The Renters' Rights Act 2025 abolished blanket "no pets" clauses in residential tenancy agreements from 1 May 2026. Landlords can no longer prevent tenants from keeping pets through a standard contractual prohibition. Instead, the Act grants every tenant in a periodic assured tenancy a statutory right to request a pet — and creates a specific legal process that landlords must follow when responding to that request.
Statutory pet request right — active from 1 May 2026The important clarification is what this right is and is not. Tenants do not have an automatic right to keep a pet. They have a right to a fair and timely process — to make a written request and receive a substantiated response within a defined window. Landlords retain the ability to refuse, but refusal must be on documented reasonable grounds. Refusal based on general preference, anticipated wear and tear, or policy is no longer a lawful basis.
What Does the 28-Day Response Process Require?
The timeline is fixed by statute. When a tenant submits a written pet request describing the animal (species, breed, age, approximate size), the landlord must respond in writing with consent or refusal by the 28th day from the date of the request. If the landlord needs further information before deciding (veterinary records, a previous landlord reference, clarification on the animal's circumstances), that request must be made within the initial twenty-eight days. Once the tenant provides the requested information, the landlord then has a further seven days to issue the final decision.
| Stage | Deadline | What Happens |
|---|---|---|
| Tenant submits written request | Day 0 | Request must be in writing and describe the animal |
| Landlord requests further information | By day 28 | Only if genuinely needed — e.g. vet records, previous landlord reference |
| Landlord issues consent or refusal | By day 28 (or 7 days after info received) | Decision must be in writing with reasons if refusing |
| Superior landlord consent required | Seek within 28 days; respond 7 days after freeholder replies | Leaseholder landlords must actively seek consent — cannot simply cite delay |
Failure to respond within the required window is treated as consent — not as a refusal. A landlord who does not respond within 28 days is deemed to have agreed to the pet. This makes prompt action essential: a landlord who needs to refuse must do so in writing within the deadline.
No response within the statutory window is automatically treated as consent to the pet request. If a landlord intends to refuse, that refusal must be communicated in writing with documented reasons before the 28-day deadline expires. Landlords who receive a pet request must action it immediately, not when it is convenient.
Tenants who believe a refusal is unreasonable can challenge it in court. When the PRS Landlord Ombudsman launches in 2028, tenants will also be able to escalate there — and as the Ombudsman will be free to use, that route is likely to become the most common challenge mechanism once it is available.
What Constitutes a Reasonable Refusal?
The Act does not provide an exhaustive list of reasonable grounds, but 2026 guidance makes the distinction reasonably clear. A refusal based on the unsuitability of the specific property for the specific animal is likely to be treated as reasonable: a large breed dog in a studio flat with no outdoor space, a cat in a property where a co-occupant has a documented severe allergy, or an exotic animal whose welfare needs cannot be met in the property. A refusal based on a head lease that explicitly prohibits animals, combined with evidence that the landlord genuinely sought and was denied consent from the freeholder, is also defensible.
What is no longer a lawful basis for refusal: a general "no pets" policy; anticipated wear and tear or damage (the general risk of mess, scratched floors, or odour); concerns about future re-letting difficulty; or personal dislike of animals. These were common grounds for refusal under the old regime. Under the current framework, they are not.
How Are Financial Protections Preserved?
The financial protection architecture for landlords has been preserved and includes one specific protection that was debated heavily during the Act's passage. As a condition of granting consent to a pet, a landlord can require the tenant to obtain and maintain pet damage insurance. This must be a genuine insurance product — the landlord cannot impose an arbitrary financial surcharge dressed up as an insurance requirement — but requiring documented coverage is a lawful condition of consent.
The security deposit remains the primary protection for damage that insurance does not cover. The standard five-week cap applies regardless of whether a pet is present — landlords cannot charge a separate "pet deposit" on top of the security deposit. However, a claim against the deposit for damage beyond fair wear and tear caused by a pet is valid, provided the landlord can evidence the pre-existing condition through a signed inventory with photographs. Damage that cannot be evidenced against a clear baseline condition cannot be claimed, with or without a pet.
Landlords can legitimately negotiate a slightly higher monthly rent at the point a new tenancy begins — before the tenancy starts, not after a pet request arrives during the tenancy. Increasing rent in response to a pet request mid-tenancy is not permissible under the Tenant Fees Act framework. The time to discuss rent level is before the Written Statement of Terms is signed, not as a condition of consenting to a request.
This article reflects our understanding of the law at the time of publication. It is for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify against GOV.UK or seek qualified legal advice before acting.
