As a petition is being pushed to end pet restrictions in rental housing, some organizations representing landlords in Canada are cautioning voiding such clauses in the proposed federal renters’ bill of rights could create conflicts.
Last month, Humane Canada started a parliamentary petition asking the House of Commons to include a specific provision for tenants with pets in the proposed bill of rights, calling for “no pet” clauses to be voided “so that tenants with pets are no longer excluded from rental housing.”
Cameron Choquette, the CEO of the Saskatchewan Landlord Association, said in an interview with Global News that landlords recognize that pets are growing in the rental space and can be important for people, but said there needs to be flexibility for rental housing providers.
“If buildings that have current tenants in them, perhaps with allergies or maybe it’s a small building, that flexibility would allow a rental housing provider to have a no pet building or no pet clause in their tenancy agreement,” he said.
He notes things like tenants’ allergies or the potential damage a pet could cause could be why landlords don’t want pets.
Kevin Russell, the executive director of the Investment Property Owners Association of Nova Scotia (IPOANS), said in a statement that renters want the choice of pet-free buildings for their own safety and have “as much right to have housing without pets as those who have pets.”
He said voiding “no pet” clauses nationally would be an “unfair” move by the government.
“Imposing a ban on pet-free buildings would worsen the housing crisis by increasing more disputes between tenants that own pets and tenants that don’t,” he said. “Sadly, rental housing providers would be caught in the middle of such disputes.”
He added that more rental housing supply is the best way to provide rental housing for pet owners.
The rules around pets in rental properties are fairly consistent in Canada, stipulating that landlords can choose to not allow an animal in their property, with some exceptions, like service animals.
Where that differs, however, is in Ontario.
According to Oduraa Legal Services, a landlord can choose not to rent to someone because they own a pet but once a tenancy agreement is signed, a tenant can move in with their animal and cannot be evicted.
However, the act also allows for the removal of the pet if they are causing a severe allergic reaction, damage to the unit or an unreasonable amount of noise.
There are some exceptions to Ontario’s rule with condos where pet bans are permitted if laid out in the condo building’s governing documents.
“Whether you are a tenant or an owner, you should understand before you move in that you are choosing to become part of a community that self-governs and has the ability to make decisions that fit their needs – including about pets,” the Condominium Authority of Ontario told Global News in a statement.
The voiding of such clauses has been “incredibly frustrating” for landlords, but Kevin Costain, a board member for the Small Ownership Landlords of Ontario (SOLO), said it’s not always known so some of SOLO’s members only find out after they try to impose such a restriction.
“It’s just this adversarial environment,” he said.
When it comes to having an animal in a property, he said people need to find a balance.
“It’s about balancing this idea of having a companion and having a pet with you in a property and balancing that with the responsibility of having a pet,” he said.
Costain and Choquette said voiding ‘no pet’ clauses nationwide may be difficult and while consistency is good, a “one-size fits all approach” isn’t the right answer.
“Pets absolutely can be allowed in rental properties, but there are also buildings that, for whatever reason, don’t need to have pets in them,” Choquette said.
— with files from Global News’ Saba Aziz