Government announces pet bond policy for renters

Ladyhawke Bishop contributes to the policy unveiling. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone.

The government has announced a two-week pet bond and obligations for tenants to pay for damage their animals cause in a bid to make renting with an animal easier.

It intends changing the Residential Tenancies Act next month in a bid to give pet owners more choice when trying to find a rental.

Housing Minister Chris Bishop and his dog, Ladyhawke, made the announcement alongside ACT leader and Regulations Minister David Seymour.

The changes:

  • Introducing a pet bond (a maximum of two weeks' rent) that can be charged in addition to the existing bond
  • Making tenants liable for all pet damage to properties beyond fair wear and tear, whether accidental or deliberate
  • Requiring tenants can only have a pet or pets with the landlord's consent. The landlord can withhold consent on reasonable grounds.

"Pets are important members of many Kiwi families. It's estimated that around 64 per cent of New Zealand households own at least one pet, and 59 per cent of people who don't have a pet would like to get one," Chris says.

"Anyone who has ever tried to find a pet-friendly rental property will know how hard it is, so we're going to make it easier."

David says the policy would fix the problem of tenants being locked out of rental markets due to landlords not being willing to take a risk on tenants with pets.

Chris Bishop and David Seymour make the announcement. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone.

He was confident tenants wouldn't mind paying extra (set at a maximum of two weeks' rent) if it meant their pet could move in too.

"More landlords would be willing to allow pets if they could protect themselves from some of the risks."

He says the move would also be important for helping domestic abuse victims who were often trapped in violent relationships in part to protect animals.

"Helping these people find rentals that are accepting of pets will allow them to move on safely and have a brighter future."

The government intends introducing a bill amendmening current laws in May.

Media were invited to the announcement with a note "Ladyhawke Chris, Minister of Snuggles" would be attending with "some colleagues".

Ladyhawke, a Samoyed, also interjected several times during the press conference as Chris was speaking.

ACT proposed the policy during the election campaign alongside other tenancy changes, saying it would allow "genuine negotiation" between landlords and tenants and increase the number of rentals allowing pets.

The party secured it in the coalition agreement with National.

- RNZ

4 comments

Does this Gment

Posted on 15-04-2024 20:08 | By The Caveman

REALLY think that I am going to take on tenants in my block of 12 ONE bedroom apartments over THREE stories, that want cats, dogs, ETC???

NAH not going to happen - I look after ALL tenants - and the SMELL of "pets" that effects the building is NOT what I will accept - AND my current tenants are aware of it in - in their tenancy agreements - AND are more than happy with the condition - NO PETS - cats / dogs!! And it will stay this way !!


About Time

Posted on 16-04-2024 06:57 | By Thats Nice

We had a young family renting our house years ago and the children drew on the walls and the carpet had all sorts of things staining it. I would much rather rent to a pet owner than to a young family.


@Caveman

Posted on 17-04-2024 14:04 | By morepork

This is well-meaning (but very wrong) legislation. If they make it law, you will not be able to veto pets. So, what do you do? Take your rental property off the market? Maybe change the use of your apartments from residential to commercial? There is nothing wrong with renters being required to take responsibility for damage caused by their pets (the animals can't do that...) but the fundamental principle has to remain: The owner of the property decides who or what will be accepted in their property.


Reasonable grounds?

Posted on 17-04-2024 14:16 | By morepork

Who deides what these "reasonable grounds " for a landlord vetoing pets would be? Caveman has already made HIS position clear. Is it "unreasonable"? Maybe, or maybe not. Who decides? The problem here is not the intention of the new laws, it is the lack of thinking through the problem. There are many cases where pets live without problem in rented accommodation. (My next door neighbours, on both sides, have pets that cause no problems for me. I don't have pets because there are already enough animals in the neighbourhood, but that is my choice and a different matter.) Both of the neighbouring landlords are decent people and agree to pets. The tenants are responsible people also, so all is well. Can legislation improve this? I don't think so.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.