'AITA for asking my roommate to pay for damages her dog caused, even though it contributed to her dropping out?'
"AITA for asking my roommate to pay for damages her dog caused, even though it contributed to her dropping out?"
My (20F) ex-roommate “Sarah” and I are both college students. We shared an on-campus apartment and a bedroom. She brought her 8-month-old dog as an ESA, even though the paperwork required the animal to be trained. Spoiler: he wasn’t.
I told her beforehand I didn’t mind the dog, but I wouldn’t be helping take care of him. Almost immediately, he was barking constantly and having accidents. I was patient—puppies are a lot, I get that. But when the dog started teething, Sarah didn’t supervise him. He destroyed a $5 basket, then went after a hand-knit blanket and eventually my $150 chair.
I repeatedly asked her to watch him or keep him off the furniture. She always brushed it off with, “He’s just a puppy,” and never apologized. He even started chewing the windowsill in the apartment. I reported that to our RA, mostly because it was campus property and I didn’t want to be held liable.
That ended up being the final straw—Sarah was told she’d lose the dog from damage to campus property and be fined $200. She told me she was thinking of dropping out anyway, and a few days later, she did. When she came back to move out, I asked her to reimburse me for the chair (it was splintered and not easily repairable).
She agreed to $90 because her mom said I caused further damage and was irresponsible for letting the dog sit in the chair. I didn’t argue—just took the money. Now I’m feeling conflicted. I didn’t want to get her in trouble or contribute to her dropping out, but I also don’t think I should have to pay for damage her dog caused. So AITA?
The internet had a lot of thoughts about the situation.
OneMoreCookie wrote:
NTA you didn’t cause her to do anything. She made choices that had unpleasant consequences. Maybe in a few years she will mature enough to attempt college again who knows but it wasn’t your fault you needed to protect yourself otherwise you might have ended up liable and having to drop out.
KaleVivid3082 wrote:
NTA. You’re entitled for compensation for damages caused by an animal that was not yours just as you would be held responsible if the animal was yours.
You are not responsible for her decision to drop out just as you were not responsible for her decision to bring an unregistered puppy and then completely disregard applying any discipline that puppies require for consistent training, exercise, toys they need. You handled this correctly. You’re ready for the adult world. She’s better off at home.
raindragon92 wrote:
NTA. This sounds similar to my sister's experience with an esa puppy. Girl lied to management about getting her roommates permission to get the dog in the first place then it ran rampant in the shared spaces.
They even praised it for pissing on one of my sister's throw pillows on the shared couch. In both cases it sounds like they wanted a dog but didn't want the responsibility of training and caring for it.
u2125mike2124 wrote:
NTA, now you know why she needed an ESA because she was not mature enough to be in college. I guess you should be thankful that her pup did not cause more damage than it did, and you won’t have to babysit her anymore.
2dogslife wrote:
People who refuse to train their dogs are always the AHs. You can just learn what to do by reading books if classes are too expensive (note: as you found out, classes are WAY cheaper than having an untrained dog let loose).
NTA.
Interesting_Deal_226 wrote:
NTA. It doesn't sound like you contributed in any way to her dropping out of school. She was obviously on the fence and this was a good excuse to quit. Sometimes we all are just looking for an excuse so don't let this phase you.
EchoMountain158 wrote:
NTA.
This entire situation was her fault from start to finish and after seeing what a failure her mother is at basic parenting, you can see why she turned out this way.
Sensitive_Middle wrote:
NTA. I would almost bet she bought one of those fake esa papers online so should could bring her pet, and probably assumed her roommate would help because "omg cute puppy."
K_SeeYou wrote:
NTA. I admire her will to stick by her dog but the cutie should have never been allowed such freedom or access to things without being fully trained not to mess with such things. Your roommate is lucky the dog didn't find chemicals instead.
Upper_Maintenance_80 wrote:
NTA.
When you have a pet, you take responsibility for it. This includes paying for the damage it causes.
ScaryButterscotch474 wrote:
NTA. Sarah feels like she can’t do college without a dog. She could change her living situation or she could drop out. She chose to drop out. Nothing to do with you and not your fault.
Chances are that she was going to drop out anyway. If she needs an ESA for college, then she probably has some big challenges and the timing for attending college may not be great for her.
Beachboy442 wrote:
NTA. Owners are responsible for animals and kids. They break something = they replace or repair. Pups need to start training at four months...otherwise, dog will train itself to be semi-wild and destructive. Owner should've noticed n stopped damage at first sign of damage. She is not a good smart owner.