Renters’ Rights Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Howard of Rising
Main Page: Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Howard of Rising's debates with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
(2 days ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I support Amendment 53A in the name of the noble Lord, Lord de Clifford, spoken to so ably by the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull.
While there is considerable improvement in the present five-week deposit limit, there will still be a good number of cases where the damage by pets is more than the cost of the remedial work that needs to be done. For the first time ever, I have just refused a tenancy on the ground that the pets would be inappropriate. The proposed tenants wanted to have three Newfoundland dogs in a two-bedroom property. In Committee, the Minister said that the Bill already permits landlords to refuse their consent on reasonable grounds which are best judged on a case-by-case basis. Would my refusal to have three Newfoundland dogs in a small two-bedroom cottage be reasonable? I doubt that even an eight-week deposit would cover the potential damage, and the present five-week deposit would be nowhere near adequate.