Some interesting answers here!
Consider this as a clause…?
(4:5) Not to keep or allow to visit in or on the Property any animals, including reptiles, insects, rodents and birds without the prior and ‘creature-specific’ written permission of the Landlord, which will not be unreasonably withheld but may be time-limited at the Landlord’s absolute discretion.
Any such permission would likely be subject to an additional ‘animal deposit’ and other conditions. Attention is drawn that this contract has been signed with this clause highlighted and is reasonably offered and agreed as a ‘no pets property’ throughout the Tenancy period.
Tweak as you see fit or disregard. It was my last take on that matter when I edited an AST some time ago. I would review the legislation before I re-drafted a fixed term. “Clarity in writing” is everything in this game.
The ‘creature-specific’ bit has methodology beyond its unintended humour. If you are foolish enough to formerly accept a pet in writing, the outdoor cat they said they were going to have could become the three boxers already on order… or join the cat to make a foursome!
Nice. Not.
Smelly, if nothing else.
Be cynical, be safe! (I really mean realistic and cautious but use the adjective that suits you!)
An additional animal deposit is essential, not considered unreasonable by precedent and so has become ‘the established norm,’
But, be sure you conform to the latest nonsense re: 5 wk deposit cap. I have not had a chance to look into that yet, in regard to whether additional deposit such as for animals is part of the equation…
…OpenRent… your input here, please.
Remember: the deposit is NOT the pet cleaning fee which should be seen as a charge ‘at cost.’ Check against current and recently changed legislation.
I would also suggest you require that a professional clean fee is taken IN ADVANCE and for which you promise to give copy of an invoice receipt on departure, on request. Thus proving it will ultimately be a not-for-profit reasonable, quantifiable expense. If you take £150, that should cover most properties for a comprehensive ‘pet allergies’ clean and I would give them the change if there is any.
Up-front? How dare I?! This is because, essentially, it reduces the risk of ill-feeling at the end of Tenancy when you are requiring payment for something once as they are on the way out. The reasonable applicant will ‘get it.’ At the beginning, Tenants are inherently more compliant - absolute human nature- because they have an incentive. They want your place. It’s lovely not to have to ask for it at the end. For both parties.
Again, am not sure as I write whether this is ok under current shifting sands deposit legislation and nor whether, for that matter, OpenRent would object under its own agreed terms between landlord and themselves.
OpenRent… would you?
Two items for feedback, please.
I rarely accept dogs or house cats. There’s no profit in taking a damage deposit. Actually the larger the deposit, the evidently greater risk for greater loss. And argument. In the case of house cat/s, they and their permanently in-situ cat litter trays can stink while urine and faeces gets walked through the house very easily… think , not least, of the next tenants with potentially a crawling toddler…
Dog owners, particularly -and always ‘supported’ by their subjective, defensive owners- are a bl**dy nuisance in my experience. Arguing about what constitutes ‘fair wear and tear’ when you accepted a dog is just the start of it.
If you are up for all the potential hassle, visit them at their current property to assess their current standards? *
And for those that object to paying either a pet damage deposit or the up-front, professional clean fee (chargeable at cost only, as I have already intimated…?)
For me, they have failed basic vetting checks.
Pun intended.
- That’s how I know all about the worse of house cats… I could hardly breathe!
Peter B
Member NLA
