Unauthorised Pet!

Pixie5740

Just out of curioisty (and we all know what curiosity did to the cat), why do you let out the property if you don't really want to be a LL and find it difficult to emotionally disconnect from the property which is now the tenant's home...not yours.

I wouldn't necessarily bank on the LA making your life any easier.

EDIT: There have been a few LLs on this forum who have paid for a fully managed service, including inspections but the inspections were never done so ask the LA for a copy of the inspection report.

If cheetah and I are ever looking to move to Leeds I'll PM you.

fozzeh

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Just out of curioisty (and we all know what curiosity did to the cat), why do you let out the property if you don't really want to be a LL and find it difficult to emotionally disconnect from the property which is now the tenant's home...not yours.

I wouldn't necessarily bank on the LA making your life any easier.

The area is flooded with homes but the rental market is booming there (due to location, price and proximity to Leeds). The wife wanted to move closer to her parents and we couldn't shift it for a 'fair price' (fair is in the eye of the beholder) so we put it up for let.

Until it's sold full out, I know I'll have to go back there at some point and that's when I think the full disconnection can occur. First homes will always have a big part to play in everyone's life.

The LA are very good also. The guy there (who deals with our house) treats you with respect and offers some good impartial advice. He did the closing inspection with me, as a favour, when the last tenant moved out. Glad he did too...was quite a tense experience (which is why I am glad our contract end period isn't near Christmas any more)!

RuthnJasper

Pixie5740 wrote: »

I think the OP was joking.

Ah, OK. Apologies in that case OP.

HelenRachel

So the absolute first thing that you need to do is establish that they actually have a cat and that the cat you saw wasn't;
1) being looked after for a friend
2) a neighbourhood cat that's made himself at home
3) a VERY realistic stuffed toy etc

Once you have established that a cat is living there you have to decided what to do about it if anything so I think your options are;
1) Ask them to get rid of the cat (expect you tenants to either leave to lie about keeping the cat).
2) Charge them an extra deposit to cover any costs for any damage the cat causes.
3) Ask them to leave.

To be honest I think your going to need to be flexible on this one. We're not allowed pets in our house (rented) but we do look after my mums dog (very small king Charles spaniel) he also visits with her (he was abused and gets upset without her or me around. I didn't ask the LL or LA permission for this to happen mainly because the dog is very clean and we have a professional cleaner and the property will be cleaned professionally when we leave. The LA has seen the dog on the premisses and no one has said anything. We are good tenants and its obviously not worth the hassle to them to upset us about it. Speaking as a tenant this house is my home and if I chose to have the dog/cat/pet here I will and I'll happily pay for any damage that animal has caused. If my LL asked me to get rid of the pet or not to have the pet in the house I'd be looking for somewhere else to live to be honest.

SoyaBunny

I don't really think you need to explain why you passed by a property your letting out, or if you intend to go back to live there one day. Its understandable that your a bit put out with the fact your contract with them says no pets and there is in fact a cat there. You just have to weigh it up whether you think its a big enough deal to you to not renew their tenancy. As a few people have suggested I would personally mention this to your estate agent and request that the carpets are cleaned professionally when they leave.

As a cat owner myself I can confirm that they are super clean and nothing to overly worry about, but with your allergies I can understand your concern. Keep in mind if you do decide to not renew their tenancy and look for another tenant, there seems to be no guarantee that they may not have pets either as most pet owners looking to rent seem to keep very quiet about this from the look of this thread! So just weigh up how happy you are with your current tenants when making a decision and whether the cat is a deal breaker.

Hope you come to a conclusion which will ease your mind about this.

Whiner

Herbalus wrote: »

You can in fact serve them notice for any reason you choose, be that a cat, not liking the tenant's hairstyle, or the colour of their shoes.

I once served notice on my tenants because I didn't like the mans hairstyle.

They were quite surprised when I did this.

As a compromise he went to the barbers and had it styled, and that was the end of the problem.

Whiner

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Would you say that you knew there was a cat because you decided to do a drive-by of the property? As a tenant I would find that creepy. Bad enough that people come into your home to inspect it but having the LL doing drive-bys too....

This sort of thing is MUCH more common than you think.

Welcome to the real world.

PenguinJim

I can't see what's weird about that. I took a drive around the country and pointed out to my wife houses I'd spent years in as a child, and then some of the houses I'd lived in at University.

If I'd happened to have a contract with people I knew were living there, and I'd noticed something that indicated they might be in breach of their contract, it might have given me paws for thought.

I agree with the advice about letting the letting agent check for cat-astrophic damage, but if there's not a whisker of evidence, don't worry.

moneyistooshorttomention

marliepanda wrote: »

Its their home.

If you dislike it so much, send them an s21.

Thats it.

Errr...nope...its OP's home (ie their own home and not bought specifically as a buy-to-let).

Many people are allergic to cats and so this house will need very thorough cleaning before OP could move back into it again (as they say they are).

In OP's position I would be concerned that my own home had had an animal I was allergic to living in it (particularly as I had known that wouldn't happen, because I had specifically stated it wasn't allowed).

I would also be concerned as to what other rule-breaking they might go in for.

Pixie5740

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Errr...nope...its OP's home (ie their own home and not bought specifically as a buy-to-let).

Many people are allergic to cats and so this house will need very thorough cleaning before OP could move back into it again (as they say they are).

In OP's position I would be concerned that my own home had had an animal I was allergic to living in it (particularly as I had known that wouldn't happen, because I had specifically stated it wasn't allowed).

I would also be concerned as to what other rule-breaking they might go in for.

Nope, it the tenant's home. It used to be the OP's home until they decided to let the property. It doesn't matter how the OP came to be a landlord the property is still the tenant's home. The OP only still has this property because they couldn't sell it for the price they wanted.

This misunderstanding of whose home a property is, is one of the things making tenant's feel like second class citizens. If you don't own the bricks and mortar it's not your home...that's ridiculous.