Pet damage insurance
Pet damage insurance is a policy that covers the cost of repairing or replacing items in a rental property that are damaged by a tenant's pet, for example scratched floors, chewed skirting boards, soiled carpets, damaged furniture, and similar accidental physical harm. It sits alongside, not instead of, buildings insurance, which covers structural damage and the fixed fabric of the property; standard landlord buildings and contents policies typically exclude or tightly limit cover for pet-related damage, leaving a gap that a dedicated pet damage policy fills. Under the Renters' Rights Act 2025, which introduced a statutory right for tenants to request to keep a pet from 1 May 2026, pet damage insurance has become an important risk management tool for landlords who grant consent.
Who holds the policy
Pet damage insurance must be taken out by the landlord in their own name. A landlord cannot require a tenant to take out or contribute to the cost of pet damage insurance, doing so is a prohibited payment under the Tenant Fees Act 2019, as explained in the pet fees entry.
This was not always the intended position. An earlier draft of the Renters' Rights Bill included a clause allowing landlords to require tenants to hold pet damage insurance as a condition of granting consent, and to recoup reasonable costs if the landlord arranged the cover. The government removed this provision during the Report Stage in the House of Lords in July 2025, citing concern that a sufficient insurance market might not develop in time. Baroness Taylor of Stevenage stated that the five weeks' rent deposit under the Tenant Fees Act 2019 was considered adequate protection. The clause does not appear in the Renters' Rights Act 2025 as enacted. Requiring tenant-held insurance, or recouping insurance costs from a tenant, is a Tenant Fees Act 2019 prohibited payment.
What pet damage insurance typically covers
Cover varies between providers but usually includes accidental damage to floors, walls, doors, carpets, curtains, and fixtures caused directly by a pet's behaviour, including scratching, chewing, soiling, and similar. Most policies specify a maximum payout per policy period; products available in the UK market typically cover between £1,000 and £5,000 per claim or per period, with some providers offering up to £2,500 as standard.
Policies generally exclude damage that is better categorised as fair wear and tear, pre-existing damage, intentional acts by the tenant, or structural damage that falls within the buildings policy. Some policies cover up to three pets per property; others require separate cover per animal.
From working with self-managing landlords, the most important thing to clarify before taking out a policy is whether the insurer requires a pet clause in the tenancy agreement and a photographic inventory as preconditions for a valid claim. Both are good practice regardless, but some insurers will decline claims where the consent was informal or undocumented.
The deposit gap
The tenancy deposit cap, five weeks' rent for properties with an annual rent below £50,000, applies regardless of whether a pet is present. Landlords cannot take a separate pet deposit above the cap. For a property renting at £1,200 per month, the maximum deposit is £1,384. If a dog causes £2,000 of flooring damage over a two-year tenancy, the deposit alone is unlikely to cover it. Pet damage insurance fills the gap between what the deposit can cover and the actual cost of restoration, without requiring any additional payment from the tenant.
Cost and practical use
NRLA's pet damage protection product is priced at £134.40 per year (including Insurance Premium Tax) and covers up to three pets per property, with a maximum payout of £2,500. Annual premiums across the market are broadly in the £100–£180 range for standard residential lets. The landlord holds the policy and controls the claims process directly.
The question of what a landlord can and cannot charge in relation to a pet request, including the 28-day response obligation and the deposit cap interaction, is covered in the pet request entry.
Landlords who hold a pet damage insurance policy can store the policy schedule and renewal date in August's document management feature alongside the pet consent addendum, giving a complete record of the protection in place.
For a full guide to landlord insurance, including which policy types cover which risks and how to evaluate cover in the context of the Renters' Rights Act 2025, see our landlord insurance guide.
Frequently asked questions
Does standard landlord insurance cover pet damage?
Typically not, or only to a limited extent. Standard landlord buildings and contents policies are written on the basis that the property is let without pets, and many exclude pet-related damage as a named exclusion. Some policies include accidental damage cover that may extend to pet damage in certain circumstances, but this varies significantly between providers. A dedicated pet damage add-on or standalone policy is a more reliable route to cover.
Can a landlord refuse a pet request because they do not have pet damage insurance?
No. The absence of pet damage insurance is not a reasonable ground for refusing a pet request under the Renters' Rights Act 2025. The Act requires landlords to consider each request on its merits, based on the specific property and the specific animal, and the lack of a particular insurance product the landlord has chosen not to buy is not a characteristic of the property or the pet. A landlord who wishes to protect against pet damage risk should obtain the insurance themselves, not use its absence as a refusal ground.
What happens if pet damage exceeds the insurance payout?
If damage to the property exceeds both the insurance payout and the tenancy deposit, the landlord's remaining remedy is a claim through the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) or the small claims court, depending on the amount. Landlords should document the condition of the property thoroughly at the start of the tenancy and at any interim inspection, so that the extent of pet-related damage is clearly evidenced and attributable.
