Allowing tenants to have pets amounts to legalising trespass by livestock and should be dropped from the Renters’ Rights Bill, according to a former local Tory councillor.
Self-styled ‘libertarian’ Charles Amos who writes The Musing Individualist Substack, believes the legislation violates landlords’ rights because it only allows them to turn down tenants’ pet requests with “good reason”.
Writing in Conservative Home, he explains: “If a person owns a large garden which many dog walkers like to use as a shortcut to stay in exclusively picturesque surroundings, their trespassing remains wrong even if the homeowner is only slightly bothered.
“Analogously, allowing dogs into a landlord’s properties without his free consent is trespass too and remains wrong, even if tenants really enjoy their dogs’ company and the landlord isn’t too bothered.”
He adds: “Permitting the moulding of private property according to public happiness is simply implausible, allowing as it does for theft, vandalism and trespass, provided enough people enjoy the bounty.”
Amos argues that the provision is likely to mean higher rents and will reduce the supply of rental properties due to increased costs from pet damages; he says that’s already why only 9% of rentals are pet friendly and 21% of landlords are thinking of selling part of their portfolio due to the bill.
“Unfortunately, Labour ministers have decided to ban pet deposits, meaning pet cost will have to be recouped from all tenants; people who lie about pets will never pay up for their damages and will likely get away Scot-free too. Yet again, landlords are screwed over by a Left-wing government that sees them as little better than parasites.”
Tags:
Comments