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.

YABU but I do have a lot of empathy because it must be really worrying and frustrating. On a statistical level, there won’t be many (any?) people who are so allergic that it will kill them. That said, I appreciate there will be far more people who will suffer with their allergies which will affect their quality of life.
With so many pet owners who rent, I suspect this is by far the larger group of people.

If the OP's allergy is that severe (as others have said, to be so allergic you can't even live in a property that once had a cat in it is as rare as a very rare thing) then appropriate housing would be facilitated by the local authorities

Sorry but this is so unrealistic ! And really seems to misunderstand housing legislation and realities.

Housing teams (usually under local borough council remit) have huge waiting lists - so an able-bodied independent person, even with a severe allergy, would be unlikely to get sufficient medical points enough to put them high priority on housing wait list- there's so many people who'd be above them for eg thousands of disabled people with mobility problems, hundreds of parents in temporary accomodation with children, all awaiting suitable housing ..

Even then, a housing association would very unlikely be able to guarantee the tenants before didn't have pets or visiting pets so they wouldn't promise that. They'd happily remove carpets but all other decoration or additional deep cleaning arrangements would be down to the tennant to arrange once they'd signed the tenancy and picked up keys.

I'm not sure how that is any more helpful to OP than private rental would be. There might be new build HA flats fresh off the builder site come up, but that can take years to wait for and well I guess it depends on the housing area / lists/ other priorities. As OP could equally try to find a new build to rent privately

It does seem OP's unlikely to be Care Act or continuing healthcare eligible unless OP has missed huge swaths of pretty serious relevant information!

Health are the only ones with significant responsibility here which is to treat / help medically manage her allergy. I wonder if OP also carries an epipen or whether it's not anaphylactic level?

As others have said most landlords would prefer not to rent to people with pets so where there is competition for a property those without pets will likely get priority. A few years ago before the rental market was as competitive as it is now we wanted to rent a place and it was between us and another couple- the landlord would accept pets (i happen to know those who rented after us got a cat) but the other couple had a dog so we were preferred as we had no pets at the time

I agree with the pps that you can't guarantee those 'pet free' homes were actually so, either because of visitors or pets not declared to the landlord.

If your allergy is particularly bad then it would make sense, as a precaution, to get any potential new house deep cleaned and laundered and opt for somewhere without carpeting if they cannot be cleaned to a safe level.

I would have thought the bill would benefit you OP.

At the moment some renters are dishonest about having a pet due to the banning clause in their lease. Now these people have no excuse to be dishonest.

There will still be people who chose not to have pets and so pet free properties should be available, but at least now the landlord should be able to accurately tell you whether or not the tenant has had a pet or visiting pet.

I don't want to come across rude but how do you live day to day, do you leave the house? Animals are everywhere.

It’s not about anaphylaxis. It’s about severe asthma.

Would you prefer for pets to simply be banned from all properties in the UK, op? Because if somebody having had a pet in a property in the past is this bad, surely it also affects people buying and selling homes, not just renters?

I don’t think this would be a reasonable restriction on people — after all, having no pets would hugely impact on peoples’ MH, loneliness etc, so I think the health effects of dis-allowing pets would be worse. But I’m confused as to why you think this restriction should specifically apply to renters when presumably someone with dogs/cats selling their house is also a risk to people with severe allergies? Out of interest are you also a landlord?

I think some people are just responding to the “killing people” and not considering the impact of allergies on quality of life and health day to day.

People lie about having pets all the time though so even if a landlord says “no pets” it doesn’t mean there hasn’t ever been pets. How would you negotiate this? Surely it’s a thought when you’re moving home or are you that naive?

Because if somebody having had a pet in a property in the past is this bad, surely it also affects people buying and selling homes, not just renters?

l would never buy a home that has had pets. I never stay in accommodation on holiday that allows pets. I visited a relative that had a farm once. My face puffed Up in 10 minutes and l had to leave.

Maybe these "guaranteed pet free since the year dot" houses could also have gardens that are manicured to within an inch of their lives and a total ban on things like no-mow-May - so that nobody with a severe allergy has to suffer?

You’d have this problem if you were buying a property from someone who had pets in before though wouldn’t you? If there were carpets etc in the property?

Or if the property is marketed under the current rules as ‘pet free’ - how do you know there weren’t previously pets in it?

If you’re renting you can look for an unfurnished property with wooden floors rather than carpets and blinds rather than curtains. I just moved out of a flat like this. You could also ask the landlord of a property you’re interested in if the previous tenants had pets.

This change isn’t going to mean you can’t rent anywhere - you’re being over dramatic.

Over dramatic about severe asthma attack🙄

Yeah right.

Maybe these "guaranteed pet free since the year dot" houses could also have gardens that are manicured to within an inch of their lives and a total ban on things like no-mow-May - so that nobody with a severe allergy has to suffer?

l just get animal allergies not hay fever.

If you're genuinely that bad, how the hell do you leave your house every day?!

I'm sometimes covered in white cat hair (own x2 long haired cats) I could be sat down having a coffee next to you in Costa IF it was hair that was the problem.

You're being dramatic I"m afraid. You rent a house - get it professionally cleaned. It's not HAIR that people are allergic to, it's actually saliva. There is zero saliva left in a house once a dog/cat has gone and the place has been cleaned.

(I might add, I'm very very allergic to dogs, so I do understand how miserable it can be )

I'm sometimes covered in white cat hair (own x2 long haired cats) I could be sat down having a coffee next to you in Costa IF it was hair that was the problem

Id start sneezing straight away. Sneezing is fine. I wouldn’t be sat next to you for long enough for wheezing to kick in.

@Petallergysufferer plenty of properties have wooden floors and are unfurnished. A deep clean will remove allergens. Plenty of people don't have pets so many rentals will be pet free. It's a case of balance - think about the family having to give up their pet because their pet friendly landlord is selling!

I feel for you OP, but presumably any home you enter may have a history of pets/pets visiting, even if they are not current tenants?

It's not like every family looking to rent a property has a pet, I'd imagine it's probably not even half and you would be able to ask landlords if the previous tenants had pets?

I shouldn’t worry about getting a rental property that is going to kill you because very soon you won’t get a rental property at all.

I cannot understand why governments bring in these type of rulings.

It is going to make renting anything extortionate because the number of rental properties is going to dry up.
Why would a landlord rent out a property with no end date to getting it back
So many things that are going to have a knock on effect and whilst the government and some renters might think this is to help renters. All it does is make renting so expensive as supply gets lower and demand gets larger

The unscrupulous/slum landlords and the ones that let dangerous properties who this bill is meant to protect against will continue as normal. In fact this bill is designed to make them thrive as people will be forced into their properties.
It is the landlords that do think about their tenants and operate their businesses properly and the tenants will be the most affected

Rents will shoot up again and whilst it is supposed to guard against a landlord refusing people who are on benefits, all that will happen is the rent will become unaffordable to those on benefits.

I know this is a different way of looking at things but if governments looked at how they could help the provider you might just get better results for the consumer

So would you not be able to go to a friends house if they had pets previously? Or a shop / office that allowed pets or somebody had a support dog?

I'm sorry that your allergy is so severe but if your logic was followed then pets or support animals would not be allowed anywhere on the off chance someone had what you yourself admit to be a very rare reaction.

Also why should pet allergies be prioritized over others? Would you say landlords should not allow nuts to be consumed on their property? or that they should be banned from using certain building materials a tiny amount of people have allergies too?

I'm a landlord (so shoot me, I know that makes me the devil incarnate on MN.)

Because my property is a flat it's a leasehold. The lease means we're not alllowed pets in the building. I'm not sure how this effects me, as we've got tenants in who don't have pets. As dog owners i'd be happy to rent to tenants with a dog or cat though I'm sympathetic to the OP plight.

We're considering relocating in the near future, which is likely to mean a period in rented at some point. It is difficult to find properties that allow pets but hopefully should be easier. I do think it should be landlords discretion though.

By the way you cannot ban assistance dogs anyway so you could be exposed that way. The answer may be to have a new build social housing - surely you have a good case

I can't understand how this isn't a problem everywhere you go. I walk past dogs everyday, my neighbour has a dog that is often in their front garden. Foxes go through the bins and I'm sure they must leave dander behind. If you rent a flat there are communal entrances and stairs and corridors. Hotels allow guide dogs at least, same with government buildings, banks, shops, hospitals. I don't understand how you're able to avoid all of these allergen hotspots. I understand it can flare up and be dangerous every time, but I can't see how it is definitely deadly to be in a building where an animal has been at some point, because that's basically everywhere. All these other buildings don't rip up carpet and change furniture every time an animal has been inside it.

One summary I have just found says "Making it easier for tenants to have much-loved pets in their homes by giving all tenants the right to request a pet in their house, which the landlord must consider and cannot unreasonably refuse."

If that is true then -

(1) There will still be no pets allowed in flats where the landlord does not have th power to allow pets as the lease he owns does not allow pets (for the mutual benefit of all flat owners in the building).

(2) There may be some landlords who advertise their properties as specifically "pet free for good" in order that people with allergies can access them without fear of the previous tenant's pets. That would seem to be a reasonable reason to refuse pets. But it might need testing in the courts.

But I also agree that there needs to be a shift from the horrific idea that landlords have the rights to dictate precisely how their tenants live.