Definitely be up front with them, no fudging the story (easy to detect when that's going on). I am an animal lover and landlord, so see both points of view, and do empathize. From their point of view: they saw the cat in the window, so for all they know it could have been there for months and they just didn't catch it. The problem with the carpet is also what happens after you're gone. Years ago, before I took over ownership/managment, the former owner had a tenant with a dog. He moved out, carpet was professionally cleaned. New single dad moves in with custody of 6 year old daughter on weekends. That little girl was so highly allergic to dogs, she had a terrible reaction whenever she stayed in the house. They could only conclude it was dander down in the padding (dirt, dust, everything works it's way down to the bottom, no matter how diligently it's cleaned). So everything had to be yanked out and replaced. So from that viewpoint, your management is exposed to liability. If they advertise as 'pet free', and if subsequent tenant turns out to be highly allergic, it's the landlord that's stuck with remedying the situation. If it's their policy to change carpet every three years (that sounds rather frequent though) then they're stuck changing it sooner than anticipated, and they are trying to avoid bearing an added expense they did not anticipate.

Same experience as Jakabedy and Sippimom: I have a cairn terrier, and her hair will NOT wash out of the fleece. (Had some for her predecessor pup, too, same thing.) I had a small fleece blanket and I also got some fleece yardage at JoAnns fabric store when on sale but I've pretty much tossed those out (I think I saved just one). You also have to be mindful of where you place that fleece. My sofa is navy and has a textured surface (can't recall what kind of upholstery it is), and that stuff will pick up litle bits of fleece from a microfiber blanket I got at Kohls last year. I was trying to clean the sofa this morning (2 visitors might stop by today), and between the Pledge Fabric Sweeper for Pets and a sticky rip-off-the-used-sheet lint roller, it took me a long time. After that effort, I didn't want to pull out the vacuum. I will have to look for a little blanket with a slick top surface, I think.

Salti, I think it's great that you had an experience with an agency that you felt did not get their responsibilities confused. I can also see why it might be more reasonable for the process to take as long as it did with the breed and situation you chose to adopt under, but not everyone is having a similar experience. Granted fosters have lives and scheduling can be an issue, but part of the responsibility of fostering is making the animals you're fostering available. This was actually said to me a few years back when I thanked a foster for her quick response while we were looking to adopt. As with the OP, if a potential family goes through the process of filling out paperwork, a home inspection and a LONG wait period because they want to bring a dog into their home, I'm more inclined to believe that they are probably a positive placement for a dog and the problem is the agency. Granted, placement is not black and white; finding the right forever home does have a lot of grey areas to consider like the animals history, breed compatibility, family dynamics and yes, environmental situations too but it should be a joint effort to figure that out, not the fosters alone. The OP says they only got to see one dog and never got a chance to see if other dogs would be a better fit for them. If you do the research and read some of the articles on this subject, you'll see there is a negative trend in the adoption world. Too many dogs go unadopted and left in less desirable situations because the "agency" trying to adopt them out is over zealous in their placement requirements. Look at how many people posting here have said they were rejected for one reason or another and subsequently had to find a dog elsewhere. All the dogs that they eventually paired up with are absolutely loved and have thrived in good homes. If a family really wants a dog they will get one in spite of the challenges poised by an agency. The family ends up with a dog but what about the dogs that are left behind? Also whether a rejection is for a good reason or not, it just seems like there are a lot of agencies who don't seem to have much regard or concern for the adopting family. If a family, especially one with kids shows an interest in an animal but doesn't qualify for whatever reason, the agency should at least reach out and communicate their concerns. What if the concern is a minor misunderstanding or there is a simple fix that can make things right? The dog could still have a chance at a good home. Follow up regardless of the decision is just common decency and the families deserve that. Lastly, I wouldn't just assume that a pet adoption agency was right just because placing dogs is what they do. As far as I know there are no requirements when it comes to credentials or certifications for the fosters. Obviously, some are pretty confused about what really matters and what doesn't matter at all.

According to the article it is because the dogs introduce the bacteria and contaminants into the environment. Much like we used to get by living and working on the farm. So the kids are exposed early and don't develop problems later like allergies and asthma. Of course if you are one that uses a ton of the antibacterial products and subject the dog to that too it probably won't help much lol.