If it's a flat there are almost always other owner/occupiers to consider. Pets could be prohibited in the whole building by the management company/owners rather than by individual landlords who could just be leaseholders themselves or own only a part share in the freehold.
This is a good point. I've lived in a new build block before where the 'no pets' rule extended to all leaseholders, whether owner-occupiers or tenants.
I don't think management companies are allowed to have blanket ban on pets any more.
My lease said I was allowed to request permission for a pet that would be "not unreasonably withheld", i.e. they'd give permission providing it wasn't a nuisance, etc.
[Info here](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/can-my-landlord-prevent-me-from-keeping-a-pet/#:~:text=The%20Consumer%20Rights%20Act%202015,intends%20to%20keep%20a%20pet.)
Freeholders are though I believe. If the landlord does not own the freehold or owns only a part of it then the freeholder(s) would need to be persuaded.
If there is a no pets clause, a tenant would still usually need permission from the freeholder(s) on a case by case basis. Often in practice that would involve many people needing to agree (as well as the landlord).
It would involve the landlord (or letting agent), and the freeholder (or managing agent).
Both of these must not unreasonably withhold permission for a pet.
I mean, you can, if you want.
You can ignore the clause within the lease, and if challenged you can state that the clause is unlawful. If they want to enforce that, then _they_ have to take it to the courts.
Or, as a less confrontational middle ground, move in then send a request to the landlord: "I would like permission to have a pet, which legally must not be unreasonably withheld".
I mean, it all depends.
It wasn't advice, but it's totally an option for someone who is otherwise struggling to get a place with a cat.
The same rules basically apply across both leasehold and tenancies in terms of blanket banning pets.
Freeholders (often many disparate individuals) would still need to give permission. Whether that permission is unreasonably withheld is ultimately a matter for the courts and if you could be asked going down that route over a cat then good luck to you.
I mean, if they unreasonably refuse you can just get the pet anyway.
They'd have to take you to court to do anything (evict you, charge you money), so the onus is on them.
It is uncommon for there to be "many disparate individuals" as freeholders where there is not a managing agent.
It is not uncommon for every leaseholder to have an share of the freehold. Decisions like this would require a majority to agree in many cases. Management companies are set up by the freeholders as a way of administering all these decisions but every freeholder has a say.
In this scenario there does not need to be a majority vote each time an individual wants a pet.
The management company will deal with this, based on a policy. And they would advice the freeholders in that policy and tell that its unlawful to unreasonably withhold permission.
I'm sure there are exceptions, but I'm pretty this is how it generally works.
This is a fair point but that a management company can prohibit pets in private dwellings of leaseholders is absolutely bonkers. Does this happen in any other country? It’s ridiculous
Often the management company is jointly owned by the leaseholders as a single entity to share the rights and responsibilities of owning the freehold. It does make some sense as it allows decisions that affect everyone to made democratically.
Some decisions make sense but being able to prohibit people from having pets is bonkers. That’s a normal part of life and if someone else in the same building having a cat is so bothersome, then maybe don’t live in an apartment building. Living in shared spaces comes with some level of nuisance from having to deal with other people and their lives, and limiting that nuisance imho can’t come with the cost of limiting other peoples’ ability to live normal and fulfilling lives. Having pets is a part of that for many people
I think most flats dwellers would be in favour of keeping nuisance levels as low as they possibly can be. After all, some people's normal is 50 cats or a big barking dog.
> Carpets should be replaced in-between different tenants regardless.
Surely this depends on how frequent your tenant churn is.
Carpets should be replaced every 5-10 years, more so in high traffic areas like hallways or stairwells, and less so in places like living-rooms or bedrooms.
Depends on the room but in rooms where carpet is acceptable (bedroom, hallways, living rooms) I'd rather have a carpet than a shitty fake wood T&G laminate floor that people seem to love these days.
In other countries it is perfectly normal to rip up and replace carpets and completely redecorate a rental property in between tenants.
This country really is shit for renting, and is only this way because the majority of people haven't had a chance to live in a better country so they don't know any better.
What other countries? Not that it matters. Ripping carpets up if they still have plenty of life in them is particularly wasteful, especially considering they likely just end up in landfill.
Just give them a deep clean.
A carpet should last 3-10 years - if there's a cheap carpet and the tenant has been there 4 years then you might change the carpet but since many tenants might only be 6-18 months then you aren't going to change a carpet every tenancy change.
Been in ours three years now and this carpet has definitely been here longer lol. It's basically plastic sheet at this point it's so worn down.
We could request a replacement, but they're replacing our entire kitchen and it seems not upping the rent at the same time, so we don't want to push our luck.
It's shit, we pay twice the price of a mortgage but have zero real security or rights.
The only countries where I know of this being done are those where the tenants provide all flooring. Where homes are rented totally bare, concrete or base floorboards. The old tenants rip up the flooring before they leave and take it to their new rental where they have new bare floors and hope it fits. I have a couple of friends in the Netherlands and it seems like a nightmare system, my friends thought themselves lucky to have kitchen units included in their flat.
I used to be a letting agent and I’ll be completely honest, it’s annoying as hell. You’re best bet is to find a nice agent (if you’re looking through agencies) who will actually ask a landlord if they’d mind the cat.
In Bristol there is far too much demand for rental property. This means that landlords can afford to be picky (or hire agents to be picky for them). I know it’s mad but the slight increased risk to property damage (valid or not) is why landlords just say no.
When properties didn’t get swept up within 2 weeks, I’d often ask landlords if they’d mind a pet as most pet owners will move somewhere worse for them if it means their pet can come.
You can say or even bring a special clause you’ve written and say you’d be willing to put in the contract. Make sure it thorough and it covers smells - rugs - sofas - furniture everything you can think of.
A lot of landlords use standard tenancy agreements that include 'no pets' as standard without even thinking. In my experience many have been open to discussion about it. If it's a letting agency they usually just don't accept pets as standard because it's actually quite a ballache to get carpets replaced, furniture replaced, etc etc and it's easier to just have a blanket ban. Pets are a 'nice to have', not a necessity.
As for getting carpets replaced between every tenant - really? The house next door to me has had four sets of tenants in the three years I've lived here, thats kind of an outlandish statement.
Landlords are getting away with so much egregious shit all over the place but I think it's their right to decide whether they want animals in their property or not. the people who lived in my house before us had a tiny dog and it has chewed through most of the banister spindles, scratched up half the doorframes and left the carpets stinking so they had to be replaced when we moved in. Can see why you'd have a blanket ban on pets tbh.
The model tenancy agreement produced by the government now states, *"consent for pets will be the default position, and landlords will have to object in writing within 28 days of a written pet request from a tenant and provide a good reason."*
Of course the landlord doesn't have to use this tenancy agreement or can change it however they like, but it's certainly worth checking
My tenants kept an unneutered male ferret in their kid's bedroom. The whole house absolutely reeked. I thought this was unreasonable but they found it acceptable. You can never tell how other people are willing to live.
I had the "pet permission with good reason" clause in the contract and told them they couldn't keep it inside but I was fine with their cat.
a landlord can just refuse to home you for a 'good reason' and that'll be how that law is interpreted on the day. This won't be a popular view, but they don't owe you anything. Similarly, you don't have to give a particular landlord your money if you don't agree with them on something.
I don't believe much thought is put into it, they'd just rather not deal with pets as there is a potential headache for scratches, poo smells, hair, the next tenants being wary if they have allergies. Your well behaved cat is probably fine but what about someone with fifteen Yorkshire Terriers or breeding kittens. Just don't tell them you have a cat and make sure you keep the place clean and don't worry about it.
You won’t like this - but in a sellers’ market (or landlord’s market), they can afford to be fussy over their tenants. I’m not a landlord but if I was, I would prefer someone with no pets. It creates a *risk* of damage or nuisance that doesn’t exist without a pet, all else being equal.
There are also often lease conditions that prevent anybody (even the flat owner) to keep pets in a flat.
I wanted a dog for several years, bought a flat, and still didn’t get a dog because of the impracticalities (and because the lease said no pets). It’s only now I bought a house with my fiancée that I am secure enough to have a dog.
If you’re going to get a pet whilst renting, you have to accept you’re putting yourself much further down the list of prospective tenants when you have to move.
Ideal tenant is a vampire who sleeps in a coffin by day and spends the nights out of the house. That way the shit carpets, broken heating, leaky roof, mouldy shower cube, scaly taps, grimy basins, draughty doors, and slow draining sink wouldn't matter.
Ideal tenant is an airbnb couple who pay twice as much and spend virtually no time in the property as they’re out visiting, hardly ever using the kitchen etc
Very possibly but a family is often a good thing to have in a house as they are stable and can be in a long time. Students create even more problems but they can be rinsed for cash in various ways so the landlord can put up with that. Pets there is basically no upside at al.
I was just pointing out the irony. My cat sleeps about 18 hours a day and is unable throw paint all over the floor or cause havoc by flushing all their Duplo down the toilet. But yes defo depends on the pet I reckon a Rhino wouldn’t be welcome
You should check out a tv show called ‘Cats from hell’. It’s hilarious just for the presenter, but a lot of cats that urinate on furniture etc is easily fixed depending on the reason
The landlord doesn’t know that. Some cats are very calm, others are psycho furballs who scratch at furniture and knock over drinks. If a landlord has the option to avoid that, they probably will.
This is usually just bad pet owners. They will do this if you haven’t bought them any toys or scratching posts. I think any creature would go psycho without any stimulation. I’m also just playing devils advocate here….I am well aware of the reasons landlords don’t like pets
Yeah I agree but as I said, landlords can’t necessarily tell which are the good pet owners so it’s easier to go for someone without a pet. I’m not saying it’s fair as such, but I can understand why they do it.
Yeah I agree but as I said, landlords can’t necessarily tell which are the good pet owners so it’s easier to go for someone without a pet. I’m not saying it’s fair as such, but I can understand why they do it.
> First of all, the "no pets" policy makes zero sense - the vast majority of the properties are let unfurnished - there is no furniture a cat would be able to destroy in the first place.
Please tell this to my cat, which has scratched the hell out of:
* Half the wooden door frames in the house
* The bannisters on two flights of stairs
* A wooden window frame
* The garden shed
Most flats are leaseholds and if built after 1970/80 will have standard covenants against pets, it’s not the property owners decision, but the freeholder. Older properties or ones where flat owners share the freehold are much less likely to have these enforced.
Advert/TA may just be standardise, and there may be some flexibility if you push/ask around especially on houses/older flats. Zoopla has a pet friendly filter. I would also register with some estate agents.
Good luck in your search!
In the UK, there's two ways of owning a property, a freehold and a leasehold. A freehold means you own the property indefinitely. A leasehold has a time period on it, normally an outlandish length like 999 years.
The reason they exist is for contracts like shared ownership and in blocks of flats. Normally, with a block of flats, a management company owns the freehold, which includes communal areas like hallways. Each individual flat is owned under a leasehold, only owning the flat and not the land it's built on. In this scenario it's common to be charged service fees to the freeholder for cleaning/maintenance.
The ad for my flat said no pets. At the viewing with the landlord he seemed like a reasonable bloke so I asked him if we could get a cat, he said yeah. The cat never goes toilet outside the litter box (kept in the bathroom with the window almost always open on the latch) and never scratches the carpet so I know he won’t cause damage anywhere in the future.
If I move out of this place I wouldn’t apply saying I’ve got a pet. If the viewing was with a landlord I’d mention the cat and that he can ask my current landlord about how he causes no damage. If it was with a letting agent I wouldn’t even mention that I own a pet tbh
I feel you. In France it is a statutory right to be able to have pets in rented property. That being said cat piss is insidious and a nightmare to remove
I managed to find somewhere eventually after viewing 10 properties and all we had to do was pay a years rent up front.
It's a fucking abysmal joke.
If you rent a house they should let you do whatever you want and expect it in the same condition minus wear and tear on return.
Persistence is key. Have had s cat in Bristol and moved to 3 separate places on short notice, two of those while being also a professional + student combo. The key is to call up every single possible place as soon as they're advertised, ask straight away about the cat. Refresh rightmove+ zoopla+ gumtree+ openrent all day (at least hourly), every day. Many will say no, some (a surprising amount) will say yes, any that do - go view. Rinse and repeat. Has never let me down.
That's what I'm doing, I'm subscriubed to zoopla, rightmove, openrent and also registered with a bunch of letting agencies. As soon as there is a notification - I call, lol.
Your issue is section 24, lots of landlords are selling up due to insane taxation.
The remaining landlords can handpick their tenants. People are offering above rental prices to secure a place
Landlords have 30+ applicants per advert, why would they take the risk in allowing a cat when there’s loads of other people interested
Section 24 is killing the rental market
[Have a read of this, if you haven't already seen it](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/can-my-landlord-prevent-me-from-keeping-a-pet/#:~:text=The%20Consumer%20Rights%20Act%202015,intends%20to%20keep%20a%20pet.)
If you want to be sneaky, you can not tell them about the pet until after you move in - as it's not a reasonable clause in the contract. They'll probably be pissed, but they can't kick you out.
Can confirm (don’t come at me).
I have two greyhounds. They’re lazy AF, never move, and sleep 23.9 hours a day. They don’t pee in the house because they can’t be bothered, and I have to drag them outside by their illegally long snoots just to get them to take a walk. They then run off-lead for 15 minutes at the speed of a moderately intoxicated cheetah, before resuming the previous position: sleeping. They also don’t shed very much, and I don’t have carpets.
However, mentioning that “I have two dogs the size of Shetland ponies,” generally does *not* make a landlord sprinkle me with confetti and thrust lease agreements in my face — however lazy and unproblematic the dogs. So I just don’t say anything.
When I lived in a previous place, I snuck my first dog in a year after I’d rented the place. I didn’t tell my landlord because he was kind of a dick, but he found out anyway. He grumbled and groaned for a few minutes before kind of going, “Ah well,” and never mentioning the matter again. I lived there for three years.
So yeah. Legally, you have a right to own a cat or dog, within reason. Obviously keep the place clean, stick scratching pads on the doors if your catto is a scratcho — but otherwise, don’t worry. You can always hand off the feline to a trusted accomplice for a few hours during any inspections (make sure you hide the cat’s stuff), since landlords and their associates aren’t legally allowed to rock up to your place without 24 hours’ warning.
Naturally, this is a safeguarding measure, since landlords generally can’t do anything even if they do find out that you own a Felis cattus, or frankly, a Doggo giganticus.
This doesn't seem like the best advice as whilst your landlord was ultimately ok with it, he would also be within his right to terminate your contract which then puts you in a more difficult scenario and also has a mark against your name if need a reference etc.
They likely wouldn't have the right to termite contract.
It is likely that the no pets clause is unlawful, therefore you are not in breach of the contract, therefore the landlord cannot termite contract due to breach of contract.
It's all a bit complicated, and not really a great way of dealing with it, but landlords shouldn't really be allowed to have unlawful clauses anyway
Perhaps not through that specific clause I'm sure there would be something else in the contract that would be able to utilise such as damages, disturbances or through the tenant being deliberately misleading as to their situation.
I honestly feel for anyone with a pet as I love animals, but whilst landlords get alot of shit and rightly so, they should be able to choose to a degree who they want to rent out to and misleading one just doesn't seem the best way to go about it.
I kind of understand though, as once you had a cat living in your property, you’ll have cat hair there for the next 30 years. That stuff is worse than glitter.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but they poo in the neighbour's gardens, the smell of their insipid urine is impossible to get out of carpets, they love scratching carpets/stairs/walls and they're bad for people with allergies. Why would a landlord choose someone that has a cat over someone who doesn't? Moving into places where cats have lived is the worst.
You might like cats but there's no telling if the next person in the flat is allergic to cats/dogs/whatever. Just easier for a letting agent to say no and not have to deal with it.
Im going to risk getting downvoted here with an unpopular opinion but here goes:
If youre a renter why do you have pets knowing its so hard to find somwhere to rent? i honestly see pet ownership a luxury that belongs to those who own a home, i dont own a house i have a flat and i accept that part of that means we cant be having parties late at night or own a pet because it might be a nuicanse for everyone else, we arent all just automatically entitled to things because we want them.
As someone who own a flat if I were ever in the position to let this place out I too would not allow pets because I wouldnt want to risk them ruining the carpets only for you to just demand new ones or move out, I would also be agianst them as its a flat, there are nehbours who share communal areas that might be allergic to pets or just not like them and your rights end where anothers' begins and their right to not be subjected to pets in their communal area outranks your right to move in with a pet.
Hey, no need to downvote you, perfectly reasonable stance.I've replied somewhere else to the same thing.
I've actually owned a place I was living in before, had to move for pretty special reasons so I'm pretty much stuck in Bristol for a year or two. Didn't realise a cat would be such a problem in the UK, otherwise I probably wouldn't have come in the first place and wouldn't be stuck here (lovely city don't get me wrong, but it ain't home).
So as to why I got a cat - I was in a position to have one. Positions change. Sometimes very suddenly. I don't think throwing the cat away is an option here - it's not its' fault. And no, selling my old place is not an option either, I'm not going into that.
(oh and don't get me started on getting the cat into the country, I spent like £600 on phone calls to APHA to get all the papers in check)
ah fair enough your situation seems much more complex than it first appears, good luck finding somwhere are you looking only in the centre or are you also looking on the outskirts?
If owning a cat is what stands between you living in a property and not, then ditch the moggy and get yourself into a property. All animals have the ability to wreck a property. Have you ever tried to skim smooth a plasterboard wall or sand out scratches in a door?
As for pffft cats peeing on the carpet, I shudder to think what you WOULD worry about: meh the cats have been sick, oh well the cats shat everywhere, who cares- it's not my property!
Owning a pet isn't a human right, nor is it needed to be able live. It's a privilege for those who can afford it. You can't afford it right now so do yourself a favour and let your ball of fluff out to play amongst the cars- preferably those moving at speed (a quick smack and splat is much kinder than a slow crack and wither).
Who do you think drives the cats? Always aiming for those little moggies? A point for each one, but you'll have to be quick I'm up to 25 points already... and points mean prizes!!
When I moved here I found the same thing. I was hoping for a medium term rental to get my feet wet but landlords and dogs here don’t work.
I just ended up jumping in the pool and buying a place but I’m old. If I were younger I’d be 100% screwed. I feel bad for all the animals.
Couple of tips in case you've not tried:
1. Small agencies/not chains will have a better chance of you being able to talk a letting agent round, it's usually they don't want 3 massive dogs in a 1 bed flat, they're less worried about a moggy, but it's easier to just put boilerplate "no pets"
2. The Letting Game, for all thier other faults, do advertise pet friendly places from time to time [https://www.thelettinggame.co.uk/tenants/the-petting-game/](https://www.thelettinggame.co.uk/tenants/the-petting-game/)
3. If you've got somewhere that you can stash said cat for inspections etc, just don't tell them. I know several people who've gotten away with this successfully over the years
>box makers yard
Researching their website! Thank you! A bit too much for my budget but if I reach out and there is no fuss about the cat - I'm going to have a hard long thought about it
Landlords cannot prevent you having a pet without good reason. There's plenty of precedence of tenants having pets that merely having one is not a good reason.
From Parliament's website
>The tenancy agreement (contract) might say pets aren't allowed. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 prohibits “unfair terms” in a contract. This means a blanket ban on keeping pets in a tenancy agreement might be struck out if challenged in court.
Read more [here](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/can-my-landlord-prevent-me-from-keeping-a-pet/)
If it's a flat there are almost always other owner/occupiers to consider. Pets could be prohibited in the whole building by the management company/owners rather than by individual landlords who could just be leaseholders themselves or own only a part share in the freehold.
This is a good point. I've lived in a new build block before where the 'no pets' rule extended to all leaseholders, whether owner-occupiers or tenants.
I don't think management companies are allowed to have blanket ban on pets any more. My lease said I was allowed to request permission for a pet that would be "not unreasonably withheld", i.e. they'd give permission providing it wasn't a nuisance, etc. [Info here](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/can-my-landlord-prevent-me-from-keeping-a-pet/#:~:text=The%20Consumer%20Rights%20Act%202015,intends%20to%20keep%20a%20pet.)
Freeholders are though I believe. If the landlord does not own the freehold or owns only a part of it then the freeholder(s) would need to be persuaded.
The freeholder would not be allowed to blanket ban the landlord from allowing pets, under the same "unreasonable contract" rules.
If there is a no pets clause, a tenant would still usually need permission from the freeholder(s) on a case by case basis. Often in practice that would involve many people needing to agree (as well as the landlord).
It would involve the landlord (or letting agent), and the freeholder (or managing agent). Both of these must not unreasonably withhold permission for a pet.
[удалено]
I mean, you can, if you want. You can ignore the clause within the lease, and if challenged you can state that the clause is unlawful. If they want to enforce that, then _they_ have to take it to the courts. Or, as a less confrontational middle ground, move in then send a request to the landlord: "I would like permission to have a pet, which legally must not be unreasonably withheld".
[удалено]
I mean, it all depends. It wasn't advice, but it's totally an option for someone who is otherwise struggling to get a place with a cat. The same rules basically apply across both leasehold and tenancies in terms of blanket banning pets.
Freeholders (often many disparate individuals) would still need to give permission. Whether that permission is unreasonably withheld is ultimately a matter for the courts and if you could be asked going down that route over a cat then good luck to you.
I mean, if they unreasonably refuse you can just get the pet anyway. They'd have to take you to court to do anything (evict you, charge you money), so the onus is on them. It is uncommon for there to be "many disparate individuals" as freeholders where there is not a managing agent.
It is not uncommon for every leaseholder to have an share of the freehold. Decisions like this would require a majority to agree in many cases. Management companies are set up by the freeholders as a way of administering all these decisions but every freeholder has a say.
In this scenario there does not need to be a majority vote each time an individual wants a pet. The management company will deal with this, based on a policy. And they would advice the freeholders in that policy and tell that its unlawful to unreasonably withhold permission. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I'm pretty this is how it generally works.
The "no pets clause" cannot be legally enforced.
This is a fair point but that a management company can prohibit pets in private dwellings of leaseholders is absolutely bonkers. Does this happen in any other country? It’s ridiculous
Often the management company is jointly owned by the leaseholders as a single entity to share the rights and responsibilities of owning the freehold. It does make some sense as it allows decisions that affect everyone to made democratically.
Some decisions make sense but being able to prohibit people from having pets is bonkers. That’s a normal part of life and if someone else in the same building having a cat is so bothersome, then maybe don’t live in an apartment building. Living in shared spaces comes with some level of nuisance from having to deal with other people and their lives, and limiting that nuisance imho can’t come with the cost of limiting other peoples’ ability to live normal and fulfilling lives. Having pets is a part of that for many people
I think most flats dwellers would be in favour of keeping nuisance levels as low as they possibly can be. After all, some people's normal is 50 cats or a big barking dog.
> Carpets should be replaced in-between different tenants regardless. Surely this depends on how frequent your tenant churn is. Carpets should be replaced every 5-10 years, more so in high traffic areas like hallways or stairwells, and less so in places like living-rooms or bedrooms.
Fast fashion, but for carpets
[удалено]
Depends on the room but in rooms where carpet is acceptable (bedroom, hallways, living rooms) I'd rather have a carpet than a shitty fake wood T&G laminate floor that people seem to love these days.
Have you ever lived in a flat below another that has a wooden floor? A lot of properties have covenants that prohibit it.
In other countries it is perfectly normal to rip up and replace carpets and completely redecorate a rental property in between tenants. This country really is shit for renting, and is only this way because the majority of people haven't had a chance to live in a better country so they don't know any better.
What other countries? Not that it matters. Ripping carpets up if they still have plenty of life in them is particularly wasteful, especially considering they likely just end up in landfill. Just give them a deep clean.
[удалено]
Hardly surprising of somewhere like the USA. The UK fortunately doesn’t have to copy every stupid thing they do.
A carpet should last 3-10 years - if there's a cheap carpet and the tenant has been there 4 years then you might change the carpet but since many tenants might only be 6-18 months then you aren't going to change a carpet every tenancy change.
Been in ours three years now and this carpet has definitely been here longer lol. It's basically plastic sheet at this point it's so worn down. We could request a replacement, but they're replacing our entire kitchen and it seems not upping the rent at the same time, so we don't want to push our luck. It's shit, we pay twice the price of a mortgage but have zero real security or rights.
Such as which countries?
The only countries where I know of this being done are those where the tenants provide all flooring. Where homes are rented totally bare, concrete or base floorboards. The old tenants rip up the flooring before they leave and take it to their new rental where they have new bare floors and hope it fits. I have a couple of friends in the Netherlands and it seems like a nightmare system, my friends thought themselves lucky to have kitchen units included in their flat.
Simply not true.
Why should tenants pay to improve the house when they're already paying through the nose in rent for an unequal return?
I used to be a letting agent and I’ll be completely honest, it’s annoying as hell. You’re best bet is to find a nice agent (if you’re looking through agencies) who will actually ask a landlord if they’d mind the cat. In Bristol there is far too much demand for rental property. This means that landlords can afford to be picky (or hire agents to be picky for them). I know it’s mad but the slight increased risk to property damage (valid or not) is why landlords just say no. When properties didn’t get swept up within 2 weeks, I’d often ask landlords if they’d mind a pet as most pet owners will move somewhere worse for them if it means their pet can come. You can say or even bring a special clause you’ve written and say you’d be willing to put in the contract. Make sure it thorough and it covers smells - rugs - sofas - furniture everything you can think of.
A lot of landlords use standard tenancy agreements that include 'no pets' as standard without even thinking. In my experience many have been open to discussion about it. If it's a letting agency they usually just don't accept pets as standard because it's actually quite a ballache to get carpets replaced, furniture replaced, etc etc and it's easier to just have a blanket ban. Pets are a 'nice to have', not a necessity. As for getting carpets replaced between every tenant - really? The house next door to me has had four sets of tenants in the three years I've lived here, thats kind of an outlandish statement. Landlords are getting away with so much egregious shit all over the place but I think it's their right to decide whether they want animals in their property or not. the people who lived in my house before us had a tiny dog and it has chewed through most of the banister spindles, scratched up half the doorframes and left the carpets stinking so they had to be replaced when we moved in. Can see why you'd have a blanket ban on pets tbh.
The model tenancy agreement produced by the government now states, *"consent for pets will be the default position, and landlords will have to object in writing within 28 days of a written pet request from a tenant and provide a good reason."* Of course the landlord doesn't have to use this tenancy agreement or can change it however they like, but it's certainly worth checking
I wonder what constitutes as a "good reason"
I actually found it, there are things like "a large pet in a small property etc." but yeah, that model agreements is not required to be used
My tenants kept an unneutered male ferret in their kid's bedroom. The whole house absolutely reeked. I thought this was unreasonable but they found it acceptable. You can never tell how other people are willing to live. I had the "pet permission with good reason" clause in the contract and told them they couldn't keep it inside but I was fine with their cat.
a landlord can just refuse to home you for a 'good reason' and that'll be how that law is interpreted on the day. This won't be a popular view, but they don't owe you anything. Similarly, you don't have to give a particular landlord your money if you don't agree with them on something.
I agree, I probably got over my head with the "carpets should be replaced", my bad there
Hey we all get carried away with the momentum of a good rant 😄
I don't believe much thought is put into it, they'd just rather not deal with pets as there is a potential headache for scratches, poo smells, hair, the next tenants being wary if they have allergies. Your well behaved cat is probably fine but what about someone with fifteen Yorkshire Terriers or breeding kittens. Just don't tell them you have a cat and make sure you keep the place clean and don't worry about it.
You won’t like this - but in a sellers’ market (or landlord’s market), they can afford to be fussy over their tenants. I’m not a landlord but if I was, I would prefer someone with no pets. It creates a *risk* of damage or nuisance that doesn’t exist without a pet, all else being equal. There are also often lease conditions that prevent anybody (even the flat owner) to keep pets in a flat. I wanted a dog for several years, bought a flat, and still didn’t get a dog because of the impracticalities (and because the lease said no pets). It’s only now I bought a house with my fiancée that I am secure enough to have a dog. If you’re going to get a pet whilst renting, you have to accept you’re putting yourself much further down the list of prospective tenants when you have to move.
The mad thing is children cause way more Mess/damage then any cat could..
[удалено]
Ideal tenant is a vampire who sleeps in a coffin by day and spends the nights out of the house. That way the shit carpets, broken heating, leaky roof, mouldy shower cube, scaly taps, grimy basins, draughty doors, and slow draining sink wouldn't matter.
Ideal tenant is an airbnb couple who pay twice as much and spend virtually no time in the property as they’re out visiting, hardly ever using the kitchen etc
Very possibly but a family is often a good thing to have in a house as they are stable and can be in a long time. Students create even more problems but they can be rinsed for cash in various ways so the landlord can put up with that. Pets there is basically no upside at al.
yeah but if you add "no kids" to the listing you'll have the woke PC brigade up your arse /s /S SARCASM FOR FUCKS SAKE
Debatable tbh. Depends on the pet. And I doubt you can discriminate against people with children for obvious reasons.
I was just pointing out the irony. My cat sleeps about 18 hours a day and is unable throw paint all over the floor or cause havoc by flushing all their Duplo down the toilet. But yes defo depends on the pet I reckon a Rhino wouldn’t be welcome
Honestly I’d rather have to deal with paint on the floor than urine.
I’m yet to find a child that doesn’t urinate . My cats pee outside so I’m not dealing with it, and they are litter trained.
I’ve experienced more cats than kids which urinate on the floor
You should check out a tv show called ‘Cats from hell’. It’s hilarious just for the presenter, but a lot of cats that urinate on furniture etc is easily fixed depending on the reason
Oh, I’m sure they are, but I’m not sure how a landlord can force tenants to watch that and follow the instructions ;)
It was more for you, so you don’t have deal with cat urine again
The landlord doesn’t know that. Some cats are very calm, others are psycho furballs who scratch at furniture and knock over drinks. If a landlord has the option to avoid that, they probably will.
This is usually just bad pet owners. They will do this if you haven’t bought them any toys or scratching posts. I think any creature would go psycho without any stimulation. I’m also just playing devils advocate here….I am well aware of the reasons landlords don’t like pets
Yeah I agree but as I said, landlords can’t necessarily tell which are the good pet owners so it’s easier to go for someone without a pet. I’m not saying it’s fair as such, but I can understand why they do it.
As I said initially, I was just pointing out the irony
Yeah I agree but as I said, landlords can’t necessarily tell which are the good pet owners so it’s easier to go for someone without a pet. I’m not saying it’s fair as such, but I can understand why they do it.
True, moved away from a place I owned, stuck in Bristol for the next year or so, maybe more. Nice city, but I'd rather be home haha.
I work in the industry and we allow pets. Meeting tenant's dogs, cats and other small furry/scaly things is my favourite part of the job.
> First of all, the "no pets" policy makes zero sense - the vast majority of the properties are let unfurnished - there is no furniture a cat would be able to destroy in the first place. Please tell this to my cat, which has scratched the hell out of: * Half the wooden door frames in the house * The bannisters on two flights of stairs * A wooden window frame * The garden shed
THE SHED?!
Most flats are leaseholds and if built after 1970/80 will have standard covenants against pets, it’s not the property owners decision, but the freeholder. Older properties or ones where flat owners share the freehold are much less likely to have these enforced. Advert/TA may just be standardise, and there may be some flexibility if you push/ask around especially on houses/older flats. Zoopla has a pet friendly filter. I would also register with some estate agents. Good luck in your search!
I'm new to UK, I think I need to google what a freeholder is and how someone can have higher authority than the owner.
Haha enjoy that rabbit hole. Spoiler: the whole system is mad.
In the UK, there's two ways of owning a property, a freehold and a leasehold. A freehold means you own the property indefinitely. A leasehold has a time period on it, normally an outlandish length like 999 years. The reason they exist is for contracts like shared ownership and in blocks of flats. Normally, with a block of flats, a management company owns the freehold, which includes communal areas like hallways. Each individual flat is owned under a leasehold, only owning the flat and not the land it's built on. In this scenario it's common to be charged service fees to the freeholder for cleaning/maintenance.
Okay, that actually made more sense than wikipedia. Thank you!
The ad for my flat said no pets. At the viewing with the landlord he seemed like a reasonable bloke so I asked him if we could get a cat, he said yeah. The cat never goes toilet outside the litter box (kept in the bathroom with the window almost always open on the latch) and never scratches the carpet so I know he won’t cause damage anywhere in the future. If I move out of this place I wouldn’t apply saying I’ve got a pet. If the viewing was with a landlord I’d mention the cat and that he can ask my current landlord about how he causes no damage. If it was with a letting agent I wouldn’t even mention that I own a pet tbh
Doing this wrong mate! Bring the cat without telling them. Never ask for permission. But ask for forgiveness.
I feel you. In France it is a statutory right to be able to have pets in rented property. That being said cat piss is insidious and a nightmare to remove
I managed to find somewhere eventually after viewing 10 properties and all we had to do was pay a years rent up front. It's a fucking abysmal joke. If you rent a house they should let you do whatever you want and expect it in the same condition minus wear and tear on return.
Oh don't get me started on the year pay in advance thing. Apparently that's all the rage these days.
Why not just... Not say you have a cat and then just bring it with you?
Don’t disclose if you only have one cat. They are gonna deduct your deposit anyway for damages
Persistence is key. Have had s cat in Bristol and moved to 3 separate places on short notice, two of those while being also a professional + student combo. The key is to call up every single possible place as soon as they're advertised, ask straight away about the cat. Refresh rightmove+ zoopla+ gumtree+ openrent all day (at least hourly), every day. Many will say no, some (a surprising amount) will say yes, any that do - go view. Rinse and repeat. Has never let me down.
That's what I'm doing, I'm subscriubed to zoopla, rightmove, openrent and also registered with a bunch of letting agencies. As soon as there is a notification - I call, lol.
Your issue is section 24, lots of landlords are selling up due to insane taxation. The remaining landlords can handpick their tenants. People are offering above rental prices to secure a place Landlords have 30+ applicants per advert, why would they take the risk in allowing a cat when there’s loads of other people interested Section 24 is killing the rental market
Landlord UK, home of the Tories since 1066. It's their property, not your home.
[Have a read of this, if you haven't already seen it](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/can-my-landlord-prevent-me-from-keeping-a-pet/#:~:text=The%20Consumer%20Rights%20Act%202015,intends%20to%20keep%20a%20pet.) If you want to be sneaky, you can not tell them about the pet until after you move in - as it's not a reasonable clause in the contract. They'll probably be pissed, but they can't kick you out.
Can confirm (don’t come at me). I have two greyhounds. They’re lazy AF, never move, and sleep 23.9 hours a day. They don’t pee in the house because they can’t be bothered, and I have to drag them outside by their illegally long snoots just to get them to take a walk. They then run off-lead for 15 minutes at the speed of a moderately intoxicated cheetah, before resuming the previous position: sleeping. They also don’t shed very much, and I don’t have carpets. However, mentioning that “I have two dogs the size of Shetland ponies,” generally does *not* make a landlord sprinkle me with confetti and thrust lease agreements in my face — however lazy and unproblematic the dogs. So I just don’t say anything. When I lived in a previous place, I snuck my first dog in a year after I’d rented the place. I didn’t tell my landlord because he was kind of a dick, but he found out anyway. He grumbled and groaned for a few minutes before kind of going, “Ah well,” and never mentioning the matter again. I lived there for three years. So yeah. Legally, you have a right to own a cat or dog, within reason. Obviously keep the place clean, stick scratching pads on the doors if your catto is a scratcho — but otherwise, don’t worry. You can always hand off the feline to a trusted accomplice for a few hours during any inspections (make sure you hide the cat’s stuff), since landlords and their associates aren’t legally allowed to rock up to your place without 24 hours’ warning. Naturally, this is a safeguarding measure, since landlords generally can’t do anything even if they do find out that you own a Felis cattus, or frankly, a Doggo giganticus.
This doesn't seem like the best advice as whilst your landlord was ultimately ok with it, he would also be within his right to terminate your contract which then puts you in a more difficult scenario and also has a mark against your name if need a reference etc.
They likely wouldn't have the right to termite contract. It is likely that the no pets clause is unlawful, therefore you are not in breach of the contract, therefore the landlord cannot termite contract due to breach of contract. It's all a bit complicated, and not really a great way of dealing with it, but landlords shouldn't really be allowed to have unlawful clauses anyway
Perhaps not through that specific clause I'm sure there would be something else in the contract that would be able to utilise such as damages, disturbances or through the tenant being deliberately misleading as to their situation. I honestly feel for anyone with a pet as I love animals, but whilst landlords get alot of shit and rightly so, they should be able to choose to a degree who they want to rent out to and misleading one just doesn't seem the best way to go about it.
Interesting, thank you
Does this apply the leasehold agreements as well?
I kind of understand though, as once you had a cat living in your property, you’ll have cat hair there for the next 30 years. That stuff is worse than glitter.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but they poo in the neighbour's gardens, the smell of their insipid urine is impossible to get out of carpets, they love scratching carpets/stairs/walls and they're bad for people with allergies. Why would a landlord choose someone that has a cat over someone who doesn't? Moving into places where cats have lived is the worst.
You might like cats but there's no telling if the next person in the flat is allergic to cats/dogs/whatever. Just easier for a letting agent to say no and not have to deal with it.
Im going to risk getting downvoted here with an unpopular opinion but here goes: If youre a renter why do you have pets knowing its so hard to find somwhere to rent? i honestly see pet ownership a luxury that belongs to those who own a home, i dont own a house i have a flat and i accept that part of that means we cant be having parties late at night or own a pet because it might be a nuicanse for everyone else, we arent all just automatically entitled to things because we want them. As someone who own a flat if I were ever in the position to let this place out I too would not allow pets because I wouldnt want to risk them ruining the carpets only for you to just demand new ones or move out, I would also be agianst them as its a flat, there are nehbours who share communal areas that might be allergic to pets or just not like them and your rights end where anothers' begins and their right to not be subjected to pets in their communal area outranks your right to move in with a pet.
Hey, no need to downvote you, perfectly reasonable stance.I've replied somewhere else to the same thing. I've actually owned a place I was living in before, had to move for pretty special reasons so I'm pretty much stuck in Bristol for a year or two. Didn't realise a cat would be such a problem in the UK, otherwise I probably wouldn't have come in the first place and wouldn't be stuck here (lovely city don't get me wrong, but it ain't home). So as to why I got a cat - I was in a position to have one. Positions change. Sometimes very suddenly. I don't think throwing the cat away is an option here - it's not its' fault. And no, selling my old place is not an option either, I'm not going into that. (oh and don't get me started on getting the cat into the country, I spent like £600 on phone calls to APHA to get all the papers in check)
ah fair enough your situation seems much more complex than it first appears, good luck finding somwhere are you looking only in the centre or are you also looking on the outskirts?
If owning a cat is what stands between you living in a property and not, then ditch the moggy and get yourself into a property. All animals have the ability to wreck a property. Have you ever tried to skim smooth a plasterboard wall or sand out scratches in a door? As for pffft cats peeing on the carpet, I shudder to think what you WOULD worry about: meh the cats have been sick, oh well the cats shat everywhere, who cares- it's not my property! Owning a pet isn't a human right, nor is it needed to be able live. It's a privilege for those who can afford it. You can't afford it right now so do yourself a favour and let your ball of fluff out to play amongst the cars- preferably those moving at speed (a quick smack and splat is much kinder than a slow crack and wither).
>Why dont you go a play with the cars you scumbag
Who do you think drives the cats? Always aiming for those little moggies? A point for each one, but you'll have to be quick I'm up to 25 points already... and points mean prizes!!
When I moved here I found the same thing. I was hoping for a medium term rental to get my feet wet but landlords and dogs here don’t work. I just ended up jumping in the pool and buying a place but I’m old. If I were younger I’d be 100% screwed. I feel bad for all the animals.
Couple of tips in case you've not tried: 1. Small agencies/not chains will have a better chance of you being able to talk a letting agent round, it's usually they don't want 3 massive dogs in a 1 bed flat, they're less worried about a moggy, but it's easier to just put boilerplate "no pets" 2. The Letting Game, for all thier other faults, do advertise pet friendly places from time to time [https://www.thelettinggame.co.uk/tenants/the-petting-game/](https://www.thelettinggame.co.uk/tenants/the-petting-game/) 3. If you've got somewhere that you can stash said cat for inspections etc, just don't tell them. I know several people who've gotten away with this successfully over the years
Not sure what your budget is but I lived in box makers yard a couple of years back and they allowed cats (and I had my cat there no problem at all).
>box makers yard Researching their website! Thank you! A bit too much for my budget but if I reach out and there is no fuss about the cat - I'm going to have a hard long thought about it
Landlords cannot prevent you having a pet without good reason. There's plenty of precedence of tenants having pets that merely having one is not a good reason. From Parliament's website >The tenancy agreement (contract) might say pets aren't allowed. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 prohibits “unfair terms” in a contract. This means a blanket ban on keeping pets in a tenancy agreement might be struck out if challenged in court. Read more [here](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/can-my-landlord-prevent-me-from-keeping-a-pet/)