A LINGERING PROBLEM

Once upon a time, a unit was leased out under a standard contract—no pets allowed.

Everything seemed normal at first.

Until one day, the building admin reached out to the owner.

There had been complaints from neighbors.

A strong, unpleasant odor was coming from the unit.

“Oh no,” the owner thought.

When was the last time he heard from the tenant? Could something be wrong… or was he overthinking it?

So he went to check.

The moment the elevator doors opened, the smell was already there.

Not the usual kind.

Something heavier. Pungent. Lingering in the hallway.

The closer he got to the unit, the stronger it became.

The unit was still occupied, so entry wasn’t possible. But after speaking with the admin, a clearer picture emerged:

The odor had been ongoing for some time

Multiple neighbors had already complained

The building had even installed deodorizers in the hallway to manage it

Eventually, the likely cause surfaced: A pet had been kept inside the unit—despite the lease terms.

At that point, the lease was just two weeks away from expiry.

So the owner made a call: wait it out.

Fast forward to move-out.

At first glance, the unit looked fine.

Clean. Presentable.

Except for one thing: the smell was still there—and still strong.

Even after the unit had been vacated.

On closer inspection, there were subtle dark patches on the flooring—likely where liquids had seeped through over time.

And that’s where the real issue begins.

Because this isn’t just a cleaning problem.

The owner explored solutions.

He had the unit professionally cleaned—twice.

No effect.

Some suggested specialized cleaning agents that could break down the odor at a molecular level.

Still no effect.

He even tried sanding the floors.

It didn’t work—in fact, the smell intensified.

Even after being sanded down, the wooden planks still showed traces of moisture… months after the tenant had moved out.

Everything led to the one solution he was hoping to avoid:

Full replacement of the wooden flooring.

Total cost: Php250,000 for 72 sqm.

*****

Circling back to yesterday’s post…Pets are one of the biggest hidden risks in rentals.

Almost every pet owner will say: “My pet is trained.”

And to be fair—that’s often true. But even trained pets can have accidents, especially when left alone.

Now layer in reality:

A few weeks ago, I was actually leaning the other way...that Lessors should consider allowing pets.

Because the demand is real. There’s a long queue of tenants—especially in places like Rockwell—actively looking for pet-friendly units.

But after what I saw recently… I’m thinking twice.

In yesterday's post, the contract was airtight. Still, the tenant chose to sneak a pet in. And to make matters worse—the pet was a cat.

See, cats evolved from desert animals, so their bodies are designed to conserve water. As a result, their urine is far more concentrated than that of dogs.

--

Why the damage is almost impossible to fix

The damage wasn’t immediately visible. Only after the planks were removed did the real problem appear:

+ Urine had seeped between the wooden planks.

+ Even 4 months after move-out, sections were still wet.

+ Some portions had already begun to rot.

Beneath the wood was a foam layer on top of the concrete slab.

The urine passed through the wood and got trapped in the foam—which was still soaked months later. At that point, no amount of cleaning or sanding can fix it.

The only solution was full flooring replacement.

So here’s the harder question:

If a tenant is willing to ignore a “no pets” clause…what makes us think they’ll respect anything else?

--

Possible Solution

I’m now considering something scarier: put a price tag on it—through a separate, explicit disclosure document.

One that clearly states:

1. No pets allowed (no ambiguity)

2. If violated:

+ Tenant pays full flooring replacement

+ Tenant covers lost rent during repairs

In this case: Php310K, inclusive of lost rent. Most tenants simply don’t realize how costly the damage can be. But if they knew the real number upfront, they might think twice before signing—or before taking the risk.