Minister host a pet picnic at Parliament to mark the beginning of new ‘pet bond’ rules for renters, 1 December.
Photo: RNZ/Craig McCulloch
More than 1700 pet bonds have been lodged with Tenancy Services since a new system allowing landlords to charge an additional bond for pets came into force late last year.
Housing Minister Chris Bishop and Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka said 1708 pet bonds had been lodged since the changes took effect on 1 December, describing it as an early sign the policy was working.
“It’s great to see such a pawsitive (sic) response,” Bishop said. “It’s a reform that is working as intended, without any ruff (sic) edges.”
The pet bond system allows landlords to charge tenants up to two weeks’ rent as a separate bond, when they agree to a tenant keeping a pet, on top of the standard tenancy bond.
The bonds are lodged, managed and refunded through Tenancy Services in the same way as general bonds.
The changes marked a significant shift in tenancy rules, with landlords now unable to refuse a tenant’s request to keep a pet, unless they have reasonable grounds. Before the reforms, Bishop said many landlords were unwilling to consider tenants with animals at all.
“The reality at the moment is it’s a hard ‘no’ for almost everyone and what we’re doing is shifting that to ‘yes’, unless there are good reasons not to,” he said, when the rules were launched in December.
What constitutes “reasonable grounds” for refusing a pet will ultimately be determined by the Tenancy Tribunal, with tenants still liable for any pet-related damage beyond fair wear and tear.
Potaka said the milestone showed the changes struck the right balance between tenants and landlords.
“This is about giving renters a fair shot at keeping a pet, while making sure landlords have a clear and reliable process,” he said.
The reforms were marked with a pet-themed event at Parliament on the day the rules were launched.
ACT leader David Seymour said the changes were backed by groups such as Pet Refuge, which had highlighted cases where people delayed leaving dangerous situations, because they feared leaving pets behind.
“It’s worth it for that, if nothing else,” Seymour said at the time.
Tenancy Services has updated its guidance and forms to reflect the changes, and allows pet bonds to be lodged, topped up and refunded, alongside general tenancy bonds.
Success ‘way too early to tell’
Tenancy Advisory director Sarina Gibbon told RNZ the intention behind the legislation change was good, but it was too early to tell whether it was a success.
“All signs point to these rules functioning as intended, and functioning in a way that is constructive and ordered,” she said.
“Now, does that mean that it’s a success? I think it’s way too early to tell.”
Gibbon said 1708 pet bonds were more than she expected since the new rules came in, especially given there was generally a slower uptake of pets during tight economic conditions.
The number did not factor in tenancies that had already allowed pets, she said.
“So if you, prior to 1 December, already allow pets at your rental property as a landlord, then you cannot collect and therefore you do not have a pet bond.”
She said, when she checked with Tenancy Services last week, there had not been any disputes related to the pet-bond system.
The policy was well designed and was generally fair for both parties – but it would take at least a year to fully understand the impact of the new rules, she said.
“A two-week bond is always going to be too high for the tenant and too low for the landlord, but a line just needs to be drawn in the sand.
“Fundamentally, this industry is all about making sure that the renter’s lived experience is as closely aligned with the owner-occupier’s lived experience as possible. “
The pet-bonding system also provided more security to landlords against general damage to the property, which would lower the likelihood of landlords pursuing former tenants for money.
“At the end of the tenancy, should the pet-related damage exhaust the two-week bond, then the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to order a refund from the four-week general bond.
“Should the non-pet related issues exhaust all four weeks of the general bond and there’s still that two-week bond attached to the tenancy, the Tribunal has [the] mandate to order the bond centre to dip into those two weeks and effect a refund for non-pet-related.”
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.