Pets and rental property is one of the most talked about parts of the Renters’ Rights Act, and for many landlords it raises immediate concerns. Will landlords still be able to refuse a pet, what if the property is not suitable, and what about damage, complaints, or lease restrictions? These are all reasonable questions. The important point is this: the Act does not remove landlord input, but it does require pet requests to be handled in a more structured and reasonable way. The new tenancy regime, including the pet request provisions, is due to take effect from 1 May 2026 in England. (Legislation.gov.uk)
For landlords across Derbyshire and Staffordshire, that matters in practical day to day management. A casual or automatic refusal is much harder to rely on. Landlords need a clear process, a prompt written response, and a sensible way to assess each request on its own facts. That practical approach also reflects the tone and structure of your original draft.
The Act says tenants can ask to keep a pet
Under the Act, it is an implied term of an assured tenancy that a tenant may keep a pet if the tenant asks in line with the statutory process and the landlord consents. The key legal point is that consent must not be unreasonably refused. That is the real shift here. It is not about landlords losing control. It is about landlords needing to consider requests properly and reply within the statutory framework. (Legislation.gov.uk)
For landlords, that means pet decisions cannot be dealt with casually. Even where the answer is no, the decision still needs to be considered properly and communicated clearly. That was one of the strongest points in your original version, and it still sits at the heart of the blog.
This is not a free for all
It is important not to overstate the position.
The Act does not mean that every tenant can keep any pet in any property. Landlords can still take sensible account of the actual property and the actual circumstances. The legal test is reasonableness, not automatic approval. The Act also sets out examples where refusal can be reasonable, including where keeping the pet would put the landlord in breach of an agreement with a superior landlord, or where superior landlord consent is needed and reasonable steps have been taken to obtain it but consent is not given. (Legislation.gov.uk)
That can include matters such as:
- the size and nature of the property
- restrictions in a superior lease
- practical suitability
- genuine risk of damage or nuisance
- the need to assess the actual pet, not just pets in general
The key point is that landlords need to deal with the request reasonably, rather than relying on an automatic refusal. That remains exactly the right practical message for landlords.
A default no pets position is much harder to rely on
For many landlords, a simple no pets rule has been the easiest approach in the past.
The Act changes that position. A blanket refusal is much harder to justify where the law requires a written request to be considered and says consent must not be unreasonably refused. In other words, the safest approach is no longer a rigid default. The safer approach is a case by case decision, based on the actual property and the actual request. (Legislation.gov.uk)
That matters because landlords may still decide that a particular request is not suitable. However, they should be able to explain why. A clear written reason will usually be much stronger than a broad policy line with no proper consideration behind it.
Timing matters as much as the decision
Timing is an important practical point.
The Act says the landlord must give or refuse consent in writing on or before the 28th day after the date of the request, unless the Act allows more time. There can be extra time where the landlord reasonably asks for further information about the pet, where superior landlord consent is needed and sought in time, or where the landlord and tenant agree a later date. (Legislation.gov.uk)
So the message for landlords and agents is simple. Pet requests should not be left sitting unanswered.
In a more structured system, delay can create just as much difficulty as the substance of the decision itself. This is where a clear management process becomes very important. That practical point from your original draft is still absolutely right.
A sensible way to handle a pet request
A practical process could look like this:
- record the date the written request was received
- review the property and tenancy position straight away
- check whether a superior lease affects the position
- ask for further information promptly if needed
- diarise the response deadline
- reply in writing with clear reasons
- keep a note of the decision on file
That does not need to be complicated. It does, however, need to be consistent.
Insurance and property protection still matter
Landlords are right to think about protecting their property.
The issue here is not whether landlords can think about risk. Of course they can. The issue is how that risk is handled. A sensible landlord will want to think about the nature of the pet, the layout of the property, any lease restrictions, and whether there is a realistic chance of damage or nuisance. The Act does not remove that judgement. It requires that judgement to be exercised reasonably. (Legislation.gov.uk)
So the right question is not simply yes or no. It is:
- what is the request
- what are the actual risks in this property
- can those risks be managed
- what is a reasonable response
That is a much stronger way to approach the issue than relying on old assumptions.
What landlords should do now
This is a good time to review:
- tenancy wording dealing with pets
- how pet requests will be handled
- whether landlord instructions are too rigid
- lease restrictions
- record keeping around requests and responses
Landlords do not need to be alarmed by this area, but they do need a clear and consistent approach. That line from the original version is worth keeping, because it says exactly what most landlords need to hear.
The government’s implementation roadmap makes clear that landlords and letting agents should use this period to prepare for the first phase of the reforms, which comes into force on 1 May 2026. That phase includes the requirement for landlords to consider tenant requests to rent with a pet. (GOV.UK)
How Scoffield Stone is responding
At Scoffield Stone, we are reviewing how pet requests should be managed in practice under the new framework.
That means helping landlords look at each case properly, respond clearly, protect the property, and avoid unnecessary risk through poor handling or vague decision making. That practical support was a strong part of the original blog, and it still fits well here.
FAQ
Can landlords still refuse a pet request?
Yes, in some cases. However, the refusal must be reasonable and should relate to the actual property and circumstances. (Legislation.gov.uk)
Does the Act give tenants an automatic right to keep a pet?
No. The Act gives tenants a statutory route to ask, and says consent must not be unreasonably refused. (Legislation.gov.uk)
Is there always a strict 28 day deadline?
The starting point is yes, but the Act allows more time in certain situations, for example if further information is requested in time, or if superior landlord consent is needed. (Legislation.gov.uk)
Can a court do anything if a landlord unreasonably refuses?
Yes. The Act says the court may order specific performance where a tenant alleges that the landlord has breached the implied term. (Legislation.gov.uk)
Final thoughts
Pets are now a more structured issue for landlords, but not an unmanageable one.
The most important thing is not to rely on old assumptions. Landlords who deal with pet requests reasonably, consistently, and with proper process behind them will be in a much stronger position. That conclusion from your original draft still works very well, because it is balanced, practical, and easy for landlords to act on.
If you would like practical guidance on pet requests, tenancy wording, or how best to manage this issue, contact Scoffield Stone.