MP Andrew Rosindell has vowed to carry on his fight for tenants to keep their pets in rental properties, even if his Bill doesn’t get time in Parliament.

Rosindell’s Dogs and Domestic Animals (Accommodation and Protection) Bill aims to give renters the right to live with their pet – provided they can prove they are responsible and caring. However, there may not be enough time to pass the law because the pandemic has led to a reduction in the number of parliamentary sittings; although it had its first reading in the Commons with cross-party support last year, no date has been set for a second reading.

The Romford MP says his Bill gives tenants and their pets the justice they deserve: an end to cruel and unnecessary separation, while protecting landlords from irresponsible owners. Rosindell vows he won’t give up on the issue if his proposals fail to become law and adds: “I will continue the fight for all the pets unnecessarily separated from their owners by ‘no-pets’ clauses.”

In January, the government updated its model tenancy agreement, aiming to end blanket bans on pets in rental properties. However, the agreement is voluntary and last month it hardened its position on the hurdles that tenants will have to clear before a landlord needs to allow pets into their property. Housing Minister Christopher Pincher explained: “A good reason for a landlord to decline a pet ownership request would be where a pet is demonstrably poorly behaved or unsuited for the premises in question, for example, a large dog in a small flat, or where other tenants have allergies to animals.”

- Advertisement -

The National Residential Landlords Association has called for the government to enable the level at which deposits are set to be more flexible to reflect greater risk.

13 COMMENTS

  1. Good luck with that Andrew, the recent legislative changes make renting property less attractive. This has resulted in fewer properties to rent , so prices have gone up and landlords can pick the best tenants, this won’t include pet owners.

  2. “Rosindell’s Dogs and Domestic Animals (Accommodation and Protection) Bill aims to give renters the right to live with their pet – provided they can prove they are responsible and caring.”

    I wonder how Andrew is proposing tenants can ‘prove that they are responsible and caring’?

    “I will continue the fight for all the pets unnecessarily separated from their owners by ‘no-pets’ clauses.” Owners need to find properties that allow pets. If a tenant choses a property that doesn’t allow pets then that’s up to the tenant.

    “Housing Minister Christopher Pincher explained: “A good reason for a landlord to decline a pet ownership request would be where a pet is demonstrably poorly behaved or unsuited for the premises in question, for example, a large dog in a small flat, or where other tenants have allergies to animals.””

    A large dog might well be suited to a small flat. Deerhounds are large but they tend to spend a lot of time lying down not running wildly around the flat or barking at every slight noise. A smaller, more lively dog, that barks when they hear a noise, might be very unsuitable for a smaller flat.

    Who decides whether a pet is poorly behaved or not? It’s not just bad behaviour it’s the damage all pets cause. I’ve not met a pet that hasn’t caused at least some damage. If somebody wants a brand new puppy, how does a tenant demonstrate that the puppy will be well behaved? Puppies have accidents on the carpets and sometimes chew woodwork and destroy furniture.

    How could a tenant demonstrate that the puppy won’t turn out to be an annoying, yapping, adult dog?

    What can the landlord do about it, once the tenant has a problem pet?

    • I am going to insist that I personally need to interview the pet before giving it the ‘justice it deserves’

      If the pet is not able to convince me that it is well behaved, then I won’t accept the tenancy!

      Christopher Pincher has also stated that landlords can take larger deposits ‘as long as they are within the 5 week cap’ What a complete wolly!

  3. It cost me thousands of pounds to fix my property after my tenant and his dog left !!! . Never again will i allow anyone with pets . Soo as we walked it the house everyone was sick and had to run out of the house. never again

  4. AMERICAN BULLDOGS KILLED WIDNES MOTHER…
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-56665801

    Tragic story reported on the BBC today (07/04/2021)

    The lady in question was well known to these animals… and there had been a previous court case involving these dogs.

    If she lived in a rental property then the landlord, gas engineer, electrician etc would have faced the same risk.

    I just hope the good people of Romford consider voting for someone else at the next election.
    He lives in leafy Romford which sits on the Essex borders, no doubt he has never had to confront a drug dealers Pitbull, Rottweiler etc in Hackney. Or deal with those that train dogs to go hare coursing in Lincolnshire where it’s a regular menace. Those people come from the likes of Sheffield by the way not locals in Lincolnshire.

    There is no such thing as a harmless pet unless it’s in a Taxidermists window.

    • If landlords are forced to accept ‘well behaved’ pets and had completed any sensible checks (vaccinations, worming, flea treatment, etc) and concluded that the dogs were suitable for the property, would the landlord be responsible in any way if the dog hurt somebody? With all the anti-landlord ethos in Britain, which seems to be getting worse, I wouldn’t be surprised if this becomes another thing landlords will be, in part or fully, responsible for.

  5. I live in Mr Rosindells constituency and I’ve rented my two rental properties with dogs on two occasions. One of the dogs, although very friendly took a liking to my skirting boards and carpets. The other tenant had two dogs and I had to evict her. The carpets were ruined with dog urine and I tried to recoup some of the cost via her deposit but the DPS arbitration panel decided I couldn’t keep her deposit. I do hope Mr Rosindell reads this post.

    • If I was you I’d take a couple of screenshots of the comments on here and send it via email to Rosindell at his constituency office (That way you have a record to prove he got it)

      I totally sympathise… The DPS is nothing but a scam organisation, basically they claim to be unbiased yet favour the tenant at every opportunity.

      DPS fees….. simply increase the rents to compensate.

  6. Forget the Tenant Fee Ban, if a tenant decides that they want a pet, then they have to take responsibility for the pet and the inevitable increase in “Fair Wear and Tear”. There needs to be a separate part of the Standard Tenancy Conditions that automatically kicks in when the tenant wants to have a pet of whatever sort either at the start or halfway through the contract. It has to be fair to BOTH the Landlord and the Tenant. There needs to be an automatic increase in the rent and deposit, even if it is still in the Fixed Term Period of the Contract.

    Extra clauses need to include Microchip ID for all Cats, Dogs, anything larger than a pet Rat, Mouse or Gerbil. Veterinary certificates on a regular basis for 6 monthly Health Check, Neutering, Fleas, Worms, etc. Location and name of a Responsible Person (with the agreement of their Landlord as well), who will look after the pet in an emergency, etc. The garden or back yard, if any, should not be used as a toilet with feces (that’s poop) that can cause problems for the next tenants who have children that will want to crawl and play in the grass and make mud-pies, etc. If feces or urine is found in the back garden, then the tenant needs to pay for the turf/soil/borders to be replaced. or for a 6 month biological decontamination period where the property cannot be rented out to a tenant who has children, allergies, etc.

    The “Dogs Trust”, RSPCA, etc., may still provide suitable paperwork that covers these areas. And there needs to be a reasonable view that some Landlords just do not want the extra work caused by pets.

  7. Society as a whole needs to realise that having a pet is a responsibility – not a God given right or entitlement. I see many owner occupiers of houses that are irresponsible with pets – particulalry dogs. Who hasn’t seen plastic bags hanging in trees/bushes in parks/countryside from lazy dog owners who couldn’t be bothered to take it home to dispose of properly or because they couldn’t find dog litter bin (or bin was full to overflowing) – same as litter problem. People need to take responsibility.
    Flats/Appartments are most often not suitable for dogs & cats anyway – Landlords in the PRS should have the right to refuse pets if they choose to do so. Once a tenants’ pet becomes a problem, the eviction process is so cumbersome and costly and loaded against the LL that it is not worth the risk.

  8. Previous tenant decided to keep a dog without permission. Left the house and garden in a terrible condition. Also furniture was missing and tenant had decorated really badly damaged wallpaper etc damaged. Her father a local |Councillor and the guarantor refused our request to see the damage done. Not a good role model and until people are made to take responsibility for their actions I shall not be allowing pets and I will be selling up as fast as I can.

  9. Vanish have just popped up a little advertisement on my FB feed for ‘Vanish Carpet Pet Spray’ – if there’s need for a pet spray there’s need for a pet ban! Pet spray is all very well if you’ve paid for the carpet, underlay and floorboards and are obliged to replace them, Pet Spray or not. Deposits don’t cover the possible cleaning up after pet ‘accidents’.

Leave a Reply to Gtim Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here