Class Action Lawsuit Says Support Pets’ Emotional Support Animal, Service Dog Documentation has ‘No Legal Significance’

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit claims that Support Pets, LLC, has falsely and deceptively marketed its emotional support animal (ESA) and psychiatric service dog (PDS) products as “official” and legally valid.

Get class action lawsuit and class action settlement news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

The 24-page complaint contends that although Support Pets sells bundles of products—vests, ID cards, certificates, leashes, and “official” documentation—that it claims are all a pet owner needs to take their pet almost anywhere, none of the documentation or paraphernalia the company sells is legally required for service dogs to enter public places.

The case additionally contends that while the law recognizes that an ESA letter can allow for a pet to live in housing with a no-pets policy, Support Pets “does not follow the protocol required for the ESA Letter it sells to be legally valid.”

Further, the complaint says that although Support Pets, in advertisements, invites consumers to “qualify” or “register” their pets, no government registry exists for service dogs or emotional support animals, and no federal law requires a pet owner to buy any form of registration, ID card, vest, certificate or other form of privately issued documentation in order to obtain rights pertaining to an ESA or service dog.

“Thus, Defendant is misleading consumers into believing that its ‘Official ESA and PSD products are official, necessary and legally meaningful, when in fact those products are not required by law and do not independently create or establish any legal rights,” the class action lawsuit summarizes, calling Support Pets’ products “privately branded documentation and accessories with no legal significance.”

Per the suit, all a dog owner must do to buy Support Pets’ products is provide a name, address, payment information, and the dog’s vest size. The filing states that the defendant “does not ask the only information legally required to establish that a dog is a ‘service dog:’ whether it has been trained to perform specific tasks to assist its owner.”

The suit claims that consumers are encouraged to register their pets online through a qualification process rife with “softball questions”—“Do you ever feel sad when you’re away from your dog?” and “Does your dog help melt your stress away?” among others— that provide no medical insight. The lawsuit further alleges that during this questionnaire process, Support Pets pressures consumers into making purchases by warning that the United States government is seeking to change ESA laws to make it “harder and more costly” to obtain approval.

Per the complaint, the two federal laws that govern the use of service and support animals are the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), which is enforced by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The ADA enforces the rights of individuals with disabilities to have service dogs in public places, whereas the FHA mandates that individuals have reasonable housing accommodations for their required animals, the suit describes.

Though these laws cover different situations of service and support animal use, the complaint explains that neither the ADA nor the FHA requires any registration, certification, vest, or ID card purchased online. Further, the only documentation recognized by the FHA is an ESA letter that must be issued to a property owner by a mental healthcare professional and explain how the animal provides support, the case relays.

In reference to the purported ESA law changes, the complaint expands that this alludes to “incremental changes” made by federal agencies to combat fraudulent businesses selling unlicensed documentation, allegedly including Support Pets. In particular, the case cites a HUD notice that called into question the legality of “commercially available documentation from the internet,” stipulating that such sellers merely intend to profit off of individuals without a disability-related need for assistance animals.

The Support Pets class action lawsuit looks to represent all people who purchased ESA and PSD products from the company within the United States during the applicable statute of limitations period and through class certification and trial.

Check out ClassAction.org’s lawsuit list for the latest open class actions.