It doesn’t make any difference to me whether they let him keep the dog or not. I live all the way across the country. I don’t make Florida law. But we live in a world where “rules” are stretched all the time whether someone gets hurt or not. We are competitive with an organization that lives off the re-interpretation of laws for their own needs all the time. I believe in following the laws if for nothing else than pride in myself, personal honesty, or living up to the expectations of family, friends and my God.
There was nothing in hiding on this situation. He signed the contract. He knew of the rule within it when he penned it.
He has three options at this point, try to get the rule changed at the lowest level, give up the animal for a smaller one within the weight limit as stated as the dog requires no training, or move. Otherwise he is breaching the contract as no law enforcement will declare it unconscionable since it directly violates the laws and determinations as to position along with his signing it thus accepting it’s terms as he is more than 18 years old.
Unconscionability is a sgined doctrine in a contract law that describes terms that are so extremely unjust, or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. An entry in a contract for the size of an animal not a disability animal, but nothing more than a pet, doesn’t reach the levels required for extreme unjustness.
rwood
My pigs have topped 100 lbs now. They are going to support my tummy once they reach 200 lbs. I suppose the HOA would not like them either. My chickens are under the weight limit though.