Tenant group claims pet deposit amendment will price out renters
9 months ago | 9 comments
Tenant’s pet deposit plan in Renters’ Rights Bill creates confusion
12:01 AM, 23rd July 2025, 9 months ago
10
The PRS faces uncertainty as the Renters’ Rights Bill amendment to bring in a pet deposit for tenancies leaves landlords, tenants and agents confused.
That’s the view of property inspection platform Inventory Base, which is warning that the latest policy shift, allowing landlords to charge a pet deposit capped at three weeks’ rent, raises more questions than it answers.
The Bill eliminates blanket ‘no pets’ clauses, requiring landlords to allow animals unless they have a valid reason to refuse.
However, protecting landlords from pet-related damage remains a challenge.
Tenants’ rights and landlord protections
The firm’s operations director, Sián Hemming-Metcalfe, said: “This latest U-turn on pet insurance highlights just how complex the balancing act is between tenants’ rights and landlord protections.
“The Renters’ Rights Bill aims to create a more inclusive rental sector — and rightly so — but without clear safeguards for landlords, particularly when it comes to pet-related damage, we risk creating uncertainty and conflict on both sides.”
She added: “Most landlords aren’t anti-pet, they’re anti-risk without recourse.
“That’s why the focus now must shift toward building a framework that’s practical, enforceable and based on how the rental sector actually works today.”
Ms Hemming-Metcalfe is urging consistent rules, a reliable mechanism for assessing pet-related damage, and clarity on who sets those standards for the sector.
Landlords are left vulnerable
The firm says that while pet insurance was proposed initially as a solution, this was scrapped during parliamentary debates, it left landlords vulnerable.
The new pet deposit amendment aims to address this, but its passage into law is uncertain, and its details are unclear.
Key concerns include whether the pet deposit will draw from the existing five-week security deposit, potentially undermining its purpose.
Also, if there will be an additional charge, what are the affordability issues for tenants?
Who will set pet rules?
The lack of clarity extends to who will set the rules – either the government, deposit schemes or the ombudsman.
Inventory Base is now urging collaboration between stakeholders like Propertymark, TDS, mydeposits and the Deposit Protection Service to create a practical framework for managing risks and resolving disputes.
Currently, only 7.5% of rental listings in England are pet-friendly, with the North East leading at just under 11%.
As the Bill opens the market to pet owners, Inventory Base recommends landlords take proactive steps: updating tenancy agreements, documenting pet refusals, increasing property inspections, considering slight rent adjustments and maintaining thorough records.
Tags:
landlord protections, pet deposit, pet-friendly renting, property inspections, renters rights bill, Tenancy Agreements, UK Landlords
Comments
Have Your Say
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
or
Previous Article
Common mistakes landlords make when buying landlord insuranceRelated Articles
Victory for landlords as Lords back pet deposit amendment
10 months ago | 17 comments
Industry body pushes back on pet insurance U-turn
10 months ago | 6 comments
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 1587
7:56 AM, 23rd July 2025, About 9 months ago
Don’t be confused.
Labour are likely to ditch the amendment. I don’t think landlords will be able to charge a pet deposit nor insist on insurance.
Just add the risk cost to the rent, pet or no pet.
Member Since August 2016 - Comments: 1190
9:46 AM, 23rd July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 23/07/2025 – 07:56
Landlords will not be able to insist on a tenant taking out pet insurance because it doesn’t exist.
Member Since May 2025 - Comments: 15
2:31 PM, 23rd July 2025, About 9 months ago
I don’t let my two big Labradors on the sofa or bed.
Even that will cause smells and wear issues. Add drool and licking/chewing, and a 3 week deposit won’t even cover the cost of a new sofa. Let alone chewed skirtings, scratched laminate and buckled laminate if it pees.
It staggers me how irresponsible some people are with their dogs. And those who leave them at home while they work are asking for frustration/boredom based damage.
I love dogs, I just don’t love the owners.
The potential losses are huge, and as we all know, the chances of getting anything back are almost zero.
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 1587
9:45 PM, 23rd July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Dylan Morris at 23/07/2025 – 09:46
It could exist if the RRB creates a market.
Member Since August 2016 - Comments: 1190
9:58 PM, 23rd July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 23/07/2025 – 21:45I very much doubt any insurance company would want to issue such a policy. How would they how much damage the pet would do in order to assess the risk ? Is it a well behaved dog (or cat) ? Has it caused damage before ? What breed is it ? What history has it got of good behaviour and how can this be evidenced ? What if it’s a puppy ? What if it’s an old incontinent dog ? What incentive have the tenants got to ensure it doesn’t cause any damage if they know the insurance company is covering the damage ? How many dogs and cats is the insurer covering ? What if there’s only one dog and another comes along so there are two dogs and then a cat turns up ? Three pets but only one covered so which pet has caused the damage ? The premium would be so large the tenant couldn’t afford it anyway. What happens if the premium isn’t paid after first year ?
As you can see it’s impossible !!
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3538 - Articles: 5
10:01 AM, 25th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Dylan Morris at 23/07/2025 – 09:46
…and as a result this is ‘reasonable’ grounds to be able to refuse a pet.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1173
10:21 AM, 25th July 2025, About 9 months ago
My understanding is that the Government dropped the pet insurance idea because the premiums were looking too high, (over £100 a year).
Even the proposed pet deposit scheme needs a lot more explanation. For example, does the extra 3 weeks get added to a generic deposit pot or are they distinct? Would landlords need to prove which damage was tenant related and which was pet related?
Member Since February 2019 - Comments: 16
9:05 PM, 25th July 2025, About 9 months ago
If we don’t want tenants with pets….in OUR property!
When new tenants apply and already have a pet…..they are easly weaned out.
If we include a clause in the contract that states any pet will increase the rent by x per pet, then we are at least covering our selves and mitigating any potential losses.
I would be very interested in reading any one else’s thoughts on how to overcome some of these draconian measures being brought in by the government.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1173
5:47 PM, 26th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Dave at 25/07/2025 – 21:05
It’s not going to be easy to just increase the rent in future so I don’t think that’s a solution.
Member Since February 2023 - Comments: 7
10:00 PM, 26th July 2025, About 9 months ago
We have HMO properties and we have no intention whatsoever of allowing pets somebody walks a dog through the communal landings and it messes how we supposed to know who has caused the mess which owner is responsible for their dogs deposit shall we call it? Imagine having several people were dogs barking day and night why should we have to pay for people’s mess why should we have to be responsible for the disturbance it causes we’ve made a decision that we will sell all our HMO properties if we are forced in any way shape or form to adhere to these laws that will put 54 people out on the street simple as that