Despite the UK’s undeniable love for pets, only 7% of rental properties across major British cities are marketed as pet-friendly, according to a revealing study by Inventory Base.
This disconnect between landlords and the nation’s 17.2 million pet-owning households raises an important question: are landlords missing out on a lucrative opportunity by shutting their doors to furry friends?
With approximately 60% of UK households owning at least one pet, the demand for pet-friendly rental homes is undeniably strong.
The government has recognised this, introducing measures to encourage landlords to accept tenants with pets.
RENTERS’ RIGHTS BILL
Changes to the model tenancy agreement, for instance, now suggest that landlords should allow well-behaved pets by default. The Renters’ Rights Bill reinforces this stance, proposing restrictions on landlords’ ability to impose blanket bans on pets.
Yet, the findings from Inventory Base reveal a stark disparity between policy aspirations and market reality.
Out of 65,826 rental properties analyzed across 15 cities, only 4,688 welcome pets. Glasgow leads the way with 11.3% of rentals allowing pets, followed by Edinburgh (10.1%), Manchester (10%), and London (8.1%). At the other end of the spectrum, Newcastle lags behind, with a paltry 2.1% of listings described as pet-friendly.
PET-FREINDLY RELUCTANCE
Landlords’ reluctance often stems from concerns over potential damage caused by pets, which can lead to costly repairs at the end of a tenancy. While this apprehension might seem reasonable, recent research challenges the perception that pets are the primary culprits of property damage.
A surprising twist in the data reveals that while pets do cause damage—averaging £300 per tenancy—this pales in comparison to the £775 worth of damage caused on average by tenants without pets. This revelation suggests that pets might have been unfairly scapegoated for years.
FINANCIAL CASE
Beyond the question of damage, allowing pets in rental properties could make financial sense for landlords. Pet-owning tenants are statistically more likely to stay in a property for longer periods, with 50% remaining in their homes for over three years, compared to just 31% of non-pet-owning tenants. This stability translates into fewer void periods, reduced marketing costs, and less hassle in finding new tenants.
Siân Hemming-Metcalfe, Operations Director at Inventory Base, highlights the potential benefits for landlords.
She says: “While pets might seem like they could cause issues in rental properties, it’s becoming clear that their impact is often much smaller than the wear and tear from tenants themselves. Being pet-friendly can actually offer significant advantages for landlords.
“By welcoming pets, you not only attract a broader range of potential tenants but also encourage longer and more dependable tenancies.”
MITIGATING RISKS
For landlords concerned about potential damage, Hemming-Metcalfe emphasizes the importance of a robust inventory process.
“The main risks of allowing pets arise when there isn’t a solid inventory process in place at both the start and end of each tenancy,” she explains. A thorough inventory, coupled with regular property inspections, ensures that any damage – whether caused by pets or tenants – is properly documented and accounted for.
CHANGING VIEWS
The data challenges conventional wisdom and invites landlords to rethink their policies. By excluding pets, landlords may inadvertently limit their pool of potential tenants, forgo the benefits of longer tenancies, and overlook the relatively minor financial risks associated with pet-related damage.
As the rental market evolves and the government continues to push for more inclusive housing policies, the onus is on landlords to adapt. Welcoming well-behaved pets might just be the key to unlocking greater profitability and tenant satisfaction – proving that sometimes, a wagging tail can be worth its weight in gold.
