There seems to be a blanket policy on not allowing pets even if the ad says pets considered etc.
Apart from the obvious flees etc. Surely the pet owner can take out insurance against damage from pets.,or a extra. month rent in advance.
It is so annoying to be told no pets children or smoking, I don’t smoke by the way something to do with Human Rights or allowing the people to have their own home comforts. The after all renting means it’s still your home though the Landlords property.
I once had a property returned to me in a disgusting state they had no pets 20 years and I still get angry. So I do understand and empathise, my remarks are not meant to anger anyone, it is so frustrating there seems no chance of my moving because of this issue.
Furthermore since over half the population of the country have pets, would it not be a more advantageous to make property more pet friendly less easy to damage walls and floor coverings. The That makes more sense plus having an extra months rent as insurance.
As a retired renter do not like the idea of paying rent for each pet on top of my rent, for one thing it would make it very hard if not impossible financially and feels very wrong to me.
I am hoping for some informative responses from Landlords and whether pet friendly properties could be a steady corner of the market if approached correctly to protect both parties.
Kind regards AOE