By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Graham Awards


Pets In Lets back on the agenda thanks to petition

A petition has been launched on the Channel Island of Jersey to prevent landlords banning pets from the local private rental sector.

The petition - which has over 525 signatures and runs until early February next year - is to the local parliament, known at the States.

It says: “Pet owners face the reality that their family could be torn apart because most landlords in Jersey have unnecessary bans or restrictions on pet ownership. As an island of animal lovers, how can we allow this situation to continue? This is discrimination, pure and simple. The law must change.”


The local parliament’s online petition system is similar in principle to that run by the Westminster parliament. If the petition secures 1,000 signatures, a States minister will respond; if it secures 5,000 signatures, the petition will be considered for debate in the States Assembly.

Last month the States passed legislation to remove a loophole from local legislation which effectively allowed landlords to discriminate against families by not allowing children to move into certain properties. 

You can see the Jersey pets petition here.

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • PossessionFriendUK PossessionFriend

    Who are people that are not the owners and people taking the risk, to criticise a business protection strategy. ?
    In England, if government hadn't interfered in private business by restricting the amount of a Deposit a landlord can take from a prospective tenant to cover potential pet damage ( which can easily run well into 4 figures ) - there would be more properties let to tenants with pets.


    I used to consider renting to a tenant with a pet with an increased deposit, now it has to be an increased rent, so once again it's the tenant that ends up the looser

  • Theodor Cable

    Well, I can always refuse any tenant in the first place, but I will add in my contract that if any hint of animals are in the house then I will invent an eviction.

    Say, I need the house for myself for example. Or the house needs structural repairs???

    And if they want a pet, then there is an additional £2,500pcm. If they like that then ok.

    I bet there are loads of other good examples as well.



    Fine to do this but don't warn them of your plans - at least not in writing!

  • icon

    It would never do to Discriminate against a tiny number pet owners in Jersey but fine to Discriminate against millions of Private LL’s in England. I don’t know why they call it States the whole place would hardly make one State with a population about one third the size of Dudley in the Black Country. We are supposed to take notice of what they do with their brown cows, spuds and off shore Accounts, while we have a massive population in England of 55 million so we are supposed to be guided by what happens there with their inhabitants of only 100 thousand, the tail is really wagging the dog.

  • icon

    As usual the government does not give a dam about landlords and only about the poor tenants.

    Has the stupid government forgotten about leases or do they not know they exist? Numerous Flat Leases prohibit animals in apartments - so if they are prohibited by the lease how can the landlord be forced to break the covenants of their head lease just for the tenant?


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up