Making landlords pay for pet damage is 'barking mad', experts warn
AN ELEVENTH hour amendment by the Government that means landlords will have to foot the bill for any damage caused by tenants' pets has been slammed by experts as “barking mad”.
Ben Beadle, chief executive of the National Residential Landlords Association, said it reverses an earlier pledge that would allow landlords to require tenants to have insurance cover.
The amendment has been added less than a week before the Renters’ Rights Bill returns to the House of Lords for report stage.
Landlords will still be expected to accept tenants with pets, unless there is a good reason not to, but removing the insurance requirement could leave them seriously out of pocket, Mr Beadle said.
The late change could also make it even harder for tenants with pets to find homes as landlords become more risk averse, he claimed.
Newspage spoke to experts who also slammed the move as "a dog's dinner".
Michelle Lawson, Director at Lawson Financial, said the “amendment is beyond belief and completely barking mad”.
She added: "Another classic example of the Government ignoring the advice from the experts. A perfectly fair outcome had previously been proposed where the landlord could buy insurance chargeable to the tenant to mitigate risk of damage. To now put all the risk, yet again, on the landlord will only push the rents up further to ensure landlords aren’t out of pocket.
“There is a rhetoric that landlords are rich - most are not and most are barely keeping their heads above water with the constant barrage of costs being introduced. This has been shown by the exodus of properties already as they sell up. This isn’t the way to either help with the housing crisis or encourage people that house some of the most vulnerable in society, to remain in the sector.”
Kundan Bhaduri, Entrepreneur at The Kushman Group, said the amendment showed a “comical misunderstanding of risk”.
He added: "This Government's latest decree is so profoundly detached from the realities of property management, it borders on the fanatical. This is a masterclass in unintended consequences, adding yet another layer of financial burden and uncertainty to an already overstretched sector.
"We are not talking about fair wear and tear; we are talking about potentially significant damage, from chewed skirting boards to irreparably soiled carpets, now apparently a landlord's charitable contribution in every tenanted home. The assertion that we should simply foot this bill demonstrates a comical misunderstanding of risk and responsibility by people who have never let a property in their lives.
“It essentially socialises the cost of irresponsible pet ownership onto the property provider. The inevitable consequence will be fewer landlords will be willing to accept pets at all, despite warm Government rhetoric. Or, for those brave enough, rents will have to creep up further to create a defacto insurance fund.”
Kate Allen, Owner at Finest Stays, agreed, adding: “Landlords aren’t running pet hotels. This policy’s gone to the dogs; and the cats, rabbits and ferrets too. Encouraging pet-friendly rentals is fine, but making landlords cover every claw mark and nibble? That’s a wild idea to unleash at the last minute.”
Emma Jones, Managing Director at Whenthebanksaysno.co.uk, said: "It’s becoming a dog's life for lots of landlords. The Government will be sorry when they’ve pushed every private landlord out and they have no more homes left for private rent.
“Private landlords are a necessity for many families wanting to live in better areas with their families. In the public the dog owner is responsible for any damages caused and this should be the same in a privately rented home.”
Rohit Kohli, Director at The Mortgage Stop, agreed, adding: “This amendment is a classic case of policy-making gone feral. What began as a balanced reform has now been chewed up and spat out. Expecting landlords to cover pet damage without safeguards is not just unfair - it’s political petting for votes at their expense. Once again, landlords are left holding the lead while Government chases its own tail.”
David Stirling, Director at Mint Mortgages & Protection, believes it could lead to landlords just saying no to all pets to avoid the risk.
He said: "The Government wants landlords to roll over, play dead, and pick up the poo too. With landlords facing so many escalating costs, this amendment is making renting property paws-itively unattractive.
“This could all backfire and landlords might just say no pets full stop to avoid the risk, which defeats the whole purpose.”
Justin Moy, Managing Director at EHF Mortgages, joked that dogs “will have more rights than the landlord”.
He continued: “Just another reason why private landlords will just look to exit the market. With so much reliance on the private rental market, why does the Government feel it needs to twist the knife even more? Just another reason to show 'Lab The Door'.”
Patricia McGirr, Founder at Repossession Rescue Network, added: “If the Government thinks landlords will just roll over and play dead on this one, they’ve got another thing coming. Shoving the cost of pet damage onto landlords is bonkers at best.
"Responsible pet ownership is crucial, but so is a functioning rental market. What’s next? Landlords covering vet bills and birthday bonuses? Landlords are already chasing their tails trying to keep up with more requirements. It’s not a pet-friendly policy; it’s a dog’s dinner.”
While Sean Horton, Managing Director at Respect Mortgages, worries pet owners will struggle to find rentals.
He said: "What's next - landlords paying for tenants' parking tickets because they own cars? This barking mad policy ensures pet owners will struggle even more to find rentals. Brilliant strategy: force landlords to cover Rover's redecorating whilst simultaneously expecting them to welcome pets with open arms.
"The Government's clearly been sniffing something strong. Landlords aren't running animal sanctuaries - they're businesses facing mounting costs from every direction. Stop giving landlords such a ruff time."
