Renting with animals - why is it almost impossible?

Priapus said:
"NO PETS" Singular.
Click to expand...
Pets is clearly a plural... :P

However, assuming it's a reasonable sized property for the amount of pets, could you not express interest and ask to meet or speak with the landlord? - Offer some additional deposit or otherwise assure them that you won't leave them on the hook for any damage? I get the reasons against, but would have thought there'd be a way past it.

(pre-edit: typed this before realising there was another page!)
 
Last edited:
As is so often the case a small number of inconsiderate owners ruin it for everyone. I've a couple of relatives who rent properties on Facebook who've posted pictures after bad renters so I can quite see why though - the state one with several pets left the place in was horrendous enough in pictures never mine what it was probably like in person.
 
Rroff said:
As is so often the case a small number of inconsiderate owners ruin it for everyone. I've a couple of relatives who rent properties on Facebook who've posted pictures after bad renters so I can quite see why though - the state one with several pets left the place in was horrendous enough in pictures never mine what it was probably like in person.
Click to expand...
People that keep tidy houses keep tidy houses. Wether they have two cats or three dogs doesn't change that. It does, however, make it significantly worse when someone is untidy.

My old man was a tradie and I used to go on jobs with him when I was in my teens. You wouldn't believe how untidy people can be. Moch budr.
 
Jumper118 said:
You can, it's not easy and it takes a long time to save up but you can. The main problem is the cheap houses are where nobody wants to live and people want more house than they can afford in locations they can't afford.

On the minimum wagie you can buy a £100k house with a 10% deposit. You only need to save £8k in a LISA to get £10k then the £90k mortgage would be :D under 4x your salary. You could save £134 over 5 years to get that amount or half over 10 years. There are £100k houses up norf is bad areas, some are even cheaper, but of course, nobody wants to live there. Once you're on a £30k+ or the median average for an area, maybe £120-140k house is possible in a similar time frame and at that price range you can start to get a bad house in a decentish area, or a decent house in a not so great area.
Click to expand...

That’s my other main issue - how much house prices vary around the country for exactly the same design. I live on the outskirts of Cheltenham but go towards the city itself and my house would easily double in price.

There have also been times where prices were going up faster than what I was being paid each month, so saving for one was almost pointless. I was lucky in that I had military accommodation for the years before I bought a house and I could use the Forces Help to Buy scheme - without those two factors it would have been a nightmare.

Quartz said:
Come to Aberdeen.
Click to expand...

I’d rather not - I grew up in Elgin and did my first tour at Kinloss :D
 
The only thing worse than an OP who is clearly, demonstrably wrong is an OP who also then acknowledges his position and takes on board some criticism but is still mostly wrong but gives you that kernel of doubt that maybe ... no, he is wrong. He must be.

FOUR DOGS, JEREMY?!

That's insane.
 
Last edited:
cheesyboy said:
What you've highlighted here is the exact net-negative that landlording gives to society.

The rights of a huge swathe of the population, the renting class, has their personal freedoms limited, in ways the home owner class are not, on the arbitrary whims of property holders.

And against this societal 'bad', what is the 'good' of landlording to society? There is literally none.
Click to expand...
If you don't want to be in the 'renter class' then buy a house!
 
VRDoctor said:
If you don't want to be in the 'renter class' then buy a house!
Click to expand...
The fun thing here is that landlording makes that much harder by adding demand to the housing market (putting up prices), and the higher property prices then push up rental prices (a substitute good), which makes it harder for renters to transfer to being home owners.

And the upward pressure landlords put on prices attracts more landlords. And landlords are more often cash buyers (boomers cashing in their pension tax free lump sum are regular culprits), which makes it even harder for owner-occupiers to get on the housing ladder.

Fwiw, I own a home, I've not got ulterior motive here, I just hate on landlords for the love of the game.
 
Last edited:
Penfold101 said:
Legally different categories, but my dog is a part of the family the same as my child is and will be with us till she dies.
Click to expand...

"Legally different categories"....ok....but in reality even to you it's more then that.....which do you save if you only have time to save one from falling off a cliff? Assuming the child....so then do the next test, if the dog is easier to save first but it adds 10% extra risk to your childs safety do you save the dog first......?

One more step...if your dog and another person's child run out in front of your car you can steer away from one but into the other which do you choose?

Clearly it's not the same and it's not about legal category.... Your just upset that other people don't care about your pets...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom