Pets in Flats..?

[wrighty]

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

I can assure you it's not. Maybe the dont like the taste of the Jack Russell's blood or maybe the short coat stops them proliferating. I am not sure what the science is but i can tell you our Jack Russell has never had fleas and the bloody cockapoo can be riddled with them.

I'd have guessed the opposite with those dogs.  The woolly coat that comes from the poodle part of the genome tends to be non-attractive to fleas.  My other half has had labradoodles with no fleas, despite my cats getting them occasionally.  They will pick up ticks however 😃

[finlo]

13 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I'd have guessed the opposite with those dogs.  The woolly coat that comes from the poodle part of the genome tends to be non-attractive to fleas.  My other half has had labradoodles with no fleas, despite my cats getting them occasionally.  They will pick up ticks however 😃

Isn't that because cat and dog flea's differ? Although I'd imagine most aren't overly fussy.

[2112]

3 hours ago, HeliX said:

Ours came free with some when we picked her up from the breeder.

Responsible people check the breeder credentials (which I’m sure you have) but afterwards applied topical flea treatment to your animal. Normal common sense. 

[Happier diner]

23 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I'd have guessed the opposite with those dogs.  The woolly coat that comes from the poodle part of the genome tends to be non-attractive to fleas.  My other half has had labradoodles with no fleas, despite my cats getting them occasionally.  They will pick up ticks however 😃

It remains a mystery. I could only find this and its certainly not a scholarly article

https://www.weare-family.com/en-ZA/why-some-dogs-are-more-attractive-to-fleas-than-others/#:~:text=Although all dogs are at,are more likely to thrive.

I can only recount our own experience. I once spotted a flea on the Jack Russell during a time when the cockapoo was riddled with them. So clearly they were keen to give the Jack Russell a go. We shaved off all the hair off the cockapoo (I mean so it was like a piglet) and treated it with the usual spot on. The fleas eventually vanished as they didn't like the bald dog. I checked the Jack Russell daily and never found another and have never found one to this day.

[2112]

2 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

Did the landlord not have a clause covering damages beyond general wear and tear? If so why did then not pass the costs back to the tenant rather than incur the costs themselves?

Every property I have rented has had a similar clause and inspections were completed prior to me moving in and on the day I left.  I had the opportunity to challenge points on both those inspections if necessary.  It seems to me that some landlords simply don't bother with these precautions and checks. 

Landlords get a pasting because people think they are fair game and they can afford. People should be eternally grateful if a landlord allows pets and do their best to ensure that they keep the pet from from fleas and take it out to do its business. Sadly some tenants think they have self entitlement, and if they can’t get their own way, it’s whinge to the politicos, they are hard done to.

[manxman1980]

2 minutes ago, 2112 said:

Landlords get a pasting because people think they are fair game and they can afford. People should be eternally grateful if a landlord allows pets and do their best to ensure that they keep the pet from from fleas and take it out to do its business. Sadly some tenants think they have self entitlement, and if they can’t get their own way, it’s whinge to the politicos, they are hard done to.

Which is why I was suggesting that landlords who allow pets have a clause in the agreement that would offer them protection from those who are not responsible.

If I was in a position to rent a property that is the approach I would take or if that was not an option I would add a surcharge for having pets.  I would also want to know that the pet owners were responsible pet owners if that I was something I could establish. 

 

[thommo2010]

If someone is renting out their property then surely they should be allowed to decide who or what they want in the property. 

[Happier diner]

40 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Which is why I was suggesting that landlords who allow pets have a clause in the agreement that would offer them protection from those who are not responsible.

If I was in a position to rent a property that is the approach I would take or if that was not an option I would add a surcharge for having pets.  I would also want to know that the pet owners were responsible pet owners if that I was something I could establish. 

 

Its normal to make a surcharge

26 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

If someone is renting out their property then surely they should be allowed to decide who or what they want in the property. 

They can.

[The Central Scrutiniser]

My missus owns a couple of rental properties. A town house & dormer bungalow. The town house was recently vacated by a family with a couple of dogs. They had obviously had free run of the house as all the walls had greasy rub marks at dog height, doors scratched, carpets covered in hair, stained and the whole house absolutely stunk. The bill so far for new carpets & redecoration throughout is £4500. 

With the new landlords bill this is the final straw.  as they have both paid for themselves many times over it's going on the market followed by the bungalow next year when the lease expires.

[Chef Raekwon]

14 minutes ago, The Central Scrutiniser said:

My missus owns a couple of rental properties. A town house & dormer bungalow. The town house was recently vacated by a family with a couple of dogs. They had obviously had free run of the house as all the walls had greasy rub marks at dog height, doors scratched, carpets covered in hair, stained and the whole house absolutely stunk. The bill so far for new carpets & redecoration throughout is £4500. 

With the new landlords bill this is the final straw.  as they have both paid for themselves many times over it's going on the market followed by the bungalow next year when the lease expires.

Oh no. How awful to have to sell your 2 extra houses. 

[2112]

12 minutes ago, Chef Raekwon said:

Oh no. How awful to have to sell your 2 extra houses. 

He is perfectly entitled to. I can’t blame him. Or he can do the renovations, repaint and carpet and increase the rent, if people can’t afford it ………. tough. If tenants paid a deposit their deposit will be lost if they had left a mess. 

[The Central Scrutiniser]

17 minutes ago, Chef Raekwon said:

Oh no. How awful to have to sell your 2 extra houses. 

Yes it is, isn't it. Fortunately our 3 bed apartment near Estepona is is fine. Thanks for your concern.

[Happier diner]

16 hours ago, Chef Raekwon said:

Oh no. How awful to have to sell your 2 extra houses. 

When did it become a bad thing to have a business and be a Landlord. 

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Manx17 said:

When you see the amount of dog muck left  on pavements and around the island,  you can understand why landlords won’t allow pets into their properties. As many don’t seem to mind living among dog muck, I wouldn’t like to see there living accommodation that’s for sure .

Surely all the dog muck on the Pavements is a bit less for the rented house and garden. Win Win

[Kopek]

I think there is far less crap on pavements in the last 5 years. When you do see crap in the same area frequently, it's probably one Dog owner not picking up?