Not allowing my dog

Louella12

I'd live in a tent on the beach if my dogs weren't able to live with me.

I would never leave them

I might have said that till my recent shoulder fracture. I could barely look after myself and nine weeks on my huge young lab still boarding. I don’t have the strength but I hope to have him back when I’m fit enough to walk him
It’s unfair to suggest scarlettsnan loves her dog any less than you do Louella tho maybe you didn’t mean that

Accept the apartment if your daughter can have her sleep
Over at hers . Some good advice here especially from gsm

Definitely. And if you’re not happy you can then, as MayBee says, look for somewhere else. There’ll certainly be no shortage of takers for the almshouse if you don’t settle.

Such a difficult choice scarlettsnan Even though I am a dog lover through and through in this instance I think you have to choose the accommodation.
As others have said priorities change when you are homeless and especially as you get older. Your little dog is well settled with your daughter and you can see her all the time it's a no brainer.
Take the housing offer and be happy.

AreWeThereYet

^Don't expect your neighbours to look favourably on you trying to bend the rules, it usually causes much ill feeling.^

That's very true - you won't know how many of your neighbours would have liked to keep their dogs/cats but were unable to.

It would also set precedent for future tenants. I’d take the property, especially as your dog will be allowed to visit. You can always look for a more suitable property that allows dogs.

Could you claim that it is a therapy dog?

Casdon

Louella12

I'd live in a tent on the beach if my dogs weren't able to live with me.

I would never leave them

It’s a lot easier to say things like that when you are not homeless though, isn’t it?

Exactly what I was thinking. Plus it's pretty hard looking after dogs when you're homeless.

If your d is willing to look after your dog, I'd take the house, but I understand that it's a hard decision...

Louella12

I'd live in a tent on the beach if my dogs weren't able to live with me.

I would never leave them

It’s a lot easier to say things like that when you are not homeless though, isn’t it?

I'd live in a tent on the beach if my dogs weren't able to live with me.

I would never leave them

Calendargirl

But if they bend the rules for one tenant, then how do they refuse someone else?

I’m afraid I disagree with trying to get them to accept the dog.

If the OP wants the almshouse, and isn’t allowed a pet, well, that’s the decision she has to make. Which is more important in the long run? If she wants to keep the dog herself, then she should turn the property down.

I agree.

As you say, OP, the chance to live in an almshouse like this is an absolute privilege. And as others have said, your little dog is now well used to the company of your daughter’s dog and may even be happier staying put. You can be with your dog every day for as long as you want, so if I were you I’d be accepting the offer. And whatever the legal situation, it just seems wrong to try to get privileges that aren’t enjoyed by the existing residents, or the many other people who would love to be offered this opportunity.

Don't expect your neighbours to look favourably on you trying to bend the rules, it usually causes much ill feeling.

That's very true - you won't know how many of your neighbours would have liked to keep their dogs/cats but were unable to.

If a licence to occupy an entire property gives the occupant exclusive possession of that property it will be extremely difficult to argue that it’s not a tenancy. You yourself use the word ‘tenant’. As I have already said, you can’t generalise - there are a great many almshouses throughout the country and they will be managed by many different organisations.

But if they bend the rules for one tenant, then how do they refuse someone else?

I’m afraid I disagree with trying to get them to accept the dog.

If the OP wants the almshouse, and isn’t allowed a pet, well, that’s the decision she has to make. Which is more important in the long run? If she wants to keep the dog herself, then she should turn the property down.

Germanshepherdsmum

Do the owners of the almshouse know that your dog is very small and doesn’t bark? I would try very hard to get them to accept her.

Great idea 😊

Germanshepherdsmum

*OldFrill*, tenancy terms will vary between one social landlord and another, just as in the private sector.

It's often a 'licence to occupy' not a tenancy agreement. The tenants in almhouses have fewer legal rights.

I agree with Casdon, your little dog is probably very happy with your daughter’s dog. You will still see her every day so the chance of a home is just too good an opportunity to pass by. We lived with my MIL and her dog for some time, we had two dogs. When we left she insisted that her dog came with us as he was used to being with other dogs.

Not to confuse, just the first bit of my post referred to the post by MissInterpted, but the rest to Scarlettsnan.

OldFrill, tenancy terms will vary between one social landlord and another, just as in the private sector.

I think the ‘and your dog’ part of your sentence is very important MissInterpreted, because your dog has been living at your daughter’s house for the last two years, he may be very bonded with other members of the family, including, as a pack animal, her dog. I’d be thinking, what is best for my dog as well as what’s best for me?

If your daughter is prepared to let your dog stay with her, that might be the answer. It's a very tricky one, but I know I could never leave my dog behind, not under any circumstances, no more than I would if it was my child. I hope you find a solution which works for you and your dog.

Have you asked dd if she will definitely have the dog? If she can’t then I guess your decision is made. If you do move in then when you get to know the neighbours if you have your dog round occasionally and they see how well behaved they might join you in asking the LL to make an exception for you. They do look very nice houses and usually they look after their tenants very well.

Just read the posting by OldFrill who may have knowledge of almshouse tenancies that I dont have. In most social housing it is quite difficult to evict without multiple complaints of something like anti social behaviour.

My nephew had a malicious complaint made about him by an upstairs neighbour who said his TV was too loud. He is disabled following a stroke was being bullied by the housing officer. I attended a meeting and advocated for him, reminding them of their obligations under the Equality Act. I probably terrified the life out of the woman from the housing society. He subsequently wrote to them registering a formal dispute and asking for copies of their complaints and equalities policies prior to going to the Housing Ombudsman. They never did send him the required documants and no more was heard of the complaint.

Magistrates do not like evicting people for insufficient reasons.

Scarlettsnan. Take the offer of the house. You are are lucky to have been offered an Almhouse, and from your picture it looks a lovely place
Hopefully your daughter will continue to take care of your little dog, but please don't try and bend the rules.

In the past LLs have been reluctant to allow pets because they (can) damage the property and also can cause noise and annoyance to neighbours (in case of dogs).

Lately there has been a shift in the law on renters of private lets to keep pets and private renters can now ask their LL to vary the lease to allow pets. One option is to offer a deposit payment twoards any damage done by the pet. Another is to offer to take out an insurance policy for same.

Of course the LL can still refuse.

I would go back to your social LL and point this out and perhaps get someone to argue/advicate for you. Point out what the pet means to you and that you are being less fairly treated than private tenants. Also is there a chance whereby you can pass the pet off as a "sensory" dog which you could probably do if you had physical or mental health problems and the dog contributed to your wellbeing. The LL would then be obliged to consider your case under the Equality Act.

If the worst comes to the worst remember that housing is for life but a dog does not last much more than 15 years.

I believe you have less rights in an almshouse than other tenancies. It is very difficult to evict due to having a pet in most tenancies but eviction in an almshouse is easier.
Don't expect your neighbours to look favourably on you trying to bend the rules, it usually causes much illfeeling.