Should more landlords let tenants have pets?

WE SAY

Rental properties that allow pets are very hard to come by in New Zealand, yet the number of people owning therapy dogs is rising. Some might say that allowing tenants to have pets means that they’ll stay longer and treat your house like a home. Do you think changes should be made to ensure more pet-friendly rentals are available?

YOU SAY

Normally I’d say it’s up to the landlord, but this is actually a big health issue. Pet ownership is linked with improved heart health and immunity, significantly lower levels of stress, anxiety, blood pressure, PTSD, and numerous other benefits. On the other hand, pets can be costly on the landlord in terms of wear and tear on properties. So while landlords should be strongly encouraged to allow tenants’ pets, they should also have stronger conditions in the lease for coverage against damage, for example bonds topped up to higher amounts via time payments.

David from Bader

It is all very well to say landlords can charge a large bond but the tenancy tribunal comes down on the side of tenants every time. I for one got stung renting to two so-called professionals with a dog. They were not inclined to exercise the dog, instead just let him have free rein of the property, which ended up being ruined inside and outside. The tenancy tribunal sided with the dog owners/ tenants - never ever again will I fall for that, nice dog shame about the owners! Everything was blamed on the dog, not the so-called responsible owners. Margaret from Paparangi

Given the damage that dogs and cats cause to our wildlife, should we be encouraging more pets?

Ken from Richmond

Much as I sympathise with the restriction on pets , it’s the landlord that has the long-term responsibility of the property. It is impossible to get urine, vomit and so on out of the underlay of the carpet. It is also impossible to have a pet that does not do some damage to the home. The tenant moves on. The damage remains and the* landlord is often not told what happened. It’s covered up.

Joan from Masterton

I think it’s mean as so many elderly, sick or disabled people can’t even have a cat for company. Tenants pay bonds … so this would also cover damage caused by pets. Young children often cause damage to homes by drawing on walls or staining carpets and so on: are landlords going to say “no kids” next?

Kate from Pukekohe

The simple fact of the matter is that rentals are in short supply. Landlords have the choice of many prospective tenants so why take the added risk of allowing pets (or children). It is almost impossible to know if a tenant will be good bad or indifferent by meeting them briefly or by references and with the current rental laws it is very difficult to get rid of bad tenants.

Tony from Rangiora

I rent and am lucky my landlord allowed me to have pets. As part of my rental agreement, I have had a clause put in that states all damages caused by pets is the tenant’s responsibility to rectify immediately and on exit all carpeted areas are to be professionally cleaned. If landlords were willing to do an option like this, it could be a win-win for all.

Sandy from Dairy Flat

We do need to have more pet-friendly rentals. In saying that, we need more responsible pet owners willing to pick up after their animals. Even when animals poop in the backyard, it still needs to be picked up. I wouldn’t want to rent to an irresponsible animal owner, but you never know until you rent to them.

Linda from Takanini

The law will have to be changed to make dog owners responsible for damage to property and people as if the owner had done it themselves. This is not just in the realm of tenancy law but in general. I am not a dog-lover but I recognise the science behind the benefits which are said to accrue from pet-ownership. So, we should incentivise landlords to allow pets but not when tenants’ pets can menace neighbours with impunity.

SUPPLIED Pet ownership is linked with improved heart health and immunity.