Jimmy T – Thank you, I appreciate your response.
Yes, I do understand that an agent has a license to act on behalf of the owner in terms of authorising a lease. However, my understanding is that each individual application by a tenant (VIC and NSW) requires the written consent of the landlord, in which case the rental agent cannot give consent to an animal without the consent of the owner (on a case-by-case basis). Otherwise, why the need for written consent from the landlord at all? What if an owner has told the rental agent that their property as not suitable for pets? In principle, an owner still has a right to withhold consent. And an Owner’s Corporation likewise still has a right to decline an application for an animal if they believe there are reasonable grounds to do so. Whether they are challenged is another matter.
And, yes it all depends on the specific by-laws in place at the scheme in question.
Regarding your second point, yes of course they could write to the EC directly, and that would be a welcome and polite thing to do, as would having the courtesy to check with the landlord first. Providing information about your intended pet in your application is an opportunity to show that you have a reasonable attitude to your new neighbors and you intend to be a responsible pet owner.
However, my post was aimed at the highly annoying situation of tenants who don’t even bother to ask before they move in with their animal, or who sign a lease and then just acquire the animal shortly after, hoping to just brazen it out when objections arise. A tenant is in breach of their lease if they keep an animal without the written consent of the landlord and without prior notification and/or written permission of the OC (depending on the actual by-law in place).
Even if Option A is in place, an occupier would still have to notify the OC in writing and this must be done within 14 days of housing the animal in the lot. Many people won’t bother and won’t care when the OC comes knocking.
Option B says the occupier may keep an animal with the written approval of the OC, although with the caveat that an OC ‘must not unreasonably withhold its approval’. (The pre-1996 Schedule 2 by-law isn’t that much different in this respect). In both cases, written approval still needs to be sought and obtained. And ccording to Option A, there is a time limit of 14 days.
I am specifically focusing on situations where an occupant fails to act reasonably by ignoring these basic requirements and continues to ignore them after being notified. In that case, the occupant is not adhering to the terms of their lease with respect to by-laws. Is it unreasonable of an OC to withhold approval for any retrospective applications in such circumstances?
As to your final point (and yes, that should read ‘cynical’ – spell check gremlin), it’s usually not difficult to work out who is trying it on and who is genuinely bewildered. By the same token, prospective tenants can always read the notice board in the lobby when they inspect. Before they sign a lease they can read the rental agreement – the by-laws should be included by the agent. Or they could just be upfront and say ‘We’re planning to get a dog/cat – ‘is the landlord OK with pets? Is there anything we need to do first’?