Independent report

Animal Sentience Committee: Renters (Reform) Bill report

Updated 9 February 2024

The purpose of this report is to record the Animal Sentience Committee’s views as to whether, or to what extent the government is having, or has had, all due regard to the welfare of animals as sentient beings.

The policy

The Renters (Reform) Bill legislates for reforms set out in the private rented sector white paper published in June 2022. Its intention is to bring in a better deal for renters, including abolishing ‘no fault’ evictions and reforming landlord possession grounds. The policy has been developed by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

During the bill’s second reading on 23 October 2023, it was announced that abolishing ‘no fault’ evictions would be delayed, and further amendments are possible as the bill progresses. The bill was mentioned in the King’s speech on 7 November 2023.  The relevance of the policy for animal welfare relates to the section on renting with pets.

Implications of the policy

The bill gives tenants the right to request to keep a pet and the landlord cannot unreasonably refuse this request. If this leads to an increase in the number of properties willing to accept pets in the private rented sector there could be positive benefits for some sentient animals.

Poor animal welfare can arise in the private rented sector when tenants cannot find accommodation where they can keep their existing pets. These animals may be euthanised, abandoned, given away to friends or family, or taken to an animal rescue shelter for re-homing, causing stress, disruption and the severing of stable relationships.  Some tenants may instead choose unsuitable accommodation or even homelessness to maintain their relationship with their pet, but compromising animal welfare in other ways (for example cramped, cold or damp).

However, because the bill only provides a tenant with the right to request to keep a pet once the tenancy is established, and not at the point of negotiating a tenancy, the potential benefits for animal welfare are greatly reduced. Tenants may have to make temporary arrangements for existing pets before starting a tenancy in the hope that their landlord will subsequently agree that their pet can join them. The bill does not require landlords to give a reason if they choose not to let to prospective tenants with pets. The policy development team stated that landlords would be encouraged to consider each application on a case-by-case basis but the mechanism by which this could happen is not clear.

Overall, the bill favours the acquisition of new pets over the welfare of existing pets. In some cases, a tenant may have to give up an existing pet but could later request a new one once a tenancy has been agreed. This could add to the number of animals that are abandoned or re-homed and to the size of the UK pet population, raising resource concerns.

Evidence collected by the policy team

Responding to the ASC, the policy development team stated that officials have considered the detail of the policy over many months and that they have engaged a range of stakeholders including tenant and landlord groups as well as animal or pet organisations who had established prior relationships with the team such as Dogs Trust and Battersea. The policy development team considered that these organisations are supportive of the policy, noting that they had previously lobbied government to ensure there are more pet-friendly properties available in the private rented sector.

Implementation of the policy

The policy development team informed the ASC that the same rules will apply to tenants keeping pets as any other person. Because animal welfare is covered in separate legislation it is not mentioned explicitly in the bill.

The policy development team stated there is an intention to provide guidance to support landlords to determine how to make a reasonable decision after receiving a tenant’s request to keep a pet. Animal welfare considerations may be one factor in this determination.

The Committee’s views

The ASC considers that the government took positive steps to engage with animal welfare organisations with a focus on dogs and cats in developing this policy but consultation around the welfare implications for other species did not take place. Many species are kept as pets (including rats, mice, rabbits, guinea-pigs, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish). The ASC considers it is appropriate to refer to current legislation covering the welfare of vertebrate animals kept as pets when providing guidance to landlords.

The ASC notes that there is no current legislation covering the welfare of sentient invertebrates that might be kept as pets.

The ASC was informed that the bill should help to reduce the number of pets being given up when tenants cannot find a property. However, there is a mismatch between this aspiration and the provisions of the bill. Specifically, if prospective tenants enter into a tenancy, they are obliged to wait up to 42+7 days from requesting permission to keep a pet until receiving a response from the landlord. This would mean that they either keep any existing pet under the new tenancy initially without permission or they have to make alternative arrangements for their pet which would have animal welfare implications (for example stress). If the landlord refuses the request, then there results a potentially difficult situation with a number of possible outcomes including a period of arbitration, a requirement to rehome the pet, a requirement to give up the tenancy (possibly with a penalty for breach of tenancy contract etc).

The bill refers to the right to request permission to keep “a pet”.  The ASC was informed that the intention of the legislation is for tenants to be able to request to keep more than one pet per tenanted household. The view of the ASC is that group housing of social species is essential for good welfare and that clarity on this point is needed in guidance documentation.

The ASC is aware that the impact assessment indicates that the bill may add significantly to the pet population. The impact assessment guestimates that 40% of tenants may request permission to keep a pet of which one-third will be successful. A consequence of the bill is therefore a possible increase in the pet population. With 4.6 million private rented sector (PRS) households in England this increase is potentially 0.6 million pets over the period of the assessment. The ASC considers that all due regard should be given to this issue as there are possible implications of an increase in the pet population in relation to the resources available to support animal health and welfare, such as the current pressures on the RSPCA, local authority welfare inspectors and animal rescue centres.

Committee recommendations

The ASC recommends that when drawing up guidance for landlords on what might be considered reasonable in terms of animal welfare, the government should liaise with a wider range of animal welfare organisations to ensure the needs of all pets (not only dogs and cats) are considered.

The ASC recommends that it is made clear in guidance documentation that the bill permits tenants to request more than one pet. This will be necessary to ensure the welfare of certain social animals.

The ASC recommends that the welfare needs of existing pets are considered further, particularly the need to avoid disruption and the risk of re-homing at the start of a tenancy.

The ASC recommends that further consultation is undertaken with stakeholders such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), local authority welfare inspectors and animal rescue and rehoming centres regarding the resource implications of the likely increase (and timing of increase) in the pet population as a result of the bill.

The ASC recommends that the Ombudsman redress scheme incorporates training for the Ombudsman in the welfare needs of pet animals. Claims about animal welfare are likely to feature in disputes about whether landlords reasonably or unreasonably refuse tenants’ requests to keep a pet.

Concluding remarks

The ASC found that the policy team engaged in active and constructive dialogue about the animal welfare implications of the bill. Of necessity, given the recent establishment of the ASC, this came at a late stage in policy development. Both the ASC and the policy development team felt that earlier engagement in future policy developments would be helpful.

Governance

The Animal Sentience Committee members who were responsible for developing this report are:

• Professor Christine Nicol
• Professor Richard Bennett

This report was produced in January 2024.

Read more about the Animal Sentience Committee.