To think that the renters reform bill is going to kill people with allergies?

[Petallergysufferer]

Just that really. I know many people will see this as a good thing. I know too that the severity of allergy to pets which means they can kill you is rare. But it does happen. I am that severely allergic. So if landlords can't give a blanket ban then there are no pet-free properties for me to move into.

For those who don't know - antihistamines make no difference and the only way to get all allergens out of the place is to remove all soft furnishings including carpets and underlay. Deep cleaning things does not work. So unless the landlords change all carpets, curtains, sofas etc. in between tenants, then it still has enough allergens to trigger a life-threatening reaction. For me that reaction is asthma and I already see a hospital specialist so there is no further treatment that can be offered. Avoiding allergens is the key advice. I'm really worried that the full implications have not been thought through.

I think you never really know whether pets have been in a house or not. Plenty of people have pets in rental properties even though it says no pets. Cats/small animals in particular are easy to get rid of for an hour or so for inspections just by sticking them in a cat box in the car or something!

No I don't think it will kill anyone. Landlords can still choose to go with people without pets, if they wish to. There will still be a property for you to rent. If your allergy is that severe though I do wonder how you manage to work etc, as dog owners especially, usually have pet hairs on them. You could be next to someone with pet hairs on the train/bus or in the queue at a shop etc.

I have a question for the landlords on here.... Why do landlords ban children/kick tenants out if they get pregnant? I have never understood that one and would genuinely want to know. A ban on pets I can kind of see but honestly the ban on children baffles me.

Of course they will have a choice. They can’t advertise ‘no pets’ but they can choose renters without pets over those with. All things being equal, many would.

But even then, there’s no guarantees. Landlords don’t replace everything when they buy a property. And even people who didn’t have their own pets will often have had visiting ones.

I am allergic to grass. I’ve been hospitalised with it, and so has my daughter. And I cannot be on any higher medication than I am. Should I be insisting there are lawn free properties available? It’s not reasonable to accept society to accommodate me, here. I just have to accept that I will have to modify a garden and put it back as I found it. It sucks, but there it is.

I do sympathise, but it’s a social norm and the people who will benefit from the no pets clause far outnumber yourself. You are, quite literally, the only person I’ve ever heard of with pet allergies so severe that deep cleaning won’t suffice, so to expect a whole country to accolade them is not reasonable or even possible.

This.

m we had rented out the small terraces we lived in before we moved in together. Small terraces in Yorkshire, cheap rent and looked after them really well. Remnants had pets, decorated and were made to feel it was their home.

we’ve had to sell as the new laws (not just this one) have frightened us enough thy we just don’t feel we can afford to keep up. So that’s 2 lovely 3 bed houses for less than £500 a month gone from the rental pool that’s already decimated.

I think it's wrong that landlords will be more or less compelled to accept pets. Their house, their rules (within reason but I don't think it's unreasonable for people not to want pets, or certain types of pets, in their properties). It also depends ln the type of property. If you are renting out a large house with a big garden it is more unreasonable to say no pets than if you are renting out a flat with no outside space.

But there may be some landlords who have long-term tenants whose policy is no pets, but the tenant wants a pet, and they may allow it because they trust those tenants and have a good relationship with them.

Guide dogs are different anyway because they are very well trained. That doesn't necessarily help the allergy issue but you do know they won't trash the place. I'd allow rabbits and guinea pigs too. You can't really ban cats as they adopt people

Studies show growing up with pets reduces the incidence of allergies so maybe think of it as being a benefit for the allergy community overall.

Won’t happen.

They’re not allowed to discriminate against single mothers, but they will always choose the working couples with kids over the working single mothers, and there’s fuck all anyone can do about it.

They’ll just do the same with people with pets. Choose the ones without pets.

Presumably allergies as severe as yours are incredibly rare, and already mean you can’t ever use public transport, visit pubs, a lot of shops etc

So as inconvenient as it is, you are used to seeking specific (and specialist?) ways to get through day to day life, which would include living in places with hard floors (as most allergy sufferers do anyway) rather than going with the standard way and expecting a small risk of death..?

Actually, allergy specialists point out constantly that unless hard flooring is kept spotless (as in special vacuuming and washing more than once a day) far more allergens are released into the air than from carpet as carpet (minging though it sounds) kind of absorbs them.

One of my favourite things about WFH is I no longer have to sit in an office filled with people covered in animal hair. Who dare to complain about me sneezing and wheezing all of the time.

My children have caused more damage to my house than my pets ever had!

Surely landlords just want to minimise wear and tear to their property, so exclude any residents who are likely to do damage
The deposit scheme seems to nearly always side with the tenant so it’s harder to claim the cost to cover redecorating etc

Do they assume they will scribble on the walls?

Again, I think it depends on the size of the property. Small flat isn't really conducive to kids, although if it's all you can afford...and it's not really the landlord's call.

You can't ban kids from a family house though! I'd have thought that throwing someone out when pregnant was discrimination but I don't know if there's an exemption somewhere in the Equality Act for rentals. I'd be a bit surprised! I sometimes wonder if the policies come from the letting agents rather than the landlords themselves. A friend of my mum has a couple of rental houses with long-term tenants and her letting agents keep trying to get her to increase the rentals (for higher commission no doubt). She says no, because they are good long term tenants, don't give her any hassle and she doesn't want to lose them due to being greedy. I don't know if she allows pets as she doesn't have any herself.

The bill just means that landlords can’t say no without a reason. So I am allergic to cats which triggers my asthma, I could reasonably say no to having a cat in my house as if I moved in it would trigger reaction. If it was a flat with no garden I could reasonably say no cats and dogs as the property wasn’t big enough to accommodate.

I agree with you, OP.

However, the devil is in the detail. The current proposal just says landlords can't have an unreasonable blanket ban on pets in the property. I am assuming there will still be plenty of properties which are totally allergen-free either because the previous tenants didn't want pets or the property is genuinely unsuitable for pets.

Also, while we landlords are driven by our own interests, I think that our interests coincide with yours here. Many of us will be taking the actions which happen to keep allergies at bay. As a landlord, if I'm going to be forced to allow pets, then I may be looking to reduce the carpeted areas of the house, and also use cheaper carpets and underlay so they can be replaced in full more often. I already rent my property unfurnished (less hassle for me), and would be even more set on doing that if there may be pets in it. I don't want to have to deal with pet smells putting off future tenants, or with additional deep-cleaning costs between tenants, so I'll make the property as easy to keep clean as I can.

Can you not just rent places that don't have carpet. Just like a person with mobility issues will look for a place without stairs. Have you ever heard of xolair? It's a treatment for allergies that a lot of people have success with. Might be worth asking your consultant about it.

Even if pets are banned there's no way to guarantee animals have never visited

This.

OP I think you are over thinking this. There are lots of properties with wood and tiled floors that can be cleaned effectively, blinds and shutters etc are more common now too. You will simply have less choice (as do many physically disabled people who have to find properties that meet their needs). It may mean you have to have your own curtains and you ask landlords to take down the ones that are there.

Landlords may also agree to remove carpets too and you can agree to put down flooring that works better for you.

Saracen has said it all. Landlords who have no choice but to allow pets will move away from choosing carpets etc.

Guide dogs are different anyway because they are very well trained. That doesn't necessarily help the allergy issue but you do know they won't trash the place. I'd allow rabbits and guinea pigs too. You can't really ban cats as they adopt people

Guide dogs are not the only assistance dogs, nor are they the only ones that are very well trained. But they are still all dogs and so yes, there needs to be appropriate conditions for their homes just as much as for people. But you are assuming dogs are dirty or destructive - in my experience cats are far more destructive. And rabbits can be far dirtier.

Lots of rentals have laminate flooring and/ or posh lino that looks like wood. Then rent unfurnished. That said I'm not a fan of the new rules, pets can cause so much damage. I love my dog and she will soon be three and is a lot better behaved but over the puppy years she's definitely caused hundreds of punds worth of damage to the house. I've heard horror stories of thousands though. I think landlords should be able to specify no pets if they wish.

Sorry I think posters are being very harsh on op here, severe pet allergies can be life threatening - my daughter is allergic to many things including some types of animal fur and does have to be careful where she visits or can end up in hospital/on steroids for 3 weeks - she is not unusual - its quite common. Personally I have rented houses out in the past and always had a no pet policy and would again for this reason.
And my daughter is happily living in a no pet rental rental until her house purchase completes.

Why do landlords ban children/kick tenants out if they get pregnant? I have never understood that one and would genuinely want to know.

When people have a child either one parent usually reduces work & earnings (initially through maternity leave, but then perhaps through SAHP or reducing hours), or they have a huge childcare bill. This can make people less able to afford rent.

Also children cause far more general wear and tear. I know I have two!

This might be the most supreme example of whataboutery I've ever seen anywhere.

I can't even be bothered to explain why it's so silly.

Indeed. We lived abroad for 4 years so rented our UK house out. It was carpeted in most rooms so we stipulated no pets and let through an agency. Got back to learn from neighbour that the renters who were there for the whole 4 years had a labradorite and 2 cats. Mind, they left the place absolutely spotless and had all the carpets professionally cleaned.