than a single rule: the Fair Housing Act's accommodation duty has not changed since 1988 and the regulation under it has never contained the word animal, while the HUD guidance that most writing on this subject still quotes was withdrawn in September 2025, permanently rescinded in May 2026, and replaced by an enforcement position that governs HUD's own cause determinations and nothing else. Every row names who it binds, and most of the rows that carry real figures bind only federally assisted, public or rural-development housing. No state record restates these rows; a state record says only where its own law references or extends them. Each row below says who it binds before it says what it does. The full text of each row, with its citations, is on the 50-state page.

Notes and caveats

Common questions: West Virginia pets & assistance animals

Each answer is the verified value from the table above, restated as a direct answer. Free to quote with a link to this page.

Can a landlord charge a pet deposit in West Virginia, and is there a limit?
Yes, with no statutory limit. West Virginia has no pet-deposit statute and no ceiling on a security deposit of any kind, so there is nothing for a pet deposit to count toward.
Can a landlord charge pet rent or a non-refundable pet fee in West Virginia?
Yes — pet rent or a pet fee may be charged, and no statute caps it. West Virginia is one of the few states whose security-deposit definition uses the words pet fee, and it uses them to create a lawful nonrefundable charge rather than to limit one.
Does a West Virginia lease have to state a pet policy?
No — no statute requires a lease to state a pet policy, and no written-rules provision governs one. Nothing in West Virginia law requires a lease to address pets, supplies a default when the lease is silent, limits the number of pets, or governs a pet rule adopted during a tenancy.
Can a West Virginia landlord restrict pets by breed, size or weight?
Yes. No West Virginia statute reaches a landlord's breed, size or weight rule, and none preempts a local breed ordinance either.
Does West Virginia have its own assistance-animal law for rentals?
Yes — a state statute or rule sets what a landlord may request or what a certifier must meet for an assistance animal in housing. Both a statute and an administrative rule under it speak to it.
What documentation can a West Virginia landlord ask for when a tenant requests an assistance animal?
One thing may be required and nothing else: documentation, from a professional treatment provider, of the disability-related need for the assistance animal (section 16B-18-5, subsection (f), subdivision 10). The rule asks only for supporting material documenting the need.
Can a West Virginia landlord charge a pet deposit or pet rent for an emotional support animal?
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 and an administrative rule. A request for a reasonable accommodation may not be unreasonably denied, conditioned on payment of a fee or deposit or other terms and conditions applied to applicants or residents with pets, and a response may not be unreasonably delayed (section 16B-18-5, subsection (f), subdivision 10).
What is the penalty for falsely claiming an assistance animal in West Virginia?
None in housing — the only offense is scoped to public accommodations and does not reach housing. It is a misdemeanor in West Virginia to falsely represent that an animal is a service animal in order to obtain a right or privilege the white cane law protects, punishable by a fine of up to two hundred dollars or up to ten days in jail or both, rising to a thousand dollars or thirty days for a second or later offense (section 5-15-9).

Citations

How this record was verified: Direct reading of the West Virginia Code on the Legislature's own code site, which prints no edition statement, so currency was established per section from the site's own signed-bills ledger and from the four completed-action rolls of the 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026 regular sessions. Twelve whole articles were pulled in raw form and read: chapter 16B articles 17, 18 and 19; chapter 37 articles 6, 6A and 15; chapter 5 articles 11, 11A and 15; chapter 19 article 20; and chapter 8 articles 1 and 12. Fourteen code-wide phrase searches were run, with one limitation recorded and worked around: the site's search returns nothing for any single word of fewer than four letters, so the pet, dog and cat negatives come from reading whole articles rather than from the search. The 2024 enrolled act that repealed the old human-rights and fair-housing articles and re-enacted them as chapter 16B was read in full and compared line by line with the current text, and its own list of code affected, which flags each section as repealed or new, was read. The 2014 enrolled act that created the assistance-animal definition and the documentation block was read in full as well. On the Secretary of State's code of state rules, the whole rule inventories of two agencies were read, the operative rule on housing discrimination against persons with disabilities who use assistance animals was read in full from the filed document, and the filing memorandum accompanying its February 5, 2025 re-promulgation was read and found to certify the changes as technical. Two appellate opinions were read in full.

What was read to state each absence on this page: