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


Pets in rental properties still on the agenda, insists MP

An MP who says no one should have to give up their pet to live in a rental property insists that his fight for a new law continues.

Andrew Rosindell, Conservative MP for Romford, has introduced the Dogs and Domestic Animals Accommodation and Protection Bill in the House of Commons.

The Bill urges a reform of rental laws allowing dogs and other animals to be kept in rented accommodation so long as owners can demonstrate their care for them.


The proposal has cross-party support and has been backed by animal welfare charities including the RSPCA, Battersea, Dogs Trust, Cats Protection and Dogs on the Streets.

However, no time has been found for the Bill to make progress because Coronavirus restrictions have cut debating time in the House of Commons.

Even so the government’s model tenancy agreement has been amended to be pro-pet. The new agreement means renters with what are described as “well-behaved pets” will be able to secure tenancies more easily. 

But relatively few agents and landlords are believed to have adopted the model tenancy agreement, which is not mandatory. 

Now Rosindell is trying to keep the issue alive through online discussions and an article in charity publication The Big Issue.

In that publication Rosindell says: “This is not a Conservative proposal, it’s coming from a Conservative MP but there are MPs from other parties that have signed up to my bill as well.

“I’ve already spoken to the minister for housing about it and [the government has] already changed the model tenancy agreements. I’m hoping that the next step will be to actually put this into legislation and make it the law of the land.” 

He continues: “An animal is a living, breathing creature with feelings and attachment to its owner.

“...It’s not just traumatic for the owner if they [lose] their pet but can you imagine the trauma for the animal, particularly dogs, being taken away from the owner that they love and who cares for them. 

“I think that the current rules are cruel, they lead to horrible situations and I really hope that what I’m promoting here will lead to a better society and a better way of treating both humans and animals.”

  • James B

    Chasing tenant votes again ? .. when will these morons realise such polices backfire on tenants. Or maybe they do but they know the tenants can’t see it.
    Higher rents , guarantors, declined for any other reasons easily found.

  • icon

    Now the question is do you have a pet? ‘You do great well we will let you know, Next’
    Maybe non pet owning tenants will have to accept that rented property smells of pets and that non pet owning tenants will have to accept this not to complain and maybe they should consider the feelings of the previous tenant that had two Doberman’s because this MP fool was trying to win cheap votes

  • icon

    How many properties does this idiot rent out to tenants with pets? I have rented one property to two different tenants with small dogs and they left the house in excellent condition so I am not against tenants with pets.

    What I am against is MPs with no actual experience pontificating on something they know less than nothing about.

  • icon

    He says 'the current rules are cruel' - there are no 'rules' at present just some LLs who allow pets and some that don't, just as there are some people who have pets and some that don't.

    There are more important things for Parliament to work on - this is a non-issue where LLs & tenants work it out between themselves.

    And don't forget it was the Govt that made pet deposits illegal thereby reducing the number of LLs willing to take them.

  • Paul Singleton

    Why doesn’t the government indemnify the property against damage by pets, in other words we will put tenants in with pets but when they vacate if there’s an issue such as pet damage or smell we can claim against the government?
    While we’re at it why doesn’t Shelter do the same so that we can put benefit tenants into properties without the worry of non payment of rent or damage which they can’t/won’t pay?
    Sound perfectly fair to me, let them take the risk rather than asking/forcing landlords to take it instead! BOOM, sorted!

    Matthew Payne

    Ah the elephant in the room. Because they know that both are high risk and they will be out of pocket to the tune of millions, but at the same time they cant admit that their tinkering in a free market with the Tenant Fees Act has created the problem in the first place.

  • icon

    This is how much the animal lover really cares about animals: Rosindell joined Philip Davies and Christopher Chope in repeatedly blocking a backbench bill banning the use of wild animals in circuses from progressing through Parliament, finally blocking it by lodging an objection in March 2015. So much for his definition of cruel.

    Rosindell has consistently voted against bills furthering LGBT rights, including equalising the age of consent, civil partnerships and scrapping the controversial Section 28 act, which banned teachers from "promoting homosexuality" or "teaching ... the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship". He opposed the legalisation of same-sex marriage, saying "Where would it end? You could finish up at a stage where the monarchy in this country is in a same-sex marriage and that would have constitutional implications". How would he cope with a gay couple and their dog?


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up