Government tells landlords how to handle pet requests and refusals

My tenants asked if they could keep a dog (small ones luckily) AFTER they had actually bought the dog.

No has actually asked me about cats although 2 tenants also have cats.

No issues so far though

Reply to the comment left by Terry Scaife at 22/11/2025 – 09:56
I believe that lease conditions do still apply, my understanding is that it would be a derogation of grant if that were overturned, another whole ‘can of worms’.

Reply to the comment left by Robin Guy at 20/11/2025 – 10:24
Aren’t HMO’s exempt from the RRA?

Re the comment on freeholder/leaseholder, if the Head Lease states ‘pets with consent from Landlord’ how is the property landlord protected if the Freeholder prevaricates or simply doesn’t answer. Howling or barking dogs allowed could cause a breach of Head Lease further down the line.

Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 22/11/2025 – 16:07
Lucky you, I had tenants who kept a small dog which chewed the door frames , while they were out at work all day. Probably worse was the fish tank which must have been leaking and ruined laminate floors and of course DPS ruled that as the laminate had not been installed at the start of the tenancy I was not entitled to even take the full deposit.Other landlords have also experienced fish tanks rotting the floor and causing extensive damage.

Is having an unapproved pet actually a ground for eviction though?

I can’t see it under any of the Section 8 causes, if this is the case this is all hot air as landlords are entirely powerless to act.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 23/11/2025 – 11:59
That sounds about right.

Landlord would be facing a £7,000 fine at first offence rates for not dealing with or unreasonably refusing a pet request. Yet seemingly no sanction for tenants just ignoring the whole protocol – which is the very likely outcome as the government has basically told them they are entitled to have one.

Reply to the comment left by Chrissie Ballantyne at 23/11/2025 – 09:22
Our head lease gives an absolute prohibition, we have previously won in Court to evict a parrot.

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 23/11/2025 – 13:33
was it a Norwegian Blue parrot by any chance! Hopefully you were awarded costs.

A family member recently moved into a housing association flat in Scotland (often still referred to as a council house). There were no carpets or floor coverings on any of the floors, the decor, although ‘acceptable’ was grubby in places, and no white goods were provided. In such a case, pet ownership is only likely to damage or soil the tenant’s own property. For private landlords, who like myself, present their properties in turnkey condition, with floor coverings, clean decor, and white goods supplied, the risks of damage, financial loss, and avoidable voids, is much higher. Those risks should have been taken into account with an appropriate increase in the deposit. Tenants and landlords may also interpret the guidance for keeping pets differently. A dog, of any size, kept in a town centre flat without garden space by a tenant who is out at work all day might seem perfectly OK to a tenant desperate to own a fluffy little puppy, but completely unacceptable to a landlord fearful of the obvious risks and a potential damages bill well in excess of any deposit paid. Perhaps, to reduce the risks, we should rent out our properties in the same condition and specification as social housing landlords. In future, tenants might have to accept that they cannot have it both ways.

A family member recently moved into a housing association flat in Scotland (often still referred to as a council house. There were no carpets or floor coverings on any of the floors, the decor, although ‘acceptable’ was grubby in places, and no white goods were provided. In such a case, pet ownership is only likely to damage or soil their own property. For private landlords, who like myself, present their properties in a turnkey condition, with floor coverings, clean decor, and white goods, the risks of damage, financial loss, and avoidable voids, is much higher. Those risks should have been taken into account with an appropriate increase in the deposit. Tenants and landlords may interpret the guidance for keeping pets differently. A dog, of any size, kept in a town centre flat without garden space by a tenant who is out at work all day might seem perfectly OK to a tenant desperate to own a fluffy little puppy, but completely unacceptable to a landlord fearful of the obvious risks and a potential damages bill well in excess of any deposit paid. Perhaps, to reduce the risks, we should rent out our properties in the same condition and specification as social housing landlords. In future, tenants might have to accept that they cannot have it both ways.