HUD Withdraws ESA Guidance: What This Means for Foothills Property Management and our Property Owners
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Property owners should consult qualified legal counsel regarding fair housing compliance and requests for emotional support animals.
Foothills Property Management | November 2025
Emotional support animal (ESA) requests have long been a complex and often confusing area for housing providers. For years, landlords and property managers relied heavily on guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to determine how to handle ESA requests under the Fair Housing Act.
In September 2025, HUD formally withdrew its prior ESA guidance, changing how these requests may be evaluated moving forward. While the underlying law has not changed, the enforcement landscape has shifted. Below is an overview of what this means for Foothills Property Management and the property owners we serve.
What Changed?
On September 17, 2025, HUD withdrew two guidance documents that had shaped how emotional support animal requests were handled nationwide:
FHEO Notice 2013-01: Service Animals and Assistance Animals for People with Disabilities
FHEO Notice 2020-01: Assessing a Person’s Request to Have an Animal as a Reasonable Accommodation
These documents were not statutes or regulations, but interpretive guidance. HUD has stated that it will no longer rely on or enforce them. The official notice can be found here.
What Did the Withdrawn Guidance Previously Require?
Under the now-withdrawn guidance, housing providers were generally instructed to:
Approve ESA requests with minimal documentation
Waive pet fees, pet rent, and deposits for ESAs
Accept many third-party ESA letters and online certifications
These expectations often went beyond the actual language of the Fair Housing Act and created uncertainty for housing providers.
HUD’s Current Position
HUD has stated that its prior guidance:
Exceeded what the Fair Housing Act requires
Created compliance obligations not found in the statute
Contributed to increased housing costs and inconsistent enforcement
Going forward, HUD has indicated it will focus its enforcement efforts on cases involving clear, intentional discrimination, rather than technical or borderline ESA disputes.
Relevant Court Developments
In July 2025, a federal court ruling (Henderson v. Five Properties LLC) reinforced this shift. The court held that landlords are not automatically required to waive animal-related fees for emotional support animals. Instead, the tenant must show that a waiver is necessary due to their disability.
The court also noted that HUD’s former guidance does not override the Fair Housing Act itself. HUD’s withdrawal of that guidance aligns with this reasoning.
What Has Not Changed
It is critical to understand what remains the same:
The Fair Housing Act has not changed
Disability discrimination remains illegal
Landlords must still consider reasonable accommodation requests on a case-by-case basis
Automatic denials of all ESA requests are not permitted
The withdrawal of HUD guidance does not give landlords unrestricted discretion, nor does it eliminate risk.
Foothills’ Approach Moving Forward
At Foothills Property Management, we take a conservative, compliance-first approach to emotional support animal requests. Our goal is to balance fair housing obligations with responsible asset protection for our owners.
Our general principles include:
Evaluating every ESA request individually
Requiring documentation from licensed healthcare providers with an established therapeutic relationship
Declining generic online certificates or registry-based documentation
Maintaining consistent, neutral animal policies that are not designed to discourage disabilities
Documenting all requests, decisions, and communications
While recent developments may allow more flexibility in certain circumstances, Foothills does not apply blanket policies, automatic approvals, or automatic fees. Any consideration of animal-related charges must be reasonable, consistent, and legally defensible.
Risk Considerations for Property Owners
Although HUD has reduced its enforcement focus:
Private fair housing lawsuits are still possible
Courts may interpret these issues differently
State or local regulations could change
Future administrations may issue new guidance
For these reasons, Foothills prioritizes risk mitigation, documentation, and professional judgment over aggressive policy changes.
Final Thoughts
The regulatory environment surrounding emotional support animals continues to evolve. While HUD’s withdrawal of guidance is significant, it does not eliminate fair housing obligations or legal exposure.
Foothills Property Management will continue to monitor developments, consult legal counsel, and adjust internal policies as needed — always with the goal of protecting both our residents and our clients’ investments.
If you have questions about ESA requests or how these changes may affect your property, please contact the Foothills team.
Reference Documents
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Property owners should consult qualified legal counsel regarding fair housing compliance and requests for emotional support animals.