Very worried about 'pets' in reform bill

Campaigning and Policy

Hello all and NRLA team, I'm very worried about and dead against this forcing of pets on us landords. My first experience of pet damage came right after the deposit cap. I was faced with £3000 worth of damage, well over the deposit, and the hassle of organising and overseeing the repair works/buying new furniture etc. Then, as I advertised for new tenants, these all asked if the house had been pet-free. Having to honestly say 'no' made it harder to find tenants. So many want 'pet free'. Government ideas about reform are giving excessive rights to tenants for OUR properties. There is nothing about BAD TENANTS. I only have one rental property, it was bought with pooled family savings to pay for my parents elderly care needs. The rent means we are not straining the NHS or benefits. Yet government is forcing me to accept pet damage and its hassle. We own our properties, we have a right to not want pet damage.
NRLA - you say you are negotiating for tenants to have to take out pet damage insurance...but what about the nuances? For example, who chooses the insurance policy/package? Tenants are going to choose cheapest options. And insurance companies only have 2 goals - sell insurance, then find every reason not to pay out. So the onus of proof - the hassle - will again fall on landlords, with no certainty of damages being paid for. We own our properties, we should have the right to say no to pets. Why is government invading & eroding the basic principles of being the owner. Government is beginning to own us now. Say no to pets, NRLA. I am sick and tired of tenants who think they have every right to do whatever they want in a property THEY DO NOT OWN.