With the debate ranging over pets in lets, a new analysis by comparative website Compare The Market suggests pet damage is typically more expensive than that caused by children.
Although pets cause less damage to the home than kids overall, the survey found that pet owners are more likely to claim on their home insurance with 24 per cent of pet owners admitting to doing so, compared to only 15 per cent of parents. The typical pet owner claim averaged £225.
Pets owners in Leeds are forking out the most every time their furry friends cause damage, with an average cost of almost £300. This is followed by pet owners in Birmingham (£269) and London (£261).
The most common damage caused by pets is ripping or staining the carpet, as over 42 per cent of pet owners have experienced this; next came stained or damaged sofas (38 per cent) following by damage to walls and skirting boards (35 per cent) and broken ornaments or fittings (31 per cent).
Of those pet owners who haven’t claimed for damage, most say they either didn’t think it was worth claiming for or didn’t want to claim on their insurance in case their annual premium went up.
Commenting on the research, Anna McEntee - director at Compare the Market - says: “As a number of parents and pet owners have experienced some type of damage to their home by their children or pets, it’s important to understand whether this is covered by your home insurance. Many home insurance providers do not cover accidental damage (such as that caused by children) or damage caused by pets as part of their standard policies. However, some do offer accidental and pet damage cover as optional add-ons, which may be worth considering if you are a parent or pet owner. It’s also important to check your home insurance policy to find out what type of damage you’re covered for.”
-400x310-min.jpeg)
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
.png)
%20(002).png)
%20(002).jpg)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Damage can be measured and quantified what cannot be is the lingering smell of wet dog, the worry that flea eggs will hatch once new tenants have moved in and discovering that special corner in the garden that the tenants used to stash the dog poo!
"No pets without the Landlord’s prior written consent which will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed"... reasonable varies from person to person. I believe it's reasonable to eat two large pizza's in one sitting (yes I am greedy), others may not.
Reasonableness is subjective... and at the end of the day a tenant cannot get a pet without written consent.
Most tenants give you a fait accompli !
Those that are arguing that insurance is the answer dont appreciate that having to make an insurance claim (even if the small print does actually allow claims for pet wear and tear as opposed to damage) for landlord is still a load of hassle and if it involves redecorating or new flooring will inevitably lead to a void period and lost income.
Please login to comment