Pets - Written Consent from the Houseing Association?

AndyNPlay

I'm looking to move in to a flat (6th floor), via a shared ownership scheme.The Housing Association has noted that I'm only allowed pets if I apply for written consent with themselves, which is fine.
My question is however, what does that process normally look like and what kind of questions / evidence points would I need to provide?

diggingdude

not sure on pets, but make sure it doesn't have cladding

hazyjo

What does the actual lease say?

If someone complains, then what? You need to find that out.

When you say 'pet', what are we talking about?

Crumble2018

I think these things are money making exercises for housing associations! Our lease makes no mention of pets at any point, yet we were told by the housing association that we must pay £60 to ask permission to keep a pet and that dogs are not allowed at all. At least 3 flats in the block have dogs, and our opposite neighbour has a cat!  Not sure of the legalities of this seeing as our lease doesn’t forbid them....

Mrsn

We just wrote an email to the housing association asking if we’re able to have a small dog (daschund) in the property. Mind you we are in a house and not a flat, they just wrote back saying it was ok but would be liable for any damage caused.

strawb_shortcake

Having lived in local authority accommodation in the past, pretty much all our neighbours had pets and I'd wager they never asked permission, and no animals were ever removed. 
One neighbour even had drugs growing in the attic and that wasn't sufficient to get them moved out, thankfully for us complaining about the number of drug users and dealers did get us moved out. 

HampshireH

If there is a section 106 which prevents pets then they will decline permission (had blocks with this in place)

Aside of that it looks like a consent letter or a decline consent letter. If they decline and you breach then they can pursue you for tenancy breach (which is what your SO flat will have.

I guess you need to know how receptive the neighbours are to pets.

On the block I refer to above someone reported almost daily the coming and going of dogs along with flat numbers, descriptions, dates and times.

Repeatedly referred to the lease, breaches and took the issue to residents meeting and threatened legal action.

All the while living in a different block on the complex completely unaffected by the pets aside of the fact They existed.

Likewise a person who has had permission declined can before very spiteful towards those who have permission or do it anyway. They can make life very difficult by claiming "nuisance"  of which is a breach of consent and lease

davidmcn

HampshireH said:

If there is a section 106 which prevents pets

Why would a planning agreement have anything to do with pets?

HampshireH

It sounds odd but there was a scheme built where all flats. One of the conditions was no pets.

Absolute nightmare to enforce.

However I believe section 106s only last 5 years unless stated otherwise they can be discharged.

Also had a block with no kids written into their 106 again very hard to enforce. It meant rehousing people as soon as they had a kid.

So weird stuff in some of these agreements.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://democracy.medway.gov.uk/mgconvert2pdf.aspx?id=38434&ved=2ahUKEwjPvOmxx9nnAhX3ShUIHZAPCiQQFjAOegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw0UuGEUNniY7Pgpw3hL5iBQ

Hopefully that works but its an example albeit for a scheme.

Same principle applies. Its to reduce nuisance and with limited grounds asb

davidmcn

Ah, seems to be a concern about pets disturbing wildlife there. I suspect that's quite site-specific rather than widespread. "No kids" makes more general sense from a planner's point of view given that councils tend to be concerned about the impact of new housing on school places - choice for the developers is either pay a contribution towards new school building, or have a no kids policy (obviously easier if it's e.g. retirement housing or student accommodation anyway).

HampshireH

Absolutely far easier to enforce in a scheme than normal flats.

As I said an odd one but it does exist