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 in reality there will remain bans on pets from many landlords.

So on the one hand there is a chronic shortage of rental properties with landlords saying they can pick and choose and on the other it isn't difficult to find an unfurnished property with hard floors and/or the landlord fitting new carpets before you move in.

Somehow that equation doesn't seem to work.

It isn't so much to do with damage to the property. It's two things.

First, parents have more outgoings and sometimes less income, and so are less likely to be solvent. Where there are children in the family, often at least one of the adults will not be working, or will be working part-time, or they'll be paying out a lot of money for childcare. That means the tenants could more easily find themselves in a situation where they cannot afford the rent.

Second, people with children tend to spend more time at home actually using their house, which means more maintenance is needed. Of course people have every right to use the house for which they are paying rent, but from a self-serving landlord's point of view, the ideal for me is to have tenants who are out at work all day and maybe going out to a restaurant in the evening, going on holidays etc. As a general rule, families will be occupying the house, walking on the carpet, flushing the toilet, using the oven. All little things, but it pushes forward the day when maintenance is required. Plus when something does need maintenance, it may be more urgent and tricky when a family is involved. One or two adults may be happy to go out for the day while their toilet is replaced, but with kids it isn't so simple.

Then you'd need to only get an unfurnished let- which isn't too hard. There's no way to guarantee that a house hasn't had a pet, and if your allergy is that severe, then the onus unfortunately will always be on you to ensure the property is cleaned to your needs before you move in somewhere.

Can’t believe this thread.

Im severely allergic too. Face swells and can’t breathe. Wooden floors don’t make any difference. Animal allergens are very ‘sticky’ and stick well to walls. They last for a minimum of 6 months. Sitting next to people with cats sets me off.

I’d love to have a pet. But the allergy clinic say no. I have an extreme reaction, and anti histamines make no difference. I can’t go to houses with cats and dogs. I bought a house when l was 24 that had a cat living in it. I didn’t think and my allergies were much less severe then.

l was pretty ill for 6 months.

And the bollocks about not being able to work if the allergy is severe😂😂

You need to be in contact with the animal itself! People can trigger minor reactions like sneezing if they have pets, but you can choose to move away from them. But you can’t get out of a house you’ve rented that’s had animals in .

Wholly agree. It’s not always the pets which cause the problems, it’s the lazy owners.

We allow pets after a tenancy has been proven to be valued and insert clauses around professional cleaning the whole house including carpets.

Nothing in blanket, the reform bill is once again stupidly written.

Not really. More landlords refuse to rent to guide dog owners than don’t, regardless of what the law says.

And guide dogs are still dogs. They still shed hair, as my carpet will confirm. ;)

Thing is, it is literally unheard of for people to routinely die because of pet allergies. Yes some people have severe allergies but if the OP’s allergy was really that severe that even being in vague contact with pet hair could kill her she literally would never be able to leave the house.

Or maybe she’s the woman who screamed at me in a shop recently that my guide dog shouldn’t be allowed because she has allergies and could die. This after she’d been standing next to me for 5 minutes,

So glad my landlady allows cats (has one herself) or I wouldn't have been able to foster the 31 hard to home cats I've had so far and they may have been put to sleep, love this new law, even though it probably won't change much, as previous posters have said, landlords will just choose tenants without pets, so you're probably stressing about nothing.

I wouldn't rent to pet owners. Why would you when there are tenants with no pets. Its a business after all. In your circumstances buying would be a better option. Or rent an unfurnished uncarpeted property.

Yes some people have severe allergies but if the OP’s allergy was really that severe that even being in vague contact with pet hair could kill her she literally would never be able to leave the house

Its extended exposure that’s the issue not some random queuing next to you.

Having said that, l was in a pub recently and the people on the next table had an Irish wolfhound. I started sneezing and had to move.

l always find the hostility to this allergy on MN unbelievable. In a wheelchair- fine, mental health-fine, hearing impaired-fine.

Animal allergy-spawn of the devil.

I own my house but young children are definitely hard on a house. There's a massive difference in the amount of wear and tear that a property will recieve from people being at home with children and a professional who is out all day.

Mines have scribbled on walls (once but still), ruined a sofa, cracked a bathroom tile, chipped a kitchen tile, broke the kitchen tap, damaged a light fixture, stairgates damaged the lathe and plaster in the hall. This is over an extended period of time and mostly accidental. Some landlords will be happy to rent to families as they will often stay in a property for a long period of time. Some won't.

I do think we need much more social housing to allow those with additional needs or disabilities to have suitable accomodation and to give families and those with pets security of tenure.

I don't think the government shunting it's responsibilities over to the private sector is a way to solve the housing crisis.

Not a renter or a landlord so have no skin in the game tbf.

l always find the hostility to this allergy on MN unbelievable.

I think it’s because allergies and intolerances have become so fashionable in the last few years that they’ve become something that lots of people roll their eyes about now rather than taking seriously. For those with serious allergies and intolerances that could make them really ill or kill them it must be so frustrating to see people bandying the term around when really they mean “it makes me a little uncomfortable/ I don’t want to eat that / it sounds much cooler to say I don’t eat gluten” etc etc

Surely there will be some properties where there have never been pets - you can ask the landlord. Obviously it will cut down the number of options but there will still be plenty available.

Legal people told us the 'no pets ruling' in our contract wasnt enforceable anyway. Even though the dog dug up the carpets, covered the garden in dog shit and presumably it was the dog that smeared it all up the walls.

If a couple have children it can go either way. In future I would consider how long the couple had been together, so that if they split i wouldnt be left with a non-working parent who didnt pay the rent and then had to be evicted with no way of claiming backrent or property damages (meaning we were £9k out of pocket on our 2 bed terrace)

A bit harsh. I can’t go round some friends’/relatives’ houses due to some pets. For example, a short period of time
in a house where there has been a guinea pig I ended up in a&e. Very unwell with bad asthma symptoms. Commuting on the train and someone had a dog - had to get off. I don’t let this stop me leaving the house or anything but I can’t stay in carpeted houses where there’s a dog/guinea/rabbit. It’s the dander in the air/carpets not always the hair. Years ago bought a house where there’d been a dog and it took months for me to acclimatise and I never did fully (got rid of carpets and curtains/increased steroid dose). So I am sympathetic. But as others have said, plenty of people bring pets in and don’t tell the landlord.

I think the OP has wound people up by her attitude.

This bill will increase renters' ability to keep pets. It will make it much easier for pet-owners to find a rental but the trade off is that it will make it more difficult for people with severe fur allergies to find a rental: they'll need to find a rental with an exemption certificate or where there's a declaration that the previous tenants happened not to have pets, or get an unfurnished flat with hard flooring and get it deep cleaned. What it won't do is kill people.

I thought exactly the same when this was announced. I also have a very severe cat allergy and cannot go to anyone's house who has cats (antihistamines don't help) and even sitting next to someone who is wearing clothes from a house with cats triggers it (but antihistamines work for that).

I am glad I own a house now and don't have this problem. I was lucky though as deep cleaning and repainting would help. As a PP said, maybe it will go in your favour as landlords will still prefer no pets. Can you go for places with hard floors and put your own rugs down?

@JesusInTheCabbageVan

Nothing silly about it. The op has severe allergies and guide dogs are still dogs.

What op wants is a gaurantee that no animals have lived in the home before her which would include guide dogs. I get that she's annoyed about having limited choices when it comes to looking for a home but a complete ban on animals would be impossible

I do wonder how you ever move house OP - even if you're buying somewhere, the previous owners may have had pets. Indeed, they're more likely to have pets seeing as they don't have a landlord breathing down their necks, and on viewings vendors will routinely hide evidence of pets. Plus if you're in a chain then you won't have an overlap between houses where you can rip out the carpets, deep clean etc. before moving in.

You also only give consideration to your own health - what about the well-established mental health benefits to pet owners? And the exercise benefits - there's no way I would have gone out for a 90 minute walk yesterday if it wasn't for ddog. Sedentary lifestyles are a major killer, and mental health an epidemic. Far more people die through inactivity and poor mental health than pet allergies.

I think it’s because allergies and intolerances have become so fashionable in the last few years that they’ve become something that lots of people roll their eyes about now rather than taking seriously. For those with serious allergies and intolerances that could make them really ill or kill them it must be so frustrating to see people bandying the term around when really they mean “it makes me a little uncomfortable/ I don’t want to eat that / it sounds much cooler to say I don’t eat gluten” etc etc

My animal allergy is bloody serious believe me. My face, tongue and lips swell up, my eyes close and l can’t breathe. I think it’s because MN like pets, and have no understanding about animal allergies. If l stay in a room with an animal long enough I’d die. It triggers severe asthma. Not sure why guide dogs are the ones that trump this🙄

In reality, I don't think much will change. Most rented properties get a lot of applicants - if a LL doesn't want pets, they'll just choose someone who doesn't have them. Unless a LL is a real animal lover, most don't want them in their properties.

*do wonder how you ever move house OP - even if you're buying somewhere, the previous owners may have had pets. Indeed, they're more likely to have pets seeing as they don't have a landlord breathing down their necks, and on viewings vendors will routinely hide evidence of pets. Plus if you're in a chain then you won't have an overlap between houses where you can rip out the carpets, deep clean etc. before moving in.

You also only give consideration to your own health - what about the well-established mental health benefits to pet owners? And the exercise benefits - there's no way I would have gone out for a 90 minute walk yesterday if it wasn't for ddog. Sedentary lifestyles are a major killer, and mental health an epidemic. Far more people die through inactivity and poor mental health than pet allergies*

Nice. So just ignore one disability as all the others trump it apparently? Having a severe animal allergy doesn’t count on MN. It’s just stupid people making a fuss about nothing after all.

Some landlords still won’t let to pet owners, just like some landlords still won’t let to people who claim benefits, they’ll just choose someone else to let to instead without stating that as a reason. It’s still perfectly possible to discriminate, or have preferences as it might also be called, even if by the letter of the law you aren’t supposed to.

I appreciate how serious and life-threatening some allergies can be, but you're talking a tiny minority of people who might be affected by this rule change compared to the millions who live in sub-standard properties because of rogue landlords and who will benefit hugely from the additional rights this Bill will give them.