Landlords threat to hike rents amid pet policy changes

Landlords threat to hike rents amid pet policy changes

0:02 AM, 25th October 2023, About A year ago 7

Text Size

Landlords are threatening to leave the market or hike rents if they lose the right to ban tenants from having pets, according to new research.

In a poll of 1,400 UK landlords commissioned by the insurer Simply Business, 54% of landlords are concerned about the increased risk of property damage from pets.

According to the survey, 63% of landlords would raise rents as a result of the changes.

Blanket bans on pets would not be allowed

The Renters’ Reform Bill will force landlords to have a “good reason” not to let tenants keep a pet. Automatic blanket bans on pets by landlords and by letting agencies would not be allowed.

Under the reforms, landlords will be required to fully consider all requests on a case-by-case basis.

A landlord must give or refuse consent in writing on or before the 42nd day after the date of the request, although there are some exceptions detailed in the Bill.

Totally destroyed the property

According to the Simply Business survey, only 28% of landlords polled currently allow their tenants to keep pets.

In the survey, landlords said the main reasons for not allowing pets in their property are due to chewed carpets and furnishings, hard-to-remove smells and complaints from neighbours about incessant barking.

One landlord, Hayley Lewsey of Essex, told the survey: “I have had three tenancies where pets have been allowed. Two were fantastic. One, however, ended up going from one small dog to three, including a German shepherd, and totally destroyed the property.”

Smaller pets are less likely to cause problems

The charity, Dogs Trust, told the Times about the troubles tenants face when trying to find a pet friendly property.

Rebecca Saunders at Dogs Trust, said: “While some properties are unsuitable for some pets, the blanket nature of bans is unfair. Older, smaller pets are less likely to cause problems, while properties with gardens or nearby parks are more suitable.”

Cats Protection says that last year it took in around 1,300 cats – the equivalent of at least three cats each day – due to landlords not allowing them in their properties, making it the eighth most-cited reason as to why cats are given up to the charity.

Elsewhere in the survey, 25% of landlords are looking to sell a property in the next 12 months, while only 3% are looking to buy.

According to the poll, 49% of those looking to sell cited the new legislation as a factor, while rising interest rates and mortgage costs were also a reason given by 43%.


Share This Article


Comments

JB

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

9:28 AM, 25th October 2023, About A year ago

I refuse some pets on the basis that I've just had new carpets fitted or that the tenant goes out to work all day and tells me the pet will 'just sleep' all day or that their cat will be a 'house cat' and will live its life in a one bedroom flat without ever going outside.

I do have a number of tenants who are reponsible pet owners and there is not problem.

However, some tenants just go ahead and get a pet or two or three anyway and I end up with urine soaked carpets and damaged door frames.

So where can I claw back the frequently significant cost if not by putting up rent?

Easy rider

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:58 AM, 25th October 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by JB at 25/10/2023 - 09:28
There will always remain a risk that a tenant will have a pet regardless of why the AST says. Most tenants don’t read the AST and most know that landlords have very little power to enforce any agreed terms.

The answer is to factor this risk in to their risk plan and charge for it in the rent.

Landlords will not be able to increase the rent above market rate without running the risk of losing out at a rent tribunal. It’s not even worth including such a threat in any argument. In fact, it’s not worth arguing as it is a done deal.

Reluctant Landlord

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

13:52 PM, 25th October 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Easy rider at 25/10/2023 - 10:58
...but if market rates increase as a result of all LL's feeling the pressure to accept animals or 'compensate' for tenants who get them anyway and then they cause damage, then there is no way of loosing at a rent tribunal.... (if the tenant even bothers)

JB

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

16:58 PM, 25th October 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 25/10/2023 - 13:52
But to make up the sometimes considerable expenditure, all rents rise. I feel sorry for those good tenants who pay for the irresponsible ones. It would be better if you could take a bigger deposit for pets.

As always the good tenants subsidise the bad

Max Knight

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

21:10 PM, 25th October 2023, About A year ago

For goodness sake, how much more are the government going to tell me what I can and can't do with my properties! I'm not forcing anyone to rent from me. I've just had to pay to have one house fumigated twice to get rid of the cat fleas left behind and change all the carpets!! It's left me uneasy to allow cats again.
Another left blood all over after a dog had a split tail (if you've had a dog with this you'll know!)
But I have others who have house rabbits with no problem
But in the end they're my properties.

David100

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

14:29 PM, 26th October 2023, About A year ago

I had a tenant who I did not authorise having a pet because I had a full set of brand new carpets in the property. He got a pet anyway. When he was leaving and I did the inspection, I found the living room and hall carpets destroyed (chewed, and soaked with urine and faeces). I told him I was going to charge for replacing the carpets (he was only there 18 months) at which point if offered me to fight him. I am 65, he is 35.

Stella

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

17:16 PM, 26th October 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by David100 at 26/10/2023 - 14:29
We would need a crystal ball to decide which tenants would be responsible owners.

When I watched the 2nd reading of the RRB I could not help thinking how naive some of these people were insisting that tenants had a right to have pets.

I wonder what Mr Gove would say if he could see the mess or savour the pungent arome left behind by my tenants who owned a dog.

Even though this dog died several months before they moved out the floorboards were saturated, the garden was full of dog mess and the guys who came to get rid of the rubbish that these tenants had left behind unwittingly put his hands in a bin which was full to the brim with dog poop.

Mr Gove needs educating!

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Automated Assistant Read More