AdvoCATS founder and pets campaigner Jen Berezai sympathises with landlords who have been backed into a corner by the government’s Tenant Fees Act over accepting pets.

The charity is calling for the Act to be amended to allow landlords to either take additional deposits off tenants seeking to rent with pets or require tenants to take out extra insurance.

It has prompted a cross-party group of 35 MPs, peers and industry figures to write an open letter to housing secretary Robert Jenrick urging him to make it easier for landlords and agent to accept tenants with pets.

It now wants MPs to table a question in the debate on the Renters Reform Bill and is pushing for its proposal to be included in the White Paper.


Landlord Mick Roberts has voiced the frustration of many in the sector, saying that, in the past, landlords could just charge a higher deposit and those tenants who didn’t cause damage would get all their money back.

“There’s no better insurance than the tenants’ own money,” says Roberts, who adds that if landlords are forced to take tenants with pets, they have no choice but to increase rent across the board – even for those without pets.

Berezai says the modern tenancy agreement doesn’t cut it and agrees that landlords want to be able to cover potential damage – but their hands are tied.

She tells LandlordZONE: “Landlords currently haven’t got many options and we’re trying to provide them with some.”

Berezai started the charity in 2018 while working at a rescue shelter, after becoming frustrated at the number of people wanting to adopt pets but being refused permission by their landlord.

“Lockdown rammed it home to people who had never experienced loneliness or isolation just how valuable a pet is,” she adds.

Visit Advocats



    What a CATastrophe…

    Yet another idiot advocating to give animals preferential treatment over Human property investors…

    The place for pets to live is called a kennel, rabbit hutch etc and that is located OUTSIDE in the garden.

    The sheep can bleat (Shelter, Gen rent, Labour, Pet advocates) but the wiley fox (Shrewd investors) will simply wander off and find another den to stash the cash.

    I’m sure I am not alone in seeking out low risk alternative investment vehicles as alternatives to the high risk PRS.

    Pet owners are NOT responsible. If they were there would be no need for pet insurance, however, Insurance is not an option… tenants can cancel the policy as soon as they get the keys. Maybe the insurance fee can be added to the rent? I wonder how that would go down? Rent £700pcm + £69.17pcm Pet insurance premium? Before anyone starts to claim I’m making it up that is a genuine quote, I checked as its in my interests to do so.

    The plumber that works for my letting agent was recently set upon by three dogs whilst attending a tenanted property in the evening on a call out. He required medical treatment for his injuries. That is the reality of tenants’ pets. Sadly, we even hear horror stories of people being killed by their own pets.

    Regardless of any legislation I will not allow pets and will find ways to circumvent the law if necessary. The govt are simply pushing law abiding investors into law breaking activity with the govts war on landlords.

    Be it pets, EPC’s. Right to Rent or draconian taxes or any of the other pointless rules set out by govt…
    No one can force me to remain in the PRS… The balance of risk to reward is totally out of line.

    “Berezai started the charity in 2018 while working at a rescue shelter, after becoming frustrated at the number of people wanting to adopt pets but being refused permission by their landlord.”

    What makes you (Berezai) think you can impose your charity hobby on legitimate businesses… I played guitar from when I was about 10 years old and still do but when I was a tenant, I never expected landlords to allow guitarists to use their properties as rehearsal studios. Playing guitar is great for my mental health but not so sure about my neighbours!!!

    The govt is already at war with landlords and today in the commons Starmer was commenting on the care bill and using Landlords as some sort of example of fat cats not paying their fair share…

    “A tax rise which means a landlord renting out dozens of properties wouldn’t pay a penny more, but their tenants working full time jobs would” Starmer… PMQ’s 08/09/2021

    Let ALL landlords be aware… Labour will come after you if you vote for them.

  2. Let’s not forget Advocats, MP Andrew Rosindell et al are not on the side of landlords. They want to force landlords to take pets as the default. And I also take issue with the landlord quoted in the article who says many in the sector are frustrated. It’s misleading. It make it sound as though the current deposit cap or ban on charging for insurance is a barrier for many landlords who want to take pets when, given the choice, many of us would rather not. In fact I’m quite happy Hughs dismissed the idea of increasing the cap for pet owners because it makes it harder for Rosindell to get his bill over the line.

  3. Government is surreptitiously taking over our properties; dictating who we let to and under what terms and conditions. Soon they will be setting rent levels. What next? Will we be obliged to sell to one of the large commercial landlords eg. John Lewis because tenants don’t have to vacate when landlords want to exit the PRS.

    • It is creeping nationalisation whether by Councils or large Corporate LL.

      Time for Little LL to get out of the game ASAP!

      Govt is coming for LL and their assets.

      We have all heard that idiot Starmer suggesting that LL won’t be paying the increased NIC that their tenants will be


      LL pay a lot more tax that any one who pays NIC

      LL provide a service.

      So what if LL have different tax arrangement

      Amazon etc has different tax arrangements……………..all legal.

      So why did idiot Starmer mention LL.

      I sense political envy etc.

      Labour would love to tax small LL out of existence.

      Their last idiot leader Corbyn nearly attained power and he was for forcing LL to sell their rental properties at a 30% discount to feckless tenants.

      With Blue Labour and Idiot Labour remaining an AST LL isn’t a very sensible business proposition!!!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here