Pets charity AdvoCATS has spoken out after the House of Lords amended the Renters’ Rights Bill so tenants will have to pay an additional three-week deposit instead of taking out insurance.
The charity said the Lords’ reasonings for the change was baffling – as the move to scrap pet damage insurance was firstly blamed on affordability, and secondly on the market not being ready for such policies “at scale”.
Jen Berezai, founder of AdvoCATS, said: “Let’s debunk that second reason straight away.
“No one within the specialist insurance market inside the private rental sector was consulted about their readiness.
“There are products in development now, both for landlords and for tenants. The bill’s implementation period would have allowed for further policies to be brought to market.
“There’s been a lot of behind-the-scenes preparation by the industry in anticipation of the Renters Rights Bill becoming law, and this last-minute amendment has left them, and us, stupefied.”
Berezai estimated that pet damage insurance for tenants starts at £2 a month for £3,000 worth of cover, with a landlord policy costing the same for £5,000 of cover.
As such, the affordability argument doesn’t make much sense.
The second amendment voted on by the peers – to introduce a separate pet deposit of three weeks’ rent – is far more costly for tenants than taking out insurance.
Berezai added: “This is nonsensical. The average rent in England is £270 a week, which means pet owning tenants would need to find around £810 extra deposit up front, a huge additional expense.
“It’s also geographically disproportionate, why should someone, in say the Home Counties, have to pay significantly more pet deposit than someone here in the East Midlands? Rent itself is subject to market forces, a pet deposit shouldn’t be.”
While the insurance amendment was proposed by the government, the introduction of a pet deposit came from the Lords.
As such, Berezai said there’s a hope it won’t go through both chambers, while the government has stated the insurance issue will be kept under review.
Berezai acknowledges “that’s one glimmer of hope on the horizon”.
She said: “Damage insurance is favoured by landlords and tenants alike, giving the former more financial cover and being financially viable for the latter.
“We can only hope common sense will ultimately prevail.”