An Emotional Support Animal (ESA) provides a therapeutic benefit (i.e. emotional support, comfort, or companionship) to individuals with a mental health or psychiatric disability. An ESA is not considered a service animal under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and an ESA is treated differently than a service dog under federal and state law. For more information on service dogs and the federal laws governing this topic, visit the article titled Service Animals in the Preventing Housing Discrimination section. An Emotional Support Animals (ESA), unlike a service animal, can be any animal and an ESA is not required to have any special training to perform tasks to aid a personal with a disability.

Indiana has a unique state law governing Emotional Support Animals in Housing, which lays out helpful definitions and processes for verifying an individuals need for an ESA in housing. Ind. Code § 22-9-7. Under Indiana law, an emotion support animal is defined as a companion animal that a health service provider has determined provides a benefit for an individual with a disability, which may include improving at least one symptom of the disability. Additionally, to be prescribed an emotional support animal, the individual seeking an emotional support animal must have a verifiable disability.

Fortunately, Indiana law creates a detailed process for verifying whether a resident qualifies for reasonable accommodation for an ESA. A property owner leasing to an individual with a disability that is not readily apparent who seeks a reasonable accommodations for an emotional support animal in a dwelling may require that the individual (prospective or current) resident provide written verification from a health service provider that the individual in an individual with a disability; there is a disability related need for the emotional support animal to assist the individual; and the emotional support animal assists the individual in managing the individual’s disability.

An issue that has become more and more prevalent for property owners is ESA documentation coming from a health service provider operating outside of Indiana. Numerous websites offer ESA verification letters for nominal fee without ever having a health service provider relationship with the individual. However, Indiana does not accept these types of letters. In Indiana, documentation from an out-of-state health service provider must come from a physician, psychiatrist, social worker, or another mental health professional licensed in that state and having an ongoing treatment relationship with the individual requesting the ESA.

Additionally, Indiana law does not accept letters from health service providers located in Indiana who only write a letter to a resident for the purpose of obtaining an ESA. In recent years, websites have emerged that require residents to answer some simple questions before linking that individual to a health service provider located in Indiana who signs an ESA letter. However, both the definition of a health service provider (IC 22-9-7-4) and the section on misrepresentation of animal as an emotion support animal () explicitly require that the health service provider relationship must be more than issuing an ESA letter.

IAA has worked with an attorney to draft forms that help property owners obtain this information to assist in analyzing whether a resident’s request complies with state law. To view those documents, visit the Forms tab in this section.

If an individual with a disability seeking an ESA submits a request for a reasonable accommodation, a person who offers to rent or otherwise make available a dwelling may evaluate those documents to verify the individual’s disability related need for an ESA. If an individual misrepresents their need for an ESA, they can be subjected to prosecution for a low-level infraction. While prosecution of an infraction is unlikely, given the demand on prosecutors’ time pursuing more severe crimes, it can provide a deterrent against residents attempting to abuse the process. 

For individuals with disabilities seeking an ESA who comply with state law and can verify their need for an ESA, a property owner cannot require any fee. However, a property owner can require a resident to pay for the cost of repairs that result from any damage to the dwelling that are caused by the ESA in the same manner as a resident who maintains an animal that is not an ESA in the dwelling. Additionally, a property owner can require a resident to sign an agreement that sets forth the responsibilities of the owner of the ESA.

One of the most frequently asked questions among property owners is whether a resident can have multiple ESA’s or if there is a limit to the number of ESA’s a resident may have in a dwelling unit. There are no limits to the number of ESA’s that a resident can possess or request, if they can meet the verification procedures outlined in state law.

In addition to state laws, the Fair Housing Act (federal law) also governs ESA’s. However, Indiana’s laws supplement federal law by creating a process for obtaining information that supports the disability and the disability-related need for a reasonable accommodation due to an ESA.

The Fair Housing Act requires a housing provider to allow a reasonable accommodation involving an assistance animal in situations that meet all the following conditions:

• A request was made to the housing provider by or for a person with a disability;
• The request was supported by reliable disability-related information, if the disability and the disability-related need for the animal were not apparent and the housing provider requested such information; and
• The housing provider has not demonstrated that:
  • Granting the request would impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the housing provider;
  • The request would fundamentally alter the essential nature of the housing provider’s operations;
  • The specific assistance animal in question would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others despite any other reasonable accommodations that could eliminate or reduce the threat; or
  • The request would not result in significant physical damage to the property of others despite any other reasonable accommodations that could eliminate or reduce the physical damage.
     

The analysis under this framework is very fact-specific and property owners denying an ESA request or any reasonable accommodation request should keep detailed notes regarding why a request was denied. Additionally, property owners should lay out very specific policies in coordination with their property’s attorney to aid staff in determining ESA requests.

Source: https://www.hud.gov/helping-americans/assistance-animals