Tenants with pets could be hit with hefty repair bills even after paying a pet bond, renting advocates are warning.

More than 1700 pet bonds have already been lodged through Tenancy Services since new legislation came into force in December to help make it easier for tenants with pets to find a rental.

Regardless of a bond, the law makes tenants with pets responsible for all damage considered more than fair wear and tear, and landlords need “reasonable grounds” to refuse pets on their property.

But with landlords now able to claim another two weeks of rent as a pet bond - on top of four weeks of a standard bond - some worry this is unaffordable for low-income earners.

“These pet bonds have been sold as one of the few pro-renters policies of this Government, and it’s entirely set up to favour landlords‚" said Luke Somervell, president of Renters’ United.

Luke Somervell is the president of Renters United, a non-profit organisation backing renters' rights.

Somervell warned if a pet accidentally peed on a small bit of carpet, a landlord could charge the tenant to replace the entire carpet.

“I’m really worried that renters will be in for a nasty shock.

“What is the point of the pet bond?”

With the national rent average at $627 per week according to realestate.co.nz, combined bonds could cost upwards of $3500, which Somervell said was well above most insurance excesses.

Housing Minister Chris Bishop called pet bonds a “safety blanket” for landlords back in 2024 when the legislation was announced. However, Somervell believed this blanket did not extend to tenants.

“All of the protections here are for landlords, and renters are forced to cover the liabilities up [to] and beyond the cost of the pet bond.”

He believed the legislation was set up so landlords would face zero risk for accepting pets, “which I think is unreasonable”.

Concerns arose last month from renters in the capital as some landlords ignored the new rules during flat-hunting season.

Somervell believed real estate investing for rentals was being set up as a “protected industry”, exempt from the normal rules and liabilities of business.

Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka said the 1700 pet bonds already lodged showed “the reform is working as intended and helping renters access homes that may previously have been off-limits.”

National MP Tama Potaka represents the Hamilton West electorate. Photo / Alyse Wright

He believed pet bonds made it easier for renters with pets to find a home, while maintaining clear, fair rules for everyone.

“Pet bonds exist to remove the upfront barrier that has seen many renters ruled out before they can even apply.”

He said tenants are now liable for the full cost of any pet-related “careless” damage.

“This reform gives renters with pets a fairer shot, reduces blanket no-pet exclusions, and brings transparency and certainty to a part of the market that hasn’t worked well for too long.”

While MSD can offer bond grants for standard bonds, no grants were on offer for pet bonds.

“MSD bond grants continue to support the general bond, which is the core requirement for securing a tenancy,” Potaka said.

Tenancy Services was responsible for monitoring and enforcing the legislation, “just as it does with all tenancy rules”.

The Salvation Army is strongly against the approach given to pet bonds, particularly how it will affect low-income earners.

“While we support reducing barriers for tenants who want to keep pets, the additional upfront cost may make renting less affordable,” principal policy analyst Paul Barber said.

Paul Barber is the principal policy analyst at The Salvation Army.

With tenants liable for the full cost of pet-related damage beyond fair wear and tear, “the pet bond may act more as an extra upfront cost than a true safeguard for tenants.”

Barber felt paying a total of six weeks’ rent as the standard and pet bond could be prohibitive for households already under financial pressure.

The charity made a submission to the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill in July 2024, and has been involved in rental law discussions through networks such as the Tenant Advocates Network.

“There is no reason why pet bonds liability should be treated any differently to the general liability for damage,” the submission read.

“The approach to damage to property caused by pets should align with that for other damage and be restricted to a maximum of the landlord’s insurance excess.”

Minister Chris Bishop previously said the tenancy law changes would provide extra surety for landlords. Photo / Mark Mitchell

In a press release, Housing Minister Chris Bishop said the reform was working as intended, without any “ruff” edges.

“The pet bond system is a practical way to make it easier for renters with pets to find a home, while giving landlords confidence there are clear protections in place.”

He said there had been a “pawsitive” response, saying pets are part of the family for many Kiwi households.