6 months ago | 14 comments
The government has released guidance on what landlords need to do when their tenants request a pet.
Under the Renters’ Rights Act, tenants have the right to reasonably request a pet, and landlords cannot unreasonably refuse permission.
The government have listed examples and refusals on when landlords can refuse pets and when they cannot refuse.
If a tenant requests permission to keep a pet, they must do so in writing and include a description of the pet in their request.
According to government guidance, landlords must consider each request on a case-by-case basis.
Once the tenant has submitted their request, the landlord has 28 days to respond in writing. If a landlord does not respond within 28 days, the tenant will then be able to apply to the court.
Landlords may ask the tenant for additional information about the pet if necessary, for example, details about the pet’s size. If the landlord requests further information, they must do so within the initial 28-day period, and the tenant must reply. Once the tenant responds, the landlord then has seven days to provide their final decision.
The government provides the following example: “Your tenant asks if they can have a dog. You will have 28 days to respond to them.
“You’d like more information about the size of the dog and whether it is house trained, so you ask the tenant within the 28 days.
“They reply and tell you it’s a small dog that is trained.
“You then have either the remainder of the original 28 days or an extra seven days to respond with your final decision, whichever is later.”
The government has also provided guidance on situations in which landlords may refuse a tenant’s request to keep a pet. These include:
The government has also set out circumstances in which landlords cannot refuse a request for a pet, such as:
A landlord refusing a pet request must respond to the tenant in writing and clearly explain the reasons for the refusal.
The tenant has the right to challenge the refusal if they believe it is unreasonable. They may submit a complaint to the landlord or apply to the court to begin legal proceedings against the landlord.
Landlords also need to be aware the government guidance says: “If the landlord agrees to your tenant having a pet, the landlord will not be able to change their mind later. The tenant having the pet you have agreed to will not be considered a breach of the tenancy agreement. If a tenant wants another pet, they will have to ask for the landlord’s consent again.”
The government has also confirmed landlords will be able to choose to keep money from the deposit to cover repair costs caused by pet damage.
However, landlords will not be able to claim for the same damage twice, such as from insurance and the deposit.
As previously reported, by Property118, an amendment to the Renters’ Rights Bill to allow landlords to take a separate pet damage deposit of up to three weeks’ rent on top of the usual deposit cap was rejected.
The government also removed the right for landlords to require pet damage insurance.
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Next Article
Why Property118 Is Changing Its Tone
6 months ago | 14 comments
6 months ago | 5 comments
7 months ago | 7 comments
Sorry. You must be logged in to view this form.
Member Since February 2018 - Comments: 627
2:50 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 20/11/2025 – 12:38
….. and I’m very pleased about that, we gave experienced a few claiming an animal to be a ‘support dog’, as I it were a mental condition crutch, I think it’s largely opportunism.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1177
3:22 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 20/11/2025 – 14:50
Not sure which bit of my posts you’re referring to, but its worth saying that whilst the concept of emotional support animal is not legally valid in Britain, there may be cases where a tenant could bring a case against you under disability discrimination. If you’re ever in that situation again, its probably worth taking legal advice before acting.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3538 - Articles: 5
4:15 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 20/11/2025 – 12:30
it is the tenant who initiates taking the LL to court so surely the burden of proof is on T first to be able to show they have a reason themselves to make a claim against the LL?
Member Since February 2018 - Comments: 627
4:47 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 20/11/2025 – 15:22
It’s not my decision, I was referring to the dilemma of our RTM building management company trying to enforce the lease which should be applied to all, when you have both genuine need and quite simply ‘chancers’ which is unfair to everyone else, most agents know of the lease prohibitions but I’ve known them to let telling the tenant to just bring the animal once they’re in residence, god knows what they tell their client landlord, if they do.
Member Since November 2020 - Comments: 136
5:05 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
The more I think about what the government is doing to my house, the income from which has been bolstering my pension, the more I think that when my current AST expires it’ll be time to sell and stick the money into high interest savings accounts. Might even buy some Premium Bonds.
The only downside to taking this action is the Capital Gains Tax I’ll be stuck with but at least that will be a known quantity unlike taking in tenants who can do God knows what to the place.
I was planning on leaving the house to my children for the extra IHT benefit (as it was my former home) but I’m getting too old for this s**t. So, sadly it’s time to join the Landlord Exodus.
Member Since October 2013 - Comments: 1642 - Articles: 3
5:11 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 20/11/2025 – 16:47
To my knowledge, our RTM Co is not responsible for enforcing leaseholder obligations.
Member Since February 2018 - Comments: 627
5:16 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by NewYorkie at 20/11/2025 – 17:11
My understanding is that an RTM adopts the freeholder’s responsibilities and in turn protects the freeholders rights, they would be in breach if they didn’t, not that most large freeholders will give a toss unless there’s money involved.
Member Since November 2020 - Comments: 136
5:23 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
The subject of allowing pets appears to revolve around tenants actually making requests, so wouldn’t the addition of a clause prohibiting pets in the leasing contract nip that in the bud? A bit like a pre-nup?
I already have that clause in my existing AST, which tenants were happy to sign. Can the new law basically ride roughshod over existing legal contracts?
Member Since October 2013 - Comments: 1642 - Articles: 3
5:29 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 20/11/2025 – 17:16
I stand corrected.
Member Since October 2024 - Comments: 197
5:42 PM, 20th November 2025, About 5 months ago
Reply to the comment left by David at 20/11/2025 – 09:47
Landlords allergy is not included in the refusal at all. Only other tenants in the house.
There is a long list why a landlord cannot refuse pets.
The government does not have other major issues so they like to micro manage the landlords.