I love animals. So when I came across a couple of news stories related to pets being displaced from their homes through no fault of their own, the sensitive part of me took interest.
Writer Fraidy Reiss from the Asbury Park Press penned an article late last month that would rip at the heartstrings of even the most hardened soul. A snippet:
‘Saint was six months old when the bank took away his family's home, and he ended up at the Toms River Animal Facility, looking confused and frightened. The deaf Pitbull-Boxer mix did not do well at the shelter. He could not hear the other dogs, but he felt their vibrations. And they seemed to terrify him.’
Oh. My. God.
Honestly, this imagery is poignant enough for me to overlook the ‘bank took away his family's home’ statement, which is a feat. I usually go crazy when someone perpetuates the evil-bank myth. However, in this case, a deaf mutt is in the mix, and I feel more like an outraged PETA member than a mortgage servicing advocate.
But if we consider the context of foreclosure and eviction, abandoning pets makes sense. After all, any field services company can tell you all about the possessions they find at a foreclosed home, from pictures and pianos to furniture and Fords. Why not leave a dog behind, too?
Pet abandonment is a unique feature of the current foreclosure climate, and the Asbury Park Press article is not the first one to detail the situation. Months ago, I came across a few other similar reports. But Reiss' article – along with the pictures of sad pooches, of course – compelled me to opine about it.
I do wonder how field service companies handle abandoned creatures. I'm not sure if there are state laws attending to this issue, and it's not like a HUD contractor can just plop a dog on the curb.
Moreover – and I am aware that it will sound ridiculous – should there be controls or policies within servicing organizations to deal with abandoned animals?
I'm thinking about headline risk here.
