Leasehold restriction on pets

Flix21

I was trying to find a facepalm emoji, but I couldn't see one.


Once again, i've never suggested the OP goes ahead and gets a dog, completely disregarding her neighbours. I said there's nothing wrong with asking what their thoughts are. How do you know the neighbours agree with the leasehold? They might not be bothered. There is nothing wrong with asking, and if I was a neighbour i'd appricate that rather than someone who just goes and gets a pet without consulting me.



If the neighbours say no, then the OP knows for sure. No dog. They either have to move or be petless. Likewise, all the neighbours and freeholder may say yes, but then the OP needs to accept that if a new neighbour moves in who doesn't agree then they'd need to move. What's important is that a dog isn't just for the "time being", it's for life.



To say that people are "entitled" because they want a pet is completely ridiculous.

I've lived in flats were neighbours have had children. The kids running around, screaming in the middle of the night etc caused a lot more nuisance than my dog ever could. But I don't think the neighbours are "entitled" for having children. Living in close proximity with others needs understanding and compromise.


My building has a shared garden. Despite being allowed to use it (and always cleaning up after my pooch) a neigbour complained they didn't like the dog in there. Regardless of the fact the neighbour never uses the garden herself, I agreed not to take the dog in there anymore because I didn't want to upset her. Thankfully, I live right next to a park so no biggie.



I previously lived in a flat that didn't allow pets. So I volunteered at the local animal shelter to help look after and walk the dogs. Maybe the OP could do that.

elsien

I like dogs.
I have lived in a flat with a dog very successfully, despite having no garden.

I think the concern that people are raising are that OP can do everything you suggest - find a quiet sensible dog, check with the neighbours etc but if there is a change of occupiers and anyone new moving in objects then the OP is back to square one. If the lease holder then chooses to enforce the lease (which again we don't know if they would do or not) the OP would have to rehome the dog or sell up and move which is not a quick process.

That's not anti pets in flats, that's something that the OP needs to consider for this particular flat.

It is all ifs, buts and maybes but it still needs considering.

Crumble2018

Flix21 wrote: »

I've lived in flats were neighbours have had children. The kids running around, screaming in the middle of the night etc caused a lot more nuisance than my dog ever could. But I don't think the neighbours are "entitled" for having children. Living in close proximity with others needs understanding and compromise.

Yep - I'd rather live surrounded by dogs than kids!!

Davesnave

Crumble2018 wrote: »

Yep - I'd rather live surrounded by dogs than kids!!

Ah, but which of them will be paying for your state pension when you're old?

Crumble2018

Davesnave wrote: »

Ah, but which of them will be paying for your state pension when you're old?

The same as I'm paying for it! Doesn't mean I have to enjoy their "nuisance" where I live.

Davesnave

Crumble2018 wrote: »

Doesn't mean I have to enjoy their "nuisance" where I live.

There are some retirement complexes that will take folks from around age 55 nowadays; even younger perhaps, if they've lost one of their faculties, like a sense of humour for instance.

gingercordial

L/C wrote: »

No current dogs but the people who owned it before us had one and the freeholder has a cat. We have no intention of getting a barky dog and have had dogs in flats before with no issue.

We've spoken to our other neighbors who have no issue with it - just haven't seen the freeholder yet. We wouldn't go ahead with it if she has any objections.

How do you know whatever dog you get won't be barky? Some breeds may be less likely to bark, but it doesn't mean that an individual of that breed won't be a barker or howler. And if you're getting a mixed breed/rescue you won't know at all.

Our upstairs neighbours used to have a dog which was fairly quiet but would very occasionally bark, not often. He died, which was sad for them. However they then looked after a relative of their old dog (not a littermate but same breeder, half-sibling I think they said) and thought this one was also quiet. I had to tell them that every time they left dog alone in the flat the poor thing would bark and howl constantly, for hours and hours. I was in tears over it one evening as the noise just wouldn't stop (it was late so couldn't go out to escape it) and when I texted them to beg them to come home and deal with it they had no idea at all. At least I could couch my complaint in terms of it being heartbreaking to hear the dog so distressed so as animal lovers they then tried not to go out at all the rest of the time they had him - but that wouldn't have been sustainable if they'd had him permanently.

My point is that even with the same breed/breeder one was totally fine to live underneath and one was utterly awful.

I do like dogs by the way!

Cakeguts

Flix21 wrote: »

I was trying to find a facepalm emoji, but I couldn't see one.


Once again, i've never suggested the OP goes ahead and gets a dog, completely disregarding her neighbours. I said there's nothing wrong with asking what their thoughts are. How do you know the neighbours agree with the leasehold? They might not be bothered. There is nothing wrong with asking, and if I was a neighbour i'd appricate that rather than someone who just goes and gets a pet without consulting me.



If the neighbours say no, then the OP knows for sure. No dog. They either have to move or be petless. Likewise, all the neighbours and freeholder may say yes, but then the OP needs to accept that if a new neighbour moves in who doesn't agree then they'd need to move. What's important is that a dog isn't just for the "time being", it's for life.



To say that people are "entitled" because they want a pet is completely ridiculous.

I've lived in flats were neighbours have had children. The kids running around, screaming in the middle of the night etc caused a lot more nuisance than my dog ever could. But I don't think the neighbours are "entitled" for having children. Living in close proximity with others needs understanding and compromise.


My building has a shared garden. Despite being allowed to use it (and always cleaning up after my pooch) a neigbour complained they didn't like the dog in there. Regardless of the fact the neighbour never uses the garden herself, I agreed not to take the dog in there anymore because I didn't want to upset her. Thankfully, I live right next to a park so no biggie.



I previously lived in a flat that didn't allow pets. So I volunteered at the local animal shelter to help look after and walk the dogs. Maybe the OP could do that.

The whole point is that they have no right to involve the neighbours at all in this decision. Just asking them about owning a dog in flat that has a clause in the lease banning animals shows an extreme level of entitlement.



They moved to a flat that has a no pet clause. Either they abide by that rule and don't get a dog or they move.



The neighbours are entitled to not be consulted about a dog in a flat that bans them.



If you consult the neighbours on this subject you put them into a difficult position especially if they are nice people. Nice people are likely to tell you that something doesn't bother them even if it does. This is called manners. Putting neighbours into this position would show a distinct lack of manners and a lot of entitlement.



The point about this flat is that you cannot have a dog in it. That is it no dog. No consultation just no dog.