South Carolina HOA Pet Restrictions

South Carolina pet restrictions at a glance

Section 1: Overview — How pet restrictions work in South Carolina

South Carolina has no statute regulating pets in homeowners associations. Pet restrictions come from the recorded declaration, master deed, or restrictive covenants and from rules the board adopts, and the main legal limit on those restrictions is fair housing law's assistance-animal reasonable-accommodation requirement.¹ The framework has two tracks by community type: condominiums operate under the South Carolina Horizontal Property Act, S.C. Code § 27-31-10 et seq., a traditional condominium statute under which pet rules appear in the master deed, declaration, and bylaws, while planned communities operate under recorded restrictive covenants as the substantive source, overlaid by the South Carolina Homeowners Association Act, § 27-30-110 et seq., with the South Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act, Title 33, Chapter 31, for corporate formalities.² South Carolina has no statutory right to keep a pet, in contrast to California's Civ. Code § 4715, has not adopted UCIOA, and its Homeowners Association Act is a disclosure-and-recording overlay rather than a comprehensive governance code.³ Under that Act, an association's governing documents, including restrictive covenants that contain pet rules, generally must be recorded in the county land records to be enforceable.⁴ Overlaying all of this is fair housing law: the federal Fair Housing Act and the South Carolina Fair Housing Law, § 31-21-10 et seq., enforced by the South Carolina Human Affairs Commission, require a reasonable accommodation for assistance animals despite a no-pet policy.⁵ South Carolina is therefore a traditional-condominium-act and disclosure-overlay state, where the federal assistance-animal requirement is the floor common to every state. What follows sets out the legal framework, the operational rules, and recent activity.

Section 2: The legal framework for pet restrictions

2A. The condominium act, the disclosure-overlay HOA act, and the source of pet authority

Pet restrictions in South Carolina carry no statutory basis. The recorded declaration, master deed, or restrictive covenants impose them, along with rules the board adopts under the authority those documents grant.¹ For condominiums, rule-making authority flows from the South Carolina Horizontal Property Act, § 27-31-10 et seq., a traditional condominium statute established when owners record a master deed submitting the property to a horizontal property regime; the Act addresses formation, common elements, bylaws, and assessments, and contains no pet-specific provision.⁶ For planned communities, the recorded restrictive covenants are the substantive source, overlaid by the South Carolina Homeowners Association Act, § 27-30-110 et seq., enacted by 2018 Act No. 245, with the Nonprofit Corporation Act, Title 33, Chapter 31, supplying corporate formalities for the many associations organized as nonprofit corporations.²

The Homeowners Association Act is a disclosure-and-recording overlay, not a comprehensive governance code. Its core features are the recording of governing documents for enforceability, § 27-30-130; member and prospective-purchaser disclosure obligations; magistrate-court jurisdiction over certain monetary disputes, § 27-30-160; and a complaint-data-collection role assigned to the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs, §§ 27-30-310 to 27-30-340.⁷ It does not comprehensively regulate elections, meetings, assessments, and internal governance the way Davis-Stirling or a UCIOA-based code does, and South Carolina has not adopted UCIOA.³ The recording requirement is the distinctive point for pet rules: a pet restriction in the restrictive covenants or in a board rule generally must be recorded in the county clerk of court, Register of Mesne Conveyance, or register of deeds office to be enforceable, and rules must be re-recorded by January 10 of the year following adoption or amendment to remain enforceable.⁴ South Carolina has no statutory pet-keeping right, so a properly recorded no-pet or limited-pet provision in the declaration is generally valid, subject to fair housing law.³

The order of precedence for a pet question runs: federal and state fair housing law, mandatory, first; then the Horizontal Property Act's mandatory provisions for condominiums and the Homeowners Association Act's recording and disclosure requirements; then the recorded declaration or restrictive covenants; then the bylaws; then board rules. The rule that actually governs any community is the declaration or restrictive covenants, read against the applicable statute and the fair housing floor.

2B. Federal fair housing constraints: assistance animals

The federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., bars disability discrimination in housing and requires reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, and services whenever necessary to give a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling, under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B). Homeowners associations and condominium associations are covered.⁸ Permitting an assistance animal despite a no-pet policy or pet restriction counts as a reasonable accommodation, and because assistance animals are not pets, no-pet bans, breed limits, size and weight limits, number limits, and pet fees and deposits simply do not reach them.⁹

The FHA category of "assistance animal" runs broader than the ADA category of "service animal." It includes animals that are trained to perform tasks and animals that provide disability-related emotional support, with no training requirement for support animals.⁹ For a disability or a disability-related need that is not obvious, the association may request reliable documentation. It may not require registration, certification, or licensing of the animal; a specific breed; professional training for a support animal; detailed medical records; or any pet deposit, pet fee, or additional insurance for the assistance animal.⁹ Online "ESA registration" products carry no legal requirement and satisfy no standard.

HUD's guidance on assessing these requests was Notice FHEO-2020-01, issued January 28, 2020. HUD withdrew that notice, together with the 2013 predecessor notice, by a memorandum dated September 17, 2025, and finalized the withdrawal in a Federal Register notice published April 6, 2026; the withdrawal removes non-binding interpretive guidance but does not change the FHA's statutory reasonable-accommodation duty, which continues to govern.¹⁰ An association may deny a specific assistance animal only on an individualized finding that it would impose an undue financial and administrative burden, fundamentally alter operations, or that the specific animal poses a direct threat or would cause substantial physical damage no other accommodation could reduce. Denial cannot rest on breed, size, or generalized fear, and the owner remains responsible for the animal's conduct and any damage it causes.⁹ The ADA is distinct: it generally governs public accommodations and government programs, not an association's internal residential operations, and does not displace the FHA's broader assistance-animal protections for residents. The ADA may reach association facilities open to the public, such as a clubhouse rented to non-residents.

2C. South Carolina law overlay: fair housing law and dog law

The South Carolina Fair Housing Law, § 31-21-10 et seq., enacted by 1989 Act No. 72, bars housing discrimination based on disability and backs the same assistance-animal accommodation analysis. It is a standard state statute operating alongside the federal FHA, and the South Carolina Human Affairs Commission enforces it — the Commission was granted federal substantial equivalency on January 8, 1995, letting it investigate cases dual-filed with HUD.⁵ A 2019 amendment, 2019 Act No. 44, added § 31-21-70(N), letting a housing provider ask two questions to evaluate a non-service animal as a reasonable accommodation: "Does the person seeking to use and live with the animal have a disability that is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities?" and "Does the person seeking to use and live with the animal have a disability-related need for the animal?" The provider may request documentation verifying the answers.¹¹

On service animals in public places, the same 2019 Act enacted a public-accommodations framework separate from the housing analysis: § 47-3-980 makes intentional misrepresentation of an animal as a service animal unlawful, with fines of $250 for a first offense, $500 for a second, and $1,000 for a third or later offense, and § 47-3-990 allows places of public accommodation to set rules for nonservice animals, including emotional support animals.¹² These provisions do not govern residential accommodation requests to an association.

South Carolina's dog law addresses conduct and liability, not HOA pet rules. The dog-bite statute, § 47-3-110, imposes strict liability on the owner or keeper when the victim is in a public place or lawfully in a private place and did not provoke the animal, without regard to the animal's prior history.¹³ The dangerous-animal provisions, § 47-3-710 et seq., define a dangerous animal, require the owner to register it with local law enforcement accompanied by "proof of liability insurance or surety bond of at least fifty thousand dollars," and provide criminal penalties; § 47-3-710(C) states that "[a]n animal is not a 'dangerous animal' solely by virtue of its breed or species."¹⁴ South Carolina has no statewide statute preempting breed-specific local ordinances, so local governments may regulate by breed under their animal-control authority.¹⁵ These are government-enforced rules; an association's authority over an animal adjudicated dangerous still derives from its recorded declaration or covenants, though a dangerous-animal adjudication can support an association's direct-threat analysis.

Section 3: Operational rules and compliance obligations

A. Enforceable pet restrictions (what holds up)

When properly adopted and recorded in the declaration or restrictive covenants, pet restrictions such as numeric limits, size and weight limits, breed or type restrictions, and leash and waste rules in common areas generally hold up, since South Carolina has no statutory pet-keeping right that overrides them.³ Two limits apply. First, under the Homeowners Association Act, the restriction generally must be recorded to be enforceable, and rules must be re-recorded annually to remain enforceable, under § 27-30-130.⁴ Second, South Carolina courts construe restrictive covenants strictly in favor of the free use of property, so an ambiguous pet restriction may not be enforced as the association intends.¹⁶ Every such restriction yields to the assistance-animal accommodation requirement.⁹

B. Handling an assistance-animal request

When an owner requests an assistance animal, the association should respond in a timely, good-faith, interactive manner. If the disability or the disability-related need is not obvious, the association may request reliable documentation and, under § 31-21-70(N), may ask the two codified questions and request documentation verifying the answers.¹¹ The association may not demand certification, registration, an ID card, a specific breed, professional training for a support animal, or detailed medical records.⁹ A denial is defensible only on an individualized finding of undue burden, fundamental alteration, or a direct threat or substantial property damage no other accommodation could reduce; it may not rest on breed, size, or generalized fear.⁹

C. Pet fees, deposits, and insurance

An association may charge pet fees or deposits for ordinary pets only if the recorded declaration or restrictive covenants authorize them.¹⁷ It may not charge any pet deposit, pet fee, or additional insurance premium for an assistance animal; the owner remains liable for any actual damage the animal causes.⁹

D. Enforcement and disclosure

Pet violations are enforced through the Horizontal Property Act and the master deed and bylaws for condominiums, and through the restrictive covenants and board rules, backed by the Homeowners Association Act, for planned communities.⁶ The Homeowners Association Act does not itself impose a statewide fining-notice or cure requirement; any pre-fine notice and cure step comes from the association's own governing documents, and § 27-30-130 ties enforceability to recording.¹⁸ Monetary disputes may proceed in magistrate court, which has concurrent jurisdiction under § 27-30-160 up to the magistrate limit, while other disputes proceed in the Court of Common Pleas, with appeals to the South Carolina Court of Appeals and review by the South Carolina Supreme Court.¹⁹ On disclosure, the Act requires that governing documents be recorded to be enforceable and that rules be made available to members and re-recorded annually; the Department of Consumer Affairs collects and reports HOA complaint data but does not adjudicate disputes or enforce compliance.²⁰

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills (past 24 months)

No South Carolina bill enacted in the past 24 months directly changes pet rules, assistance-animal accommodation, or service-animal misrepresentation as they apply to associations. The foundational assistance-animal provisions — § 31-21-70(N), § 47-3-980, and § 47-3-990 — were enacted by 2019 Act No. 44, S.281, effective May 16, 2019, which predates this window.¹¹ Two 2023-2024 measures touched associations generally but not pet rules: H.4049, 2023 Act No. 68, authorized remote and electronic participation at membership meetings by amending the corporations title, and S.881, 2024 Act No. 165, added a new Title 27, Chapter 28 restricting recorded vendor-binding real-estate service agreements.²¹ In the absence of a qualifying South Carolina bill, the federal FHA and the South Carolina Fair Housing Law assistance-animal frameworks control.

B. Recent appellate rulings (past 36 months)

The state's most significant recent appellate decision addressed restrictive-covenant enforcement, though not pets directly.

C. Active legislative debates

A 2025-2026 session bill, H.4006, proposing additional Homeowners Association Act provisions on open board meetings, political signs, and certain fines remains in committee and is not law; no pending proposal specific to pet rules or assistance animals in associations has turned up.²²

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

Among the states, a small group grants a statutory right to keep a pet, and California's Civ. Code § 4715, at least one pet per owner, is the clearest example. South Carolina belongs to the large majority where pet authority is declaration or restrictive-covenant based with no pet statute, and every state shares the same federal floor: the FHA's assistance-animal reasonable-accommodation requirement.³ For multi-state operators, the practical implication is that in South Carolina, the binding pet rules come from the recorded declaration or restrictive covenants, the Homeowners Association Act adds recording and disclosure requirements, and the federal assistance-animal analysis applies uniformly.⁴ South Carolina's distinctive features are a traditional Horizontal Property Act for condominiums, a disclosure-overlay Homeowners Association Act with a recording-for-enforceability requirement and magistrate-court routing for monetary disputes, and no statewide breed preemption.¹⁵

HOA Weekly's South Carolina Pet Restrictions coverage updates quarterly as the General Assembly and the courts act. The federal Fair Housing Act's assistance-animal framework applies to South Carolina associations regardless of the state framework.

Recommendations

• Audit pet provisions now to confirm each is recorded and re-recorded on the annual January 10 cycle, and reword any vague numeric, breed, or animal-type limit — unrecorded or ambiguous restrictions are the most common failure points.
• Adopt a written assistance-animal accommodation procedure that uses only the two § 31-21-70(N) questions, requests documentation only for a non-obvious disability or need, never charges a fee or deposit, and documents any direct-threat analysis on an individualized basis.
• Treat the September 2025 withdrawal of HUD's FHEO-2020-01 guidance as a change in interpretive guidance only. The FHA statutory duty is unchanged, so associations should continue to grant well-supported accommodations and should obtain counsel before tightening ESA practices.
• Escalate to counsel and consider magistrate court for monetary pet-related disputes within the jurisdictional limit; reserve the Court of Common Pleas for injunctive covenant enforcement.

Caveats

• HUD's FHEO-2020-01 guidance was withdrawn in September 2025 and finalized in an April 6, 2026 Federal Register notice; the analysis here rests on the FHA statute and the South Carolina Fair Housing Law, which are unchanged, but housing-provider practice may shift as courts and any successor guidance develop.
• The "Homeowners Association Ombudsman Act" and an Office of the Homeowners Association Ombudsman were proposed but not enacted; the provisions at §§ 27-30-310 to 27-30-340 are the Department of Consumer Affairs complaint-data article.
• Statutory citations were verified against scstatehouse.gov; the parallel reporter citation for Hoffman v. Saad Holdings, LLC should be confirmed before print, as the opinion was refiled in March 2026.

1. South Carolina Homeowners Association Act, S.C. Code § 27-30-110 et seq. ↩
2. South Carolina Horizontal Property Act, S.C. Code § 27-31-10 et seq. ↩
3. S.C. Code § 27-30-110 et seq. (no statutory pet-keeping right; disclosure-and-recording overlay). ↩
4. S.C. Code § 27-30-130 (enforceability of governing documents; recording requirements). ↩
5. South Carolina Fair Housing Law, S.C. Code § 31-21-10 et seq.; SC Human Affairs Commission granted federal substantial equivalency January 8, 1995. ↩
6. S.C. Code § 27-31-10 et seq. (Horizontal Property Act; establishment via recorded master deed). ↩
7. S.C. Code §§ 27-30-130, 27-30-160, 27-30-310 to 27-30-340. ↩
8. Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B). ↩
9. HUD, Fact Sheet on HUD's Assistance Animals Notice (assistance animals are not pets; no fees or deposits). ↩
10. HUD memorandum withdrawing FHEO-2020-01 and FHEO-2013-01 (Sept. 17, 2025); finalized by Federal Register notice April 6, 2026. ↩
11. S.C. Code § 31-21-70(N) (2019 Act No. 44; two-question inquiry). ↩
12. S.C. Code §§ 47-3-980, 47-3-990 (service-animal misrepresentation; public-accommodation rules). ↩
13. S.C. Code § 47-3-110 (liability for dog attacks; strict liability). ↩
14. S.C. Code § 47-3-710 et seq. (regulation of dangerous animals; § 47-3-760(E) registration and $50,000 coverage). ↩
15. S.C. Code §§ 47-3-20, 47-3-70 (local animal-control ordinances; county and municipal powers not limited). ↩
16. Hoffman v. Saad Holdings, LLC, Op. No. 6138 (S.C. Ct. App.). ↩
17. S.C. Code § 27-30-130 (governing documents and rules as the source of authorized charges). ↩
18. S.C. Code § 27-30-130 (recording-based enforceability; no statutory fining-notice requirement in Chapter 30). ↩
19. S.C. Code § 27-30-160 (magistrate-court concurrent jurisdiction over monetary disputes). ↩
20. South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs, HOA information (complaint data collection; "the SCDCA does not oversee HOAs"). ↩
21. 2024 Act No. 165 (S.881), adding Title 27, Chapter 28. ↩
22. 2025-2026 H.4006 (proposed Homeowners Association Act provisions; in committee). ↩