Wash. Admin. Code § 162-38 § 162-38-105
Removal of dog guides and service animals.
Operative Text
(1) General rule. It is an unfair practice to request that a trained dog guide or service animal be removed, unless the person can show: (a) That the presence, behavior or actions of that dog guide or service animal constitutes an unreasonable risk of injury or harm to property or other persons; and (b) A reasonable attempt to eliminate the behavior or actions of that dog guide or service animal that constitutes an unreasonable risk fails. It is an unfair practice to remove a trained dog guide or service animal from the entire rental property because the animal presents a risk of injury or harm when in part of the rental property. (2) Assessing risk of injury or harm. (a) Risk to property or other persons must be immediate or reasonably foreseeable under the circumstances, not remote or speculative. Risk to persons may be given more weight than risk to property. Risk of severe injury or harm may be given more weight than risk of slight injury or harm. For example, an apartment manager excludes a tenant's dog guide because, "a pet dog bit one of the kids here a while back, so now I don't allow any dogs in the complex." This is not "reasonably foreseeable risk" justifying removal of the dog guide. (b) Annoyance on the part of staff or other tenants of the rental property at the presence of the dog guide or service animal is not an unreasonable "risk to property or other persons" justifying the removal of the dog guide or service animal. (c) Risk of injury or harm to the dog guide or service animal is not a reason to remove or exclude the animal. The decision whether to bring the animal into the rental property under such circumstances most properly rests with the person with a disability using the dog guide or service animal. (3) Reasonable accommodation. When risk justifies the removal of a dog guide or service animal from a rental property, efforts must be made to reasonably accommodate the person with the disability. (4) Liability. Law other than the law against discrimination governs liability for injury or harm. Generally, a person with a disability using a dog guide or service animal is responsible for the animal and may be held liable for the actions or behavior of the animal.
Wash. Admin. Code § 162-38-105 establishes that requesting the removal of a trained dog guide or service animal from a rental property is generally considered an unfair practice under Washington's law against discrimination. A removal request is only permissible when the animal poses an immediate or reasonably foreseeable risk of injury or harm to people or property, and only after a reasonable attempt to address the problematic behavior has failed. Mere annoyance by staff or other tenants, speculative risks, or risks to the animal itself do not meet the legal threshold for removal. Even when removal from a specific area is justified, banning the animal from the entire rental property is itself an unfair practice.
Plain English — not legal advice.
Under Wash. Admin. Code § 162-38-105, property owners and managers who operate compliant rental properties generally document specific, observable behaviors by a dog guide or service animal that create an immediate or reasonably foreseeable risk, and make a genuine attempt to resolve those behaviors before considering any removal request. Compliant operators distinguish between legitimate safety concerns and tenant or staff annoyance, recognizing that the latter does not justify removal. When a situation does warrant restricting an animal from a particular area, operators also take steps to reasonably accommodate the person with a disability in other ways, as the provision requires.
General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.
Wash. Admin. Code § 162-38-105 protects tenants with disabilities who use trained dog guides or service animals from having those animals removed based on speculation, annoyance, or risks that are remote rather than immediate. If a landlord requests removal of your animal, this provision sets a high bar: the risk must be real and foreseeable, and the landlord must have first attempted to address the specific behavior causing concern. Tenants who believe a removal request violates this rule may consider filing a complaint with the Washington State Human Rights Commission, raising the provision as a defense in any related proceeding, or reaching out to a local tenant-rights organization for general information about available options.
General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.
Generated October 14, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.
Effective Timeline
References Out
No outbound references recorded yet for this provision.
References In
No inbound references recorded yet for this provision.