Rental Properties

[Greenkit]

AIBU to say, if you rent out your property, you shouldn't be able to stipulate 'No Pets, No DSS, No Sharers, No Smokers, and sometimes No Children (Although that may have changed)

If you are worried about damage then have extra deposit costs to cover.

After a marriage break down, I am having to rent and I am unable to take my 3 whippets with me as the landlord, doesn't allow pets. If fact its seems no one allows pets.

@Greenkit

Smoking, you could stipulate its only outside.

the smell would still end up inside. Also, no guarantee that the tenant would comply with this.

If you rent out your house, you are doing to make money, renters pay that money, so no you shouldn't be able to say no to pets etc...

It's my property, so actually i can. Pets will cause damage, so yes i could take a bigger damamge deposit, but i don't want the hastle of having to replace carpets and repair damages etc between tenants.

If I don't find somewhere which takes dogs or change my landlords mind, then three dogs are going to end up in the dog home, plus a cat.

I do understand that must be heartbreaking, but that's nothing to do with the landlord. And also, i may be willing to take one pet if i really liked the tenant, but i would not accept 3 + a cat!

@Stonebake i'm not allowed to rent to anyone on HB. Stipulated in my mortgage so my hands are tied

Ah yeah puppy. Maybe that’s the issue too. I wonder why they won’t let you though. Your mortgage lender I mean.

I think the whole system needs an over hall. As this thread shows far too many overly personally invested landlords. Of course people shouldn’t damage property etc but fundamentally it should be a business transaction and I think too many ‘landlords’ don’t get that the tenant is their customer.

*overhaul

Your not loaning it though are you, your making money from renting your property out. If you worried about carpets, then add extra onto the deposit to cover it.

If there is a possible reason, i.e. leasehold or mortgage doesn't allow, then that is different.

It is defiantly the landlord who has said no dogs.

I think you should be allowed to stipulate whatever you like with regards to pets, smokers etc when renting your own home -BUT don't be surprised if your house sits on the market for longer. For example, there is a 4 bed detached on rightmove in our area stipulating no sharers and no children. It's been on for 16 weeks now and been reduced rent price twice.

@stonebake think its cause as pp said, benefits aren't always reliable, and are sometimes paid in arrears, when rent is due in advance

I think a lot more landlords would rent to a wider range of tenants if they had protections in place.

If they could inspect, if they could evict within two weeks of a late rental payment or give notice and actually get the tenant to leave in the wake of anti-social behaviour or suspected illegal activity, if they could be sure of a criminal prosecution for theft or criminal damage if the tenant wrecked the place or stole the furniture and could be sure of getting compensation for damages through the courts - but they can't. So the risk is all theirs. And it runs into thousands.

Most tenants are just people, reasonable people, - I am a tenant at the moment - but not all unfortunately. ANd even reasonable people who hit hard times are going to act in their own best interests, (and are advised by Shelter etc to do so). So they won't leave until they are forced out.

Of course that is terrible and when my landlord gave me notice in the summer I half thought of staying put and saving myself a lot of money - but I'm local, so is he -- and I wouldn't do that to anyone. But I could have done.

Greenkit

I'm not sure I'd be allowed to stipulate a deposit that would cover all potential pet damage: carpets, scratched walls/doors, turned up garden (obviously this is worse case scenario) if there was a way I could financially protect my family from this (like a specific insurance perhaps??) then I wouldn't be so nervous. Perhaps I'm being unfair, like a pp says I understand it's a business transaction but it's my home (not a second home, we don't choose to not be in it) and I feel I need to be comfortable with who is in it?

yes Suitechild

I own my own home, which I have moved out of and will sell, husband currently living there.

My dogs have not caused damage, they don't smell, make noise or cause problems. A blanket no is wrong.

We also have a lodger, who smokes outside in the garden, the house don't smell of smoke

no wonder so many people are waiting for homes, and so many animals end up in shelters

No you are not loaning it for free but the risk applies.
And you cannot take huge deposits.

If you have found a place offer a huge deposit to the landlord outside of and in addition to the TDS deposit - and then you take the risk. That may change the landlord's mind

If they could inspect, if they could evict within two weeks of a late rental payment or give notice and actually get the tenant to leave in the wake of anti-social behaviour or suspected illegal activity, if they could be sure of a criminal prosecution for theft or criminal damage if the tenant wrecked the place or stole the furniture and could be sure of getting compensation for damages through the courts - but they can't. So the risk is all theirs. And it runs into thousands.

This is fair

Dogs do smell.
Sorry, but they do.
The smell of dog in carpet is as all pervading as smoke.

Here is a recent advert I saw stating the landlord had requested no children:

www.onthemarket.com/details/3856184/

So it does happen and doesn't seem to be illegal?

My brother rents his old house and the reason this is the case is that many insurers and mortgages stipulate no DSS, no pets etc.

There are some good schemes that will help manage and find DSS tenants if you are able to get a doesn’t preclude this.

It really helps if you’ve got a good credit and rental record and can speak to a landlord. if they realise that you are pretty responsible then they might take the risk of having to replace carpets later because of dogs.

I rent out a house and advertise as 'no smoking, no pets' but the woman who's moved in does have a dog. I would recommend speaking with the landlord if possible and explaining how trained the dogs are. If someone said to me they have 3 adult whippets, completely house trained family pets, I would let them in. I just don't want skirting boards chewed, doors scratched and carpets completely ruined- I don't have a great deal of money or time myself so some risks I just don't want to take.

One reason I would be hesitant to rent to DSS recipients is the amount of times I've heard (online and people I know) who have had to go through the legal process of evicting someone as they need council housing and the council will only assist when the legal process has been followed through. Not the fault of the LL or tenant, but could cause a bill of thousands for the LL. As I say we wouldn't be renting to profiteer but to keep our heads above the water while my husband is posted elsewhere, out of our control, we wouldn't be LL with stashes of money so we have to be risk averse with our tenants. I appreciate anyone could be in a position to need to apply to the council, not just DSS, but I suppose it's calculating risk. I know this is just one example...but just to show it's not black and white.

I'm not a landlord but I would not let my home to tenants with animals.

No matter how well behaved, non-smelly ? or quiet they are animals who drool, lick, have accidents etc.

It IS the landlords choice as to who he lets his/her own property.

A family member rents out her place whilst she's on secondment at work (year long secondment so she doesn't want to actually move).

she once told me that her title deed restricts the amount of pets she can have (she doesn't have any, but if she did, all the owners are restricted to either 2 dogs or 2 cats or one of both, nothing else). all the properties in the same row have the same restriction - i assume down to noise.

i also think she mentioned something about insurance restrictions for her mortgage when it comes to renting it out to social tenants who are being paid for by benefits.

not first hand experience, of course, but just saying there may be practical/legal restrictions to bear in mind, even if the landlord isn't the actual source of it...

I think it is legal to say no children. It does strike me as strange though. Could they also say no over 65s? Maybe they could.

I would be happy to have an extra deposit tag on, say £500/£1000 to allow me to keep my dogs with me.

Does. Not. Work. Like. That.

In the old days pre TDS - yes. Now - no way.

I rent out a house and stipulate no pets. The previous tenants had 2 dogs unbeknown to me that caused over 1k worth of damage, which was more than the deposit. Not only was it the cost of repairing it, I had to take a couple of days off work to manage it.

The problem is bad tenants can rack up £1000s in damages very quickly. Insurance companies will often not cover, also security deposits are usually no more than two months rent.

I had to rent out my first main home a few years ago for 12 months. A nice two bed starter home. It was let out to two young women, who had good references. They asked if they could bring their one, older dog. I said yes (I love dogs, and DH and I now have our own spaniel).

The property was let unfurnished. It was agreed they'd pay for a deep clean (if required) and any damage (if it occured).

Great right? (House was let for £575 a month, deposit was £750).

Except, without notifying me, they bought a second dog - a puppy. This puppy was left alone for 10 hours a day plus, it was not trained. It peed everywhere - which was never cleaned (ruining all carpets and underlay) it chewed everything - doors, and even right through the bullnose on the stairs.

The house needed not only a deep clean (which they never bothered with) but also recarpeting, rewallpapering (because boy puppy had peed up the walls) and new doors.

That's before we go into the poo clean-up in the garden.

It cost well over £1200 to out right, and that was with my elderly dad and me doing the work and finding cheap end of rolls for the carpet (thank heavens my dad used to word for Allied Carpets of old). The damage would have cost more than £3k to put right if we had not been able to do that.

That's why landlords often say 'no pets'. Because we allowed a pet, my landlord insurance would not cover the damage (even though I had stipulated exactly what I was doing).

There are many, many awesome pet owners. We had our dog as a puppy in that house before we moved last year. She did not pee on carpets (the odd accident in the kitchen and lounge though - but this was cleaned up immediately!) But then we didn't leave her for most of a day on her own.

So many places do not allow pets, so it's very hard to get a pet reference from previous landlords. And while an increase in security deposit sounds ace £3k for a £575 a month rental is not going to be achievable. Let alone what it would cost of the place had been furnished!