AIBU that people that rent shouldn't have pets

[Lloyd45]

My friend is having to find another rented property but can't find anywhere that will accept pets, she's asked me to have her 2 dogs, I have 2 dogs already but they will have to be put down if I don't have them 😞 Why do people who rent have pets when this puts them in a difficult position. I can see a lot of dogs being put down as homes will be more difficult to find

There seems to be a lot of time and care given to animals.

I don't think a lot of people can cope with humans TBH so pets can fulfil that need.

Yikes! and Woops! But that is honestly what I think now. Animals do not argue with anyone verbally.

But they can be troublesome for neighbours just the same.

If you do NOT own your house you live by LL rules. It is that simple really. Isn't it.

No Cathy its not The banning of mobility scooters and electric wheelchairs is in breach of section 149 of the Equality Act for a start.

I rent. Been in the same house 24 years, it's seen out many a cat and dog.

Why should people who aren't fortunate enough to have partners or who earn a pittance doing necessary jobs and therefore will never afford to buy, be denied a pleasure like pet owning? Should we forever be condemned to loneliness?

DISABLED SALFORD MAN BARRED FROM HOUSING MOBILITY SCOOTER

Star date: 6th September 2017

MOBILITY SCOOTER RIGHTS AGAIN UNDER SCRUTINY AT SALIX HOMES

"You've got a right to freedom of movement but mine is curtailed..."

In what is now becoming a growing problem, a disabled man living in sheltered accommodation at Salix Homes' Heraldic Court says he has to charge his electric mobility scooter at his carer's as he is not allowed to charge or park it where he lives.

Three times a week he has to get a taxi to the carer's house to pick up his scooter so he can use it..."Without it I wouldn't be able to get out" he says "I struggle to walk fifty yards with my sticks."

"James Hayes is chronically disabled and can hardly walk, due to a degenerative spinal injury in his lower lumbar... "I struggle to walk fifty or one hundred yards with my sticks" he explains "I have to stop and lean against a lamp post as most of the time I'm unaccompanied."

The only salvation for James is his mobility scooter, which allows him to get out and about and do his shopping in big stores while sitting down. In February it became necessary for him to move into sheltered accommodation at Salix Homes Heraldic Court, off Langley Road South, but was told that he couldn't take the scooter onto the property.

He left it in a yard for six weeks and then confronted Salix... "They said 'You can bring it on the premises but you can't charge it'" James recalls "I can charge it in my flat but that's on the second floor and I can't charge it in the communal area, so I've had to take it to my carer's house."

A Home Safety Guide, issued by Salix Homes last year, brought complaints and accusations of discrimination, with guidelines stating that "Mobility scooters must not be stored in communal areas in blocks and sheltered schemes" and "We do not currently provide charging facilities for mobility scooters..."*

Instead, James has had to charge the scooter at his carer's house, which entails getting a taxi for a double journey three times a week at £6 a time... "It's costing me loads and I haven't got a lot of money" he says "But without it I wouldn't be able to get out...You've got a right to freedom of movement but mine is curtailed without it."

Now James and his advocate, Bill Smid, are further confronting Salix with Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states that public bodies have a 'general duty' to 'have due regard to' a list of considerations, such as the need to advance equality of opportunity.

Indeed, James believes that Salix Homes could help its disabled tenants by looking at practical solutions. At Heraldic Court - scene of protests when Salix increased service charges recently** - there are three former bin bunkers which could be used as a mobility scooter parking and charging point... "It wouldn't need much to adapt them, put points in them and upgrade the facilities" he explains "I've put it to them but haven't had a reply."

He does have a meeting with Salix Homes on Friday, where it is hoped that common sense prevails...

"It's disappointing because I need the mobility scooter, I'm lost without it" James explains "It's been a nightmare.. "

Helena Dove,

I am not sure what you mean there. But I am sure it's well meant.

Why should people who aren't fortunate enough to have partners or who earn a pittance doing necessary jobs and therefore will never afford to buy, be denied a pleasure like pet owning? Should we forever be condemned to loneliness?

No! But they should accept that many LL's will not want to rent to them, as is their right and stop moaning about it as if private LL's have a moral duty for their tenants above that which the law requires, they dont!

You want to blame someone? Blame Thatcher. The vast majority of social housing allowed one or two pets, then she sold them and many are now in the hands of private LL's who wont. Social housing also offered long term secured tenancies which meant that you and your cats could stay put as long as you wanted.

Hey ho the witch is dead, but sadly her policies, and their consequences, are not.

My post about the disabled tenant is social housing not private.

You sound horrible OP I'm a private landlord and I accept pets must admit I'm not keen on dogs though. That's personal choice .

I'm a LL and a tenant (we were relocated fast for DH work)
I would never allow pets. I'm not messing with anyone's life. I'm not saying anyone has to live in the house they are free to do whatever they like.
But that is our house. And we do hope to live in it again one day. So I do not want to risk the carpets or walls getting destroyed.
I don't care that your dog is perfect. It is not a risk I'm willing to take.

When we came to rent the house we're in now we accepted that it wasn't our house and followed the rules.

Helena With respect (and I do mean that) this thread is about pets and private LL's.

My disabled son (almost 27) is currently trying to get social housing, so I do sympathise and understand the frustration (dont get me fucking started!) but it isnt relevant to this thread as "owns pets" is not a protected characteristic.

Fair enough Py I hope your son gets a suitable place soon.

PyongyangKipperbang you are not listening and you have it all backwards.

I cannot choose to have a pet.

I do not have the choice to have a pet.

The LL prevents me from having a pet.

So I am not doing anything to limit my options. LLs are limiting my options. Stop painting me as causing the problem.

You say no LL has a moral obligation to me, but don't we all have a moral obligation to each other to make society a decent place to live? Don't LLs also benefit from a but of human decency and kindness in life?

Also LLs cannot unreasonably refuse to allow a lot of things but rarely do tenants have the means to got to court to uphold their rights (as you found yourself) so LL get way with restrictions or terms that are in fact not legal.

And it precisely the trouble that these pet restrictions come on top of multiple other restrictions on human inhabitants that we need to have this conversation and have a re-think on renting. Because some people actually think they have the right to control other people's lives to the nth degree, yet they would have a fit if someone tried to do the same to them. Imagine the uproar if a council decide to blanket ban all pets or all children for spurious what if, just in case, money saving reasons; the home owning LLs would quite rightly be in uproar. The gov decides our population is not at risk.. so children are now a lifestyle choice.. lets ban everyone in XYZshire from having children for 3 years because blah blah blah... and we have decided that we can.

Being a home owner or LL does not automatically make you morally or in any other way superior and it certainly should not give you the right or means to unreasonably control other people beyond our already defined laws and bylaws that we should all live by.

Thanks. I do too, and that his new manager doesnt sack him because "reasonable adjustments" are apparently anything but. Yes he can go to tribunal but he just wants his job.......I did say to not get me started!

kinkajoukid absolutely everything you just said is completely correct. The current situation is appalling.

I am a landlord, and the house is advertised as cat friendly. I don't allow dogs, as I don't like them, and will be returning to the house in a couple of years. As a cat owner (and tenant abroad), I am happy for a tenant to have cats.

kinkajoukid

You could have a pet, find a LL who will let you have one. This thread has shown that there are those that will.

Why are you blaming your LL for your choice to not live somewhere that will allow you to keep a pet?

The only person who controls your life is you, so exercise that right and move somewhere that will let you have cats. No one is stopping you. Or is it simply easier for you to blame someone else than take control and be proactive?

I've always rented. I have four cats and have moved into new rented accommodation since I've had them.

Yes, I had to look harder for a property but honestly haven't found it that difficult (and would never, ever give up my cats!).

PyongyangKipperbang I can only conclude you are being wilfully provocative and insulting, for what reason I have no idea.

NEWS FLASH There is a housing crisis - it is not my choice to live somewhere that will not allow pets - it was all there was. Taking the only property available to us is not making a choice. So many LLs wont accept housing benefit (never mind pets) even for people with disabilities that we had literally no properties available to us at all. We have impeccable references, impeccable credit, a guarantor etc, etc yet were constantly turned down. Many agencies just have a blanket ban and they can get away with it because of the housing shortage. We now have a property that has practical issues related to disability but we still had to take it because it was literally, actually, factually all there was. We are victims of circumstance (disability) and of other people's prejudice and I cannot control or do anything about that and we are no more to blame for our situation than I imagine your disabled son is for his.

I am shocked at your accusing attitude towards me when you say you have this direct experience of disability and of problems with social housing etc etc. Would it be reasonable or fair or kind if I gave you no sympathy and said to you that you should take control of your life and stop relying on the council to provide housing for your son? No, that would be cruel. Why do you have a double standard for me then?

There have been many LLs on this thread who will not allow pets and a few hours spent ringing around agents and LLs will tell exactly how few LLs will allow pets - in fact that is why the thread was started. But I think you do know this perfectly well.

One of the few things I can do (when well enough) is post on thread like this in the hope that it challenges prejudice and raises awareness and maybe somewhere, somehow does some good. Maybe it will even do some good for your son or someone like your son. But clearly some people like you have a mentality I will never understand and likely never change.

I just wish we could all be a bit kinder to each other and help us all to have a better quality of life

Thank you hermionesrighthook you are very kind. This subject is obviously close to home for me but also the thought that thousands of others are also suffering this and similar is, as you say, appalling.

And for those of us who are young and have no chance of getting on the property ladder ever (despite being in full time professional jobs) what you're actually saying is that we should never be allowed pets. For me, pets are something that enrich my life more than almost anything else and having them again allowed me to come off antidepressants.

I have caged small pets. As they're caged, it is impossible for them to cause damage or otherwise harm the landlord's interests. For reasons I cba to go into here (outing) the current LL doesn't know about them - but I'd move house long before I considered rehoming them. I don't have any other choice.

YABVU

I'm currently in my 4th rental home with 2 small dogs. Before the dogs I had a cat. When I've needed to move (twice for work opportunities so no rush, once because ll selling - time was limited) I have spoken to the current ll and they have agreed to provide a written reference as well as a verbal over the phone one. I've emailed landlords and I have attached reference copies (which have always stated I was a good tenant with a child and pets and neither have caused an issue,) I have offered extra deposit and suggested a standard 'pet' clause be added. I've usually had the choice of 2 or 3 taking this approach. One ll said they wouldn't normally take pets, however they thought as I'd obviously gone to some effort to show I responsible, I was probably a better bet than some applying with no pets. I realise I need to prove I'm responsible, and not just regarding pet ownership, to get a rental property and that's what I do. I think ll's have every right to say no pets, and I respect when they do. I do think though that it's unfair to dismiss it out of hand (discounting allergies or unsuitable properties) just because someone has pets.
OP - I think your first post comes across harshly towards renters, it's unfair to say no one that rents should have a pet ever, it does come across as if renters are second class citizens who the ll is doing a massive favour to. Both parties benefit from a rental situation.

I used to own a house but started renting due to a change in circumstances when my son was 2. Many landlords did not want toddlers/children or single working mum's but that's another thread obviously I found one who did! Should renters not have children either? Then where do you draw the line? No partners for single renters? No sleepovers? No guests at all?

Not only should renters not have pets but we should be made to clean the homes of those with a mortgage ...with a toothbrush.
yabvu.
i rent and have 2 cats, fish and a tortoise

Well this thread confirms for me that people who have pets are nicer.