Pet owners are more likely to rent, will take up longer tenancies and pay more rent - so it is poor business sense to exclude them, according to LetRisks.
The firm says that the major existing research into this issu is in the US where tenants who own pets usually stay for longer, by an average of 23 months compared to 15 months for those without pets. But pet owners also take up to seven times longer to rent a home compared to non-pet owners, according to the research from the charity Dogs Trust.
LetRisks says complementary findings from ARLA show pet ownership is a signal that the tenant is committed to making the property a home.
The firm says landlords and agents can protect their property by requesting a larger deposit and stipulating which pets are not suitable.
For example, research by insurance firms suggests that chihuahuas do more damage than any other breed of dog, often ripping carpets, scratching or chewing sofas and digging up flowerbeds. The 'sausage' dog or Daschund also has a bad reputation with insurers.
In contrast - and against widespread public perception - Staffordshire Bull Terriers cause the least amount of damage according to insurers.
There are upsides to having a pet in a rented property, such as the wider appeal and choice of tenants who are likely to stay longer; a larger deposit to cover pet damage; and a pet addendum to the tenancy agreement that describes the agreed pet/s and includes cleaning carpets and upholstery and infestation treatment at the end of the tenancy says
LetRisks managing director Michael Portman.
Comments
Mo I agree with you re: Staffordshire bull terriers "attached" to bad tenants. We NEVER house a tenant with such an animal.
Bull Terriers unfortunately usually come attached to bad tenants!! Many LL Insurance policies have disclaimers regarding pet damage...what happens if the dog chews through a cable and sets property on fire. Insurance Industry needs to provide suitable Cover at Tenants cost to indemnify LL