A small proportion of rental properties advertised as ‘pet friendly’ despite incoming changes via Renters’ Rights Bill
Zero Deposit analysed a sample of property listings online and found that just 8% of rental properties listed on the current market are pet-friendly.
In the UK alone, it is estimated that around half adults own a pet, but the rental sector has a long history of being far from pet-friendly with only a small proportion of rental properties allowing the addition of furry friends.
In recent years, the government has taken steps to try and address this issue. First, it revised its model tenancy agreement to encourage the acceptance of ‘well-behaved’ pets, and now the incoming Renters’ Rights Bill is expected to insist that landlords cannot ‘unreasonably’ refuse tenants pets into the home.
Based on its research, Zero Deposit’ estimates that of the 101,908 properties currently on the market, just 7,788 are described as pet-friendly.
On a regional level, tenants with pets in the North East have the best chance of securing a home with 9% of listings currently marketed as pet-friendly.
In London, the South West, South East, and North West pet-friendly properties account for 8% of the market, followed by the East of England (7%), East Midlands (6%), Yorkshire & Humber (6%), and West Midlands (5%).
Sam Reynolds, CEO of Zero Deposit, commented: “There’s a natural reticence for landlords to open their property to pets for fear of the damage they can potentially cause. Many will have experienced pet damage to their properties which has shaped this preference. But these landlords are swimming against an increasingly fervent tide.
“The UK government is attempting to satisfy tenant demand for pet-friendly homes and when the Renters’ Rights Bill is finally introduced, landlords will find it increasingly difficult to deselect lets with animal companions.
“While public opinion is naturally in favour of improving accessibility for pet-owners, landlord concerns do hold weight. Property damage costs money to repair. This spend can be challenging to recoup and can eat into profit margins. And while the Renters’ Rights Bill disallows the blanket banning of pets, it also limits the amount of money landlords are allowed to take from their tenants for security deposits, further exposing landlords to the risk of property damage and, therefore, to loss of income.
It is possible that the bill will give landlords the right to insist that specific insurance is taken out to protect against pet-related damage, thus providing greater security.”
It’s when they keep telling us what we can do with our property.
Who would like to drive a Ferrari, crash it, get another one, & still pay the same insurance cost as a Fiat 500? I’m sure The Labour Party can sort that for you.
Ooh who can remember the days when us Landlords took tenants with pets no problem. They paid a bit extra deposit & when they left in 5 years time, if no damage, got the extra deposit back. How simple was that? It worked.
What went wrong since then? Ooh that would be the Govt & MP’s then, banning pet deposits. So what did we do? We stopped taking pets. Yes Labour, we not taking ’em, come prosecute us-Surely that will help the tenants plight won’t it?
How simple it was & now how difficult has it been made by The Labour Party
Shelter supported banning higher deposits, Landlords are now charging more rent to ALL pet owners, so ALL pet owners lose. All pet owners pay.
They trying to stop this. So what’s gonna happen and is happening? Landlords are just refusing ALL pets. So ALL pet owners suffer. When in reality, it’s only 10% that cause the damage.
Wake up people, come & ask the Housing Providers Will you please take tenants with pets & what will it take?
LINK REMOVED – PROPERTY INDUSTRY EYE TERMS & CONDITIONS #6.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Not just pet owning tenants, I know of Landlords that said they will stick £25+ a month on the rent because they would accept a pet, regardless of if the eventual tenant had a pet or not. So all tenants are paying extra, not just those with pets.
I think the pet insurance is a good idea, but under the Tenants Fee Bill, can we insist they have insurance for pets? I certainly advise pet/liability/contents insurance to tenants, but whether they take it out or not is up to them. We state in our tenancy agreement that the tenants belongings are NOT covered by the Landlord’s building insurance policy, and they need to take out their own contents policy.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I will never allow pets in my small block of 5 flats. I do not allow pets but that did not stop 2 of my tenants bringing in a cat. Nothing a landlord can do as no judge would allow an eviction because of a pet being introduced even if the landlord said no. As far as pet insurance for damage, does this even exist? No insurer will cover for damage if a cat or dog is left alone all day because the owner works full time. Tenants don’t even buy contents insurance. It is totally unfair that a landlord will be left having to pay for the damage done by a tenant’s pet. From experience we all know that some tenants just don’t care re. damage because they won’t be paying for it.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register