I'm wondering about some hypotheticals, just because I've never been in this situation, and I'm not sure what the law is. I'm going to start with the obvious, and work my way up to the one that I am not sure about. So, opinions/comments are welcome.

Person A rents an apartment and puts down a $100 security deposit. They do no damage, and when they leave, they get their deposit back.

Person B rents an apartment and puts down a $100 security deposit. They fail to clean the stove when they leave, the landlord takes $40 out of their deposit, they get $60 back.

Person C rents an apartment and puts down a $100 security deposit and $100 pet deposit. They fail to clean the stove when they leave, the landlord takes $40 out of their deposit, they get $160 back. I am assuming in this case that the law looks at those two security deposits as essentially one lump sum of $200.

Person D rents an apartment and puts down a $100 security deposit and $200 pet deposit, of which $100 is non-refundable. They fail to clean the stove when they leave, and the landlord charges them $40. Does that 40 come out the non-refundable part of the pet deposit, essentially leaving the landlord $60 richer than they started? Or does it come out of the rest of the security deposit, so that the landlord winds up with $140 and the tenant with $160? Any way I look at it, it appears that the landlord is winding up better off than he started. So why don't more landlords allow pets?

Landlord C & D should increase the SECURITY DEPOSIT and not enumerate any part of the deposit as PET DEPOSIT - this way the WHOLE deposit can be used for ANY damage.

Many states DO NOT ALLOW any DEPOSIT to be titled NON REFUNDABLE which is why this won't work... landlords would be better to increase the monthly RENT and accept a pet.

I take dog/cat in my rental homes and get an additional $200 in my security deposit which means I take $1400 to $2000 of security deposit on well-behaved members of my tenant families... there are no BAD PETS only BAD PET OWNER/TENANT