Independent mortgage monitor Moneyfacts is lauding the notion that landlords could achieve better results if they allow pets, while admitting there are also some disadvantages.

Landlords may have to take out additional insurance, although it says they can mitigate this by pet-proofing the home, such as removing rugs and expensive furniture from the property.

“As well as this, landlords should keep in mind that tenants are normally obliged to return the property in the same state in which it was initially rented, as such tenants should pay for any damage their pet causes or the money can be removed from their deposit.”

However, it suggests that in hard-nosed financial terms, allowing pets may outweigh the disadvantages: it gives three ways this could be the case.

Firstly allowing pets means a property is advertised to a wider audience - pet and non-pet owners, potentially reducing void periods.

Secondly, it seems like that allowing pets may encourage good tenants to stay in the property for longer, especially if finding a new rental property is a struggle.

And thirdly, in appropriate-sized properties, allowing pets may encourage families - who in turn are likely to stay longer and may be seen as more reliable tenants than some singletons.

Earlier this year the government introduced a revised Model Tenancy Agreement that makes it easier for tenants with well-behaved pets to find rented accommodation - however, this agreement is voluntary and it is widely thought relatively few agents and landlords use it.

During the pandemic there has been a sharp rise in pet ownership, yet government statistics suggest that just seven per cent of private rental properties are advertised as pet-friendly for creature-loving tenants.