Pets in rented property

David-Brent_2

TakingControl wrote: »

Oh someone fallen out of the bed on the wrong side?

Why is it when someone speaks the truth that they then have to be mocked like above eh? No I haven't got out of the wrong side of the bed, I got out of the RIGHT side because I've recently moved into my own property.

TakingControl wrote: »

Firstly, not all pet owners are irresponsible

Yes and they are a tiny minority. Believe me, as someone who jogs a lot in the great wide open I often catch the "not all pet owners are irresponsible" types allowing their dogs to poo on public footpaths...they only stop to pick it up (yuk!) when they see me approaching.

Anyway, you need to accept the fact that you do not own property therefore you cannot house a pet. Renting property is basically hiring a property and that property needs to remain in good condition for the next tenant, why is that so hard for you to accept? Why can you not accept that you do not own the property therefore you must accept the landlords rules?

Your attitude is very leftie indeed, your statements are of entitlement. Such attitudes have bankrupted this country. So once more: get your own property = do what you like. Rent a property = you cannot do what you like. So the name of the game is to strive and get what you want, not moan and impose your needs onto the property of others!

Harsh, but that's life.

Lagoon

David-Brent wrote: »

Anyway, you need to accept the fact that you do not own property therefore you cannot house a pet.

That's not something the OP 'needs' to accept, though. Some landlords do allow pets, as many of us have said - it's just a case of finding one that will, and there are some out there.

David-Brent_2

DRP wrote: »

great rant! :money: :rotfl:

I agree irresponsible pet owners are a PITA.

In your case, perhaps the owners are not aware their dog barks all day - knock on their doors or put a polite notice through suggesting that their beloved animals may be becoming stressed. If nothing gets done, would it be possible to get the RSPCA get involved? (i have no idea tbh)

They were aware. The damn things were barking right until they opened the door. I complained to the chap next door by knocking on his door to let him know I was getting slightly annoyed with the constant barking. His response to me was "so what am I supposed to do then? Take it to the office with me?". And this was the same guy who was leaving the bags of dog crap outside his door. And whilst we're on the subject of bags of dog poo, when these dogs curl one out the turd actually hits the deck and then is scooped up by the 'responsible dog owner' BUT the turd has made contact with a surface which will then be walked over by other members of the public thus people dragging in the contents of a dog's bowels into their homes!! Why is this allowed? So to those who are about to use the "I pick up my dogs mess" bollo just remember that as soon as it hits the deck the dangerous organisms are out in the world waiting to be picked up by someone's shoe! Nice!

Anyway:

RSPCA will not get involved, it's to do with the local council. They couldn't care less and told me to speak to the Letting Agent. By that time the property I've just moved into came up...so that was that!

People say it's the minority who are the problem but from what I've noted over the years it is the vast majority of pet owners who do not give a toss about anything apart from their animals. In the minds of such people their animal comes first before anything else, for some their animal comes before human life!

Oh and incidentally, the moron who lived next door to me with the yappy Jack Russel also took in rescue dogs...and I'm talking about deeply disturbed dogs.

Just remember, to these people their animals come BEFORE anything else! As I wrote before, Landlords MUST enforce NO PETS rules.

David-Brent_2

Lagoon wrote: »

it's just a case of finding one that will, .

LOL! And what a lovely smelling place it'll be eh? Do you think the LL would bother to re carpet the place etc. :T

I suspect it'll end up being "we just won't mention the pet".

And yes they do need to accept what I wrote. It's fact of life. Want a pet, then get your own property.

David-Brent_2

harpoboy wrote: »

This is precisely why I never allow pets.

Every prospective tenant will assure you that diddums is absolutely immaculately behaved, but unfortunately it's just too much of a risk to hand my property over to someone who would let a flea ridden animal into the house.

If you want a decent flat, lose the cat.

Exactly...just like when I'm out running and I get the "oh don't worry he's just playing" comment when the off the lead dog jumps up at me! Or the "oh he's never done that before" excuse when once again another dog off it's lead is trying to take chunks out of my ankles!

Yes, the LA who operated the flat below me was assured that Oscar was a quiet little thing...turned out to be the biggest and loudest Labrador on the planet! And that garden will now be ruined for the next tenant!

Sorry pet owners, but this is one former tenant who is telling the truth. Flat after flat after flat ruined by selfish pet owners. I can now safely say never again!

:money:

TakingControl

David-Brent wrote: »

Why is it when someone speaks the truth that they then have to be mocked like above eh? No I haven't got out of the wrong side of the bed, I got out of the RIGHT side because I've recently moved into my own property.



Yes and they are a tiny minority. Believe me, as someone who jogs a lot in the great wide open I often catch the "not all pet owners are irresponsible" types allowing their dogs to poo on public footpaths...they only stop to pick it up (yuk!) when they see me approaching.

Anyway, you need to accept the fact that you do not own property therefore you cannot house a pet. Renting property is basically hiring a property and that property needs to remain in good condition for the next tenant, why is that so hard for you to accept? Why can you not accept that you do not own the property therefore you must accept the landlords rules?

Your attitude is very leftie indeed, you're statements are of entitlement. Such attitudes have bankrupted this country. So once more: get your own property = do what you like. Rent a property = you cannot do what you like. So the name of the game is to strive and get what you want, not moan and impose your needs onto the property of others!

Harsh, but that's life.

It was tongue in cheek and not a serious comment about the falling out of bed, maybe I should have added a to it?

What makes you think that I don't own my own property? Just because I am lodging at the moment doesn't mean I am not a home owner.

As for leftie and smells of entitlement, far from it. Far too many people feel they are entitled to council houses, benefits, compensation etc, personally no one owns you (general you here, not you personally) anything.

We responsible pet owners might be in the majority but we do exist, equally as there are good or bad tenants with children, or without children.

Lagoon

David-Brent wrote: »

Just remember, to these people their animals come BEFORE anything else! As I wrote before, Landlords MUST enforce NO PETS rules.

Oh, so YOU'RE the guy that secretly owns all of the properties that other people THINK they own because they paid for them? Got it.

Conrad

DRP wrote: »

I agree irresponsible pet owners are a PITA.

Look a busy landlord with enough on her plate already just hasn't the time, resources or energy to try and second guess which pet owners are responsible, so it's just far easier to have a blanket ban.

If someone feels strongly this is inequitous, well by all means buy a property and let it out to pet owners.

One of the common reasons we hear of for rent arrears was the unexpected huge vetenary bill. When the LL then rightly demands payment the tenants claim the LL is heartless for not understanding thier pets life had to come first.

Personally as an animal lover I care much for natural wildlife. Cats cause untold damage to at risk species of bird and the often unseen things like lizards and slow worms.
Keeping cats is selfish imo placing the owners sentimental needs above that of the wider animal kingdom and yes it actually does matter if local at risk propoualtions of slow worms and other beasts gets ransacked by cats.

David-Brent_2

TakingControl wrote: »

We responsible pet owners might be in the majority but we do exist, equally as there are good or bad tenants with children, or without children.

So you have no problem with your pet pooing on a public area followed by yourself picking up that poo and putting in a bag. Can you tell me about what happens to the surface where the poo landed? How about folks then walking, jogging etc. on that surface after your dog's poo has been on there?

You see that is what I'm getting at, the very fact that you pet owners think it's perfectly fine to let your pet defecate wherever it likes but that it is ok just so long as you pick it up...believe me, you will have missed millions of nasty micro-organisms which will remain on that surface. Now think of that scenario but in a rented property where some other person will have to live.

Like I said, anyone who wants a pet ought to own their property with their own piece of land where it can empty its bowels to its heart's content! Why do people think they have the god given right to just 'own' a pet and then moan when Landlords tell them NO PETS.

David-Brent_2

Lagoon wrote: »

Incorrect. One out of two. Nice try.

Oh well. 50% is not bad.