The House of Lords yesterday backed an amendment to the Renters’ Rights Bill to require tenants keeping pets to pay an extra deposit to cover any damage to a rented property.
The Renter’s Rights Bill, which is currently going through the House of Lords, will allow tenants to request to have a pet, and landlords will not be able to ‘unreasonably’ refuse.
A previous requirement for tenants keeping a pet to take out a specific insurance to cover damage by the animal was dropped by the government. However, Lord de Clifford – who is also director of a veterinary practice – proposed the pet damage deposit of an additional three weeks’ rent as a deposit.
David Smith, property litigation partner at Spector Constant & Williams, said: “The House of Lords’ decision to reject the removal of a dedicated protection for pet-related damage is a welcome and sensible intervention. While encouraging pet ownership is important, it must be balanced against the legitimate interests of landlords in preserving their property.
“The existing five-week cap on deposits was never designed to account for the additional risks pets can introduce. Replacing the now-abandoned insurance requirement with a modest, refundable pet deposit strikes a fair compromise, offering landlords reassurance while still supporting responsible pet ownership.
“Sadly, this amendment while a pragmatic recognition of the realities of property management, is not supported by the government and, like others pushed through by the Lords is extremely unlikely to survive into the final Bill.”
House of Lords – Renters Right Bill, day two: legislation must be ‘fit for purpose’
3 weeks rent as pet deposit is just laughable, try 3 months and it will be reasonable.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Deposits from tenants in many cases does not cover the damage by them. Damage by pets of negligent owners could run into thousands as many landlords can testify. I will never allow pets in my small block of flats because my tenants all work full time and the flats are totally unsuitable. Having said that 2 of my tenants have cats even though pets are not allowed. There is nothing a landlord can do to stop this because no judge would ever grant either eviction or rule that the pet must go. Especially if the judge is a pet lover. We can turn our backs to folks applying who own a pet but once granted tenancy there is nothing we can do to stop them bringing in Fido or any pet or pets. Government has turned their back on the fact that landlords own the property and he is the person responsible for repairs and maintenance not the tenant.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
If it ends up being insufficient, then ask for the balance. If the ex-tenant refuses, sue.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Anything will be better than nothing, classic government deciding to bring mandatory insurance in and than changing their mind because they don’t think insurance companies will be ready. Believe me I’m sure they would if they realised there was a big new market coming. It would be better to add £10 a month pet payment for properties to cover the cost of landlord setting the insurance because at least that way they’ll be sure the insurance is being taken out.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Problem is that landlords do not even have the right to periodically inspect their own property if a tenant refuses. Nothing in this new bill giving landlords this right. Damage in many cases is not known until the tenant moves out. Many tenants care nothing if their pet wrecks their rented home. Deposits are useless in most cases.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
A better option is to increase the monthly rent by £25 per pet. This way, the landlord receives additional income upfront. If the tenant causes damage or fails to pay the final month’s rent, at least the landlord has some financial coverage.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The downside to this is that on a shorter length tenancy they may not have sufficient to cover damages – I’d wager that over a year a pet *could* cause more than £300 damage if the owners were irresponsible.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Pointless discussing it. The government will ignore it.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register