According to the main stream media many tenants with pets have had to get rid of them to be allowed to live in rented accommodation.

pixabay.com

However the government is planning to make changes to its model tenancy agreement to help pet loving tenants, so it can be used as the basis of lease agreements.

It will be revised to help remove restrictions on pets to make it far easier for tenants with well behaved ‘companions’ to live in rental accommodation.

In January Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick urged landlords to start accepting new tenants with pets to rent their properties.

Jenrick said: “Pets bring a huge amount of joy and comfort to people’s lives, helping their owners through difficult times and improving their mental and physical wellbeing.

“It’s a shame thousands of animal-loving tenants and their children can’t experience this because they rent their homes instead of owning.

“So, I’m overhauling our model tenancy contract.”

A property litigation firm believes that the government’s revision of its model tenancy agreement could cause tenants to break the law and leave landlords out of pocket.

However the firm says that as the contract by law is not mandatory then the agreement has no basis in law; this means that landlords are quite within their rights to refuse prospective tenants with pets and those asking permission for them.

Matt Pugh, the managing partner of the property litigation firm, said: "Private landlords have the right to choose who they want in their property and to accept pets or not.

“Any moves to force landlords to take pets will only make them more likely to exit the property market thereby making the problem worse by reducing the number of suitable properties available to individuals, couples and families with pets.” The government’s decision to cap tenant deposits at five weeks has also deterred many landlords from accepting tenants with pets, according to Pugh.

He continued: “It [the cap of tenant deposits] has resulted in many landlords flatly refusing to accept pet-owning tenants as the amount does not cover damage caused by their animals, leading to an uncertain future for many pets.

“Blocks of flats also often have restrictions on accepting pets, which would make any implementation of this kind of law very difficult."

Pugh does point out that there are plenty of insurance policies that pet owners can purchase to offset many landlords’ fears, as if a pet does indeed cause damage to the properties or its contents then it will be covered by the policy.

He added: “As with all residential tenancies, a fair middle ground between the needs of both landlord and tenant needs to be reached, something this announcement, while being a step in the right direction, doesn't quite do.

"Tenants need to check with their landlords if they are allowed to have pets or if this is something that would be considered in future given certain assurances.

“Property owners need to be clear with tenants from the start on their policy on pet ownership in their properties and reach a mutual agreement which doesn't contravene the conditions of the tenancy or leave them out of pocket due to animals damaging the property.”