Pet Clause in tenancy contract

3ilton

I'm (hopefully) moving into a new rental property in about a month. The landlord has accepted us as tenants along with our cat.
The agents (one of the big impersonal London agencies) have put a pet clause into the contract. I have no problem with this in theory, it's been pretty standard with our last two contracts. However, this one takes things a step further with, in addition to the usual cleaning/flea requests, the following wording:

"should the cat cause noise or nuisance to the adjoining occupiers the Tenant will remove the cat upon the request of the Landlord or his Agent within a reasonable time"

Is this enforcable, can they really make you to just get rid of your pet if the landlord asks?
I can't imagine our cat actually causing a nuisance, he mainly just sleeps and plays with his stuffed rat, but I really dislike the idea of signing this.

Thanks.

Pixie5740

Why stop at just the cat when the tenant is easily evicted using the Section 21 route?

camptownraces

Is it a flat (leasehold) or a house (probably freehold)?

If a flat, there will be a superior landlord, and the answer to your question is "yes, the clause is probably enforceable, because of the wording of the superior long lease".

da_rule

Also it's not just if the landlord asks. The pet must have been causing noise or nuisance.

martindow

3ilton wrote: »

"should the cat cause noise or nuisance to the adjoining occupiers the Tenant will remove the cat upon the request of the Landlord or his Agent within a reasonable time"

I can't see how a cat can cause appreciable noise (unless you give it a drum kit).

LEJC

If it is a leasehold property that you will be renting it's actually quite a standard part of a pet clause.

As a leaseholder I can apply for pet consent from the managing agent of the block that I own a property in. Sometimes there is a charge to obtain this but I have yet to come across a single pet clause that does not state some form of what you have been quoted.

I am actually in the process of as a LL granting my tenants a pet clause and only yesterday queried the pet procedure with the property manager of my particular complex.
I was told that occasionally they do need to enforce the nuisance clause but it possibly would be more geared towards a dogs and a potential noise issue with barking or perhaps an owner who repeatedly allowed their animal to foul communal gardens or areas and was not responsible in clearing the mess.

Whist you may dislike signing this type of clause you may find that without the agreement you could end up being refused the tenancy.

Certainly in my case it is a condition of the head lease that I agreed to when purchasing the flat...a consequence of which if I do not respect could lead me to having my lease revoked in exceptional circumstances. With this in mind I can understand why the clause is being passed to you also.

I would also say that the complaints would need to be justified and it's not a case that you would be asked to remove the cat purely because your next door neighbour doesn't like them there would need to be a clear reason and presumably some discussion with you and possibly your LL in order to provide a solution if available...it's not a case of one misdemenour and the cat is out.

LEJC

martindow wrote: »

I can't see how a cat can cause appreciable noise (unless you give it a drum kit).

It's interesting that they have used the wording "noise or nuisance"...it is a little difficult to gauge how loud a cat can be,but I do wonder if the cat were left to roam communal areas outside the permitted property where it lived if the "nuisance" descriptive might come into play regarding any fleas that were found or potentially any complaints from near residents regarding allergies they may have to pet hair or possibly bites(although difficult to prove the flea aspect as there are many other places that you can pick up an odd flea/ bite and transfer an infestation)

However a house cat within the confines of the four walls of the rental property seems very reasonable to me.

OP...my guess would be that if you were faced with the situation that a collection of near residents made a series of repeated complaints about your cat it wouldn't be a case of you getting rid of the pet...it would be a case of you actually leaving the tenancy as presumably by that time it would be clear that maybe neither you nor your pet were welcomed by your nearest and dearest neighbours!

Just a thought....

pinkpiglit

Not quite the same, but it can happen, even when you own your flat


http://metro.co.uk/2017/02/27/couple-lose-battle-to-keep-dog-in-no-pets-block-of-flats-6476371/

pinkshoes

3ilton wrote: »

"should the cat cause noise or nuisance to the adjoining occupiers the Tenant will remove the cat upon the request of the Landlord or his Agent within a reasonable time"

Sounds reasonable.

How on Earth are they going to define 'within a reasonable time'...

That could be just not renewing your tenancy and issuing an S21.

Pixie5740

pinkpiglit wrote: »

Not quite the same, but it can happen, even when you own your flat


http://metro.co.uk/2017/02/27/couple-lose-battle-to-keep-dog-in-no-pets-block-of-flats-6476371/

That's because what they own is lease which allows them to live in the flat rather than the bricks and mortar which is little different to a tenant owning a tenancy which allows them to live in a property.

Lease/ tenancy, potato/po-tah-to

LEJC

pinkpiglit wrote: »

Not quite the same, but it can happen, even when you own your flat


http://metro.co.uk/2017/02/27/couple-lose-battle-to-keep-dog-in-no-pets-block-of-flats-6476371/

It's exactly the same...your LL is the leaseholder who "owns" the flat but just chooses not to live there...the tenant who does live there still needs to abide by the rules.

In the case of an "owner" losing the battle to keep a pet in a no pets block then quite simply they should have read their lease prior to purchasing or at least made enquiries to the seller for such a restriction being in place.