A common belief is that the Renters’ Rights Act bans pet refusals outright. It does not. In England, a landlord can refuse a tenant’s written pet request, but only on reasonable grounds, such as a superior lease that forbids pets or a property unsuited to the animal. Refuse without a fair reason, or fail to respond within the required time, and the landlord may be in breach of the statutory process. The tenant can challenge the refusal, or the failure to deal with the request properly, through the available complaint or court route.
What did the Renters’ Rights Act actually change about pets?
It gave tenants a legal right to request a pet, and made it unlawful for a landlord to refuse unreasonably. Section 11 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 inserts new sections 16A and 16B into the Housing Act 1988. These sections write an implied term into every assured tenancy: the tenant may keep a pet with the landlord’s consent, and that consent must not be unreasonably withheld.
The practical effect is that an old-style blanket clause saying “no pets under any circumstances” no longer works as an automatic ban. The landlord still gets to decide on the facts of each request, but the decision has to be reasonable and it has to follow a process.
A pet here means an animal kept for ordinary domestic reasons. A dog or a cat is the obvious case. The point of the rules is to stop refusals that are reflexive rather than reasoned.
Does the tenant have to ask, and how?
Yes. The right is a right to request, not a right to simply move a pet in. The tenant must make the request in writing, and the request should identify the pet so the landlord can assess it properly. A request for “a medium-sized dog” gives the landlord something to weigh. “A pet” on its own does not.
If the landlord reasonably needs more information to decide, they can ask for it. A common example is wanting to know the breed or size of a dog, or whether a flat with no outdoor access suits the animal.
How long does a landlord have to respond?
Where the landlord reasonably asks for further information within the original 28 days, the response deadline may be extended until 7 days after the tenant provides that information, if that is later than the original deadline. If the tenant does not provide the information, the landlord does not have to give or refuse consent. Where superior landlord consent is needed, the landlord may delay the decision until seven days after the superior landlord gives or refuses consent, provided the landlord asked the superior landlord within the original 28 days. The landlord and tenant can also agree a later date.
The single most important point: if the landlord does not respond in time, silence is treated as consent. A landlord who ignores a request has, in effect, agreed to the pet. This is why a diary note on the response deadline matters as much as the decision itself.
When can a landlord reasonably refuse a pet?
When there is a genuine, property-specific reason. The test is reasonableness, judged on the particular pet and the particular property, not on a general dislike of animals.
Reasonable grounds include:
- A superior lease or head lease that forbids pets, so the landlord cannot lawfully consent.
- The pet being unsuitable for the property, such as a large dog in a small flat with no outside space.
- The property being a house in multiple occupation (an HMO, where unrelated people share facilities), where another occupier’s circumstances are relevant.
- Genuine animal welfare concerns, where the home could not provide a suitable environment for that animal.
The table below sets out the line between a refusal that is likely to hold and one that is not. Treat it as a guide, not a ruling. Whether a refusal is reasonable ultimately depends on the facts. If the tenant challenges the refusal, GOV.UK points to the landlord’s complaint process or court proceedings. Deposit scheme adjudication is more relevant later, where the dispute is about pet damage or deposit deductions.
Reasonable refusal versus unreasonable refusal
Situation
Ask yourself
Likely outcome
Simple classification
What supports the decision
The superior lease or head lease prohibits pets, and the freeholder will not give permission
Would allowing the pet place the landlord in breach of a superior lease?
Refusal is likely to be reasonable
Lease restriction
The wording of the lease and written confirmation that consent has been refused.
A large or highly active dog is requested for a very small property with no suitable space
Is the property genuinely unsuitable for this particular animal’s size and needs?
Refusal may be reasonable
Property unsuitable
Property size, layout, outdoor access and reliable information about the animal.
There is a genuine animal welfare concern because the home cannot reasonably meet the pet’s needs
Could the animal be kept safely and appropriately in this property?
Refusal may be reasonable
Welfare concern
The type, size and needs of the pet, together with the property’s layout and facilities.
The property is shared and another occupier has a relevant allergy, safety concern or other evidenced need
Would the pet materially affect another occupier’s health, safety or reasonable use of the home?
Refusal may be reasonable
Shared home concern
Evidence of the allergy or concern, the shared layout and whether reasonable alternatives exist.
The animal is prohibited or restricted by law and the legal requirements cannot be met
Can this animal lawfully be kept at the property under the applicable rules?
Refusal is likely to be reasonable
Legal restriction
The relevant legal restrictions, licensing requirements and property circumstances.
The tenancy contains a blanket “no pets” clause, but no case specific reason is given
Has the landlord considered this particular pet and property individually?
Refusal is likely to be unreasonable
Blanket refusal
The written refusal and whether it identifies a fair, specific reason.
The landlord refuses every dog regardless of its size, behaviour or the suitability of the property
Was the request assessed on its own facts?
Refusal is likely to be unreasonable
Automatic policy
The landlord’s stated policy and the absence of an individual assessment.
The landlord refers only to a general fear of mess, smell or future damage
Is there a specific risk connected to this pet, rather than a general assumption about animals?
Refusal is likely to be unreasonable
General concern
Any evidence of an actual risk, the pet’s history and the tenant’s proposal for managing it.
The landlord refuses because they personally dislike cats, dogs or pets generally
Is the decision based on the property and the animal, or simply personal preference?
Refusal is likely to be unreasonable
Personal preference
The reason stated in the written refusal.
The landlord does not reply within the required period
Has the landlord responded in writing within 28 days, subject to any permitted extension for further information?
This is not automatic consent, but the landlord may have failed to follow the legal process
Failure to respond
The date of the tenant’s written request, any request for additional information and the date of the response.
Can a landlord require pet insurance, a pet deposit or extra rent?
No, and this is where a lot of published guidance is wrong. The original Bill would have let landlords require tenants to hold pet damage insurance, or to reimburse the landlord’s premium. That clause was removed at Report Stage and is not in the final Renters’ Rights Act 2025. On the current enacted position, a landlord should not make pet insurance a condition of consent, because pet insurance is not listed as a permitted payment under the Tenant Fees Act framework. Charging for it would breach the Tenant Fees Act 2019, which bans most payments beyond rent and a capped deposit.
The same logic applies to a separate “pet deposit” or a pet rent top-up that pushes the deposit or fees beyond what the Tenant Fees Act 2019 allows. The deposit cap (generally five weeks’ rent where annual rent is under £50,000) does not get a pet exemption.
So how does a landlord cover the risk of pet damage? The same way they cover any other damage. Damage caused by a pet is dealt with at check-out, assessed against the inventory, and recovered from the tenancy deposit. Where damage exceeds the deposit, the landlord can pursue the tenant directly or claim on their own landlord insurance. This is exactly why a clear, well-evidenced inventory matters more than ever once pets are in the picture. A scratched skirting board or a stained carpet is far easier to charge for when the check-in record shows the condition before the pet arrived.
What good practice helps both sides?
This is good practice, not a legal requirement, and the distinction matters. The law sets the request process and the reasonableness test. It does not dictate the rest.
For tenants, responsible ownership is the strongest argument for consent. Offering details of the animal, agreeing to a sensible pet clause in writing, and keeping the property clean all make a refusal harder to justify and a renewal easier to secure.
For landlords, a documented decision is your protection. Reply in writing, on time, with your reason stated plainly. If you refuse, say which ground you are relying on. A refusal recorded as “the head lease at clause 4.2 prohibits animals and the freeholder declined consent” is defensible. “No” is not.
What should you do next?
If you are a landlord, put the 28-day response deadline in your diary the moment a written pet request arrives, and reply in writing with a reason whether you agree or refuse. If you are a tenant, make your request in writing and describe the pet. Either way, lean on a thorough check-in inventory, because that is what settles any pet-damage dispute at the end of the tenancy.
This is general information, not legal advice for your situation. For a contested refusal or a complex lease, take advice from a qualified housing solicitor or your professional body.
Sources:
- section 11, Renters’ Rights Act 2025 (inserting sections 16A and 16B, Housing Act 1988): legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/…
- Renters’ Rights Act: an overview for landlords, GOV.UK: gov.uk/guidance/…
- Assured tenancy agreements, a guide for landlords: if a tenant wants a pet, GOV.UK: gov.uk/assured-tenancy-agreements-a-guide-for-landlords/…
