1 Year AST with no pets clause, now tenant inherits a dog!!

mustardseed6

The tenant has signed a 1 year AST with a no pets clause. After 2 months, he is going to inherit the dog from his ex-wife. The landlord definitely does not want any pets.

Where does the landlord stands legally? Can the landlord expect the tenant to pay the remaining 10 months rent? What happens in these situations and how does it get resolved amicably?

Thank you in advance for any pearls of wisdom.

Gwhiz

Assuming the contract specifies "no pets" then the tenant cannot have the dog in the house AND is liable to pay rent until the end of the contract unless both LL and tenant agree to terminate and then tenant pays rent until a new tenant is found and also pays costs to find a new tenant.

Jowo_2

As far as I know, the 'no pets' clause is not legally enforceable, it's a 'nice to have' but not a 'must do'. It is not likely that the landlord can regain possession of the property back before the end of the AST just on that breach.

I assume the landlord has a signed inventory/schedule of condition that will help protect them when it comes to any damage done by the pet? Or protect the tenant from false claims that the pet has caused damage?


It's also less usual to give a new tenant a 1 year contract without a break clause in the middle - an initial 6 month AST or longer contract with break clause is more typical, precisely as a long contract pretty much guarantees the tenant can stay there for the whole period unless they wrack up significant rent arrears.

Nothing to stop the landlord/tenant from mutually agreeing an early surrender. If so, get it in writing to prevent disputes.

mlz1413

If the rented property is a flat then there maybe clauses in the lease that forbid animals to be kept. Therefore the Tenant needs to talk to his LL/LA ASAP and request early exit if he pays the costs incurred.

If the property is freehold (and has a garden so it is suitable for a pet) and is just the LL's personal desire not to have pets then the tenant could ask if they increase the deposit and agree to a have carpets professional cleaned before leaving it the dog can stay.

Also this dog is not really 'inherited' as the owner(s) have not died, it sounds more like the couple have split up and the wife is refusing to keep husbands dog. In this case I would say get the couple to discuss this issue, can the dog stay in family home and husband walk the dog daily? I feel sorry for the dog being used a pawn in couples battle - just hope they don't also have kids.

HappyMJ

My opinion is (i.e not fact) is that the landlord can issue a section 21 at any time for breach of contract giving 60 days notice to leave. It's not legally enforcable in the way that the dog cannot stay it's just a simple breach of contract. I'd expect if any damage is caused i.e by little accidents on the carpet then the tenant would have to pay to replace said carpet. It can never be cleaned. Pee gets into the underlay and it can't simply be steam cleaned out.

bebewoo

HappyMJ is completely wrong.
There is little that the landlord can do, the no pet clause is not enforceable. You cannot issue a section 21 on these grounds.

googler

The tenant obviously didn't want the dog in the first place, assuming the ex-wife to be still alive, so why is he happy to take it in now?

If he truly has 'inherited' the pet (i.e. the ex-wife has passed away), then who's been looking after it since she passed? Why can't they continue to look after it, or why can't it go to Dog's Trust or a similar animal re-homing centre?

Jenniefour

Not a landlord but if the dog is well behaved and well looked after (i.e. gets groomed regularly) then would there be a problem. If I were the landlord in that situation I think I would be wanting to meet the dog.

poppy10_2

Blanket clauses in AST contracts prohibiting pets are unenforceable, and you cannot issue notice solely on the grounds of breaching such a clause.

If the contract however had a more specific clause prohibiting the keeping of pets which could harm the property, affect subsequent tenants, or be a nuisance to other residents, then this clause would be enforceable and notice could be served for breaches of this condition.

You'll need to check the original contract to clarify the wording used.
More here:

Office of Fair Trading: Guidance on unfair terms in tenancy agreements

Cyril

There are far worse things a tenant can do than bring a dog into the home. Dogs are far cleaner than many tenants after all and as long as the tenant keeps paying the rent is there really such a problem. I'd rather have a dog than a kid tbh.

If you're worried just say that you will retain deposit money if there is any extra cleaning to be done.

Googler - animal shelters are bursting at the seams with unwanted dogs so one that is wanted shouldn't be rendered homeless.

evoke

Why not just have the pet put down so everyone is happy? LOL.