By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Graham Awards


January date for MP’s bid to allow pets in rental accommodation

A Conservative MP’s bid to ensure pets are allowed in private rental accommodation reaches its next stage in the New Year.

Andrew Rosindell, MP for Romford, has introduced a Private Member’s Bill that would strictly reduce the right of landlords or their agents to include ‘no pets’ policies for their properties. 

The Bill promoted by Rosindell, a former shadow minister for animal welfare, has the backing of animal organisations including the RSPCA and Battersea Dogs & Cats Home.


It’s now been agreed that its Second Reading will be on January 29. This is a stage where MPs debate the main principles of the Bill - not necessarily the fine details.

Rosindell says he is recognising the concerns of landlords by insisting renters demonstrate they are “responsible owners” with a suggested checklist including a vet’s confirmation that their pet is vaccinated and spayed or neutered, free of parasites and responsive to basic training commands in the case of dogs. 

In cases where the renter proves they are a “responsible owner”, and the accommodation is suitable for their pet, the right to take a pet into rented property would be assumed.

In his First Reading introduction to the Bill in the Commons last month, Rosindell said: “Dogs are more than man’s best friend, they are equal members of the family and, for most people, being separated from your dog is really no different than being separated from your brother or sister.

“But sadly, every year pet owners who move into rented accommodation are faced with the reality that their family could be torn apart because most landlords in Britain have unnecessary bans or restrictions on pet ownership.

“And for those people who depend on the companionship of their dog and who need that loving friend to be with them, especially those who live alone, such restrictions are nothing less than discrimination, cruel to both the owner and the animal alike.”

  • James B

    Another policy set to backfire on tenants .. when will these morons learn to not mess with things they know nothing about for just self gain
    Shame tenants seem to not grasp it either

  • icon

    High houses prices and more and more 🤮to deal with mmmm really is decision time with a push to get property up to c energy efficiency which ok all of mine are D but add licensing and my boots are full. With this little nobody’s trying to make a name at others expense this trade that I have been in for 25 years is turning very sour from my point of view

    • 03 November 2020 10:08 AM

    Even with a Govt Green grant have you worked out yet how many years of net profit it would take for your part of the costs to achieve EPC C status?

    So that for a certain period you wouldn't be receiving any actual surplus income as Green costs would account for it all.

    I guess a high yielding property will achieve payback quicker than a lower one though the costs to achieve EPC C status would be roughly the same.

    Is it worthwhile retaining a low yielding property which would take years to pay back the costs of EPC C status?

    Perhaps such low yielding properties would be worthwhile selling off to dumb FTB who don't understand the poor values of properties without EPC C status.

    Time for LL to get rid of these dud low yielding properties onto OO.
    Let them improve to C status.

    Will a property without C status value up for less than one that is C status.

    If not then LL will require massive discounts to bother buying properties without C Status.

  • Kieran Ryan

    Landlords didn't have too much of a problem in London for allowing pets, but no one can deny that they are a "high Risk" for dilapidation's? So why did they reduce the amount of deposit to 5 weeks?

    • 03 November 2020 11:52 AM

    Because Govt was pandering to the GR vote.

    If Govt knew what it was doing it should know that anymore than 2 months rent as a deposit creates a Premium Tenancy.

    No LL in his right mind would wish to create a PT.
    Govt should have restricted deposits to no more than 2 months rent.

    That would have prevented any LL accidentally creating a PT.

    I'm sure all you LA understand what a PT is .
    If you don't you should.
    Though somewhat academic now with only 5 weeks deposit allowed.

  • icon

    No problem with small pets in most of my properties, but no need for the government to get involved.

    I think we can work our things like this as, you know, grown adults, landlord and tenant and come to an arrangement. I usually charge an additional refundable bond of £100 for a cat or small dog with the tenant agreeing to cover any major damage caused by Tiddles or Rover. We don't need more legislation for crying out loud.

    • 03 November 2020 13:38 PM

    Providing your bond is within the 5 weeks deposit not a problem.
    But if more than 5 weeks then you are in breach of the TFA.

  • Matthew Payne

    ...the renter proves they are a “responsible owner”...

    Can't wait for practical detail on this when it's published. I hope for all tenants getting their hopes up for a realistic proposal that would see landlords fully protected and allow them to have pets, that it's not the "Vet Issued Certficate Plan".

    I am afraid that will be as useful as a bit of paper to provide proof of responsibility as monopoly money would be to pay off any rent arrears.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up