Puppy love: Disputes involving pets drop by a third in Qld
After over a decade since animal bans were declared invalid in apartments, disputes are falling but pets can still be refused sometimes, as Qld’s BCCM Commissioner Jane Wilson explains.
After more than a decade since by-laws that prohibited animals from being kept in body corporate complexes were ruled invalid, Body Corporate and Community Management (BCCM) disputes involving pets are finally in decline.
The latest data shows there has been a 33 per cent reduction over the past five years in the number of disputes, involving pets, lodged with the BCCM.
MORE: Brisbane home breaks Australian record for most bidders ever
Rental shock: Massive new rent increase forecast for Brisbane
How much more your loan will cost you with next rate rise
From a peak of 168 disputes in 2017/18, there were just 113 disputes involving pets lodged statewide during the 2022/23 financial year.
The figures are encouraging from the point of view that bodies corporate, owners and tenants are becoming more familiar with domestic pets being allowed to be kept in body corporate complexes, in most circumstances.
Without providing a deep history lesson, the BCCM Act was amended after two significant appeals that set aside two decisions to allow by-laws that prevented pets from being kept at two different body corporate complexes.
One of those decisions, in 2010, involved a successful QCAT appeal that invalidated a by-law that banned certain domestic animals.
Not long after, the legislation was amended (adding section 180 (7) to the BCCM Act) and from that point on, by-laws that have prohibited animals have been invalidated by adjudicators if challenged in this office.
That’s not to say there are no circumstances where an owner or tenant may be refused permission to keep a pet on a premises. There may be some circumstances where having a pet is not suitable, but the reasons need to be clear and justifiable.
In the main, the decision to refuse a pet cannot be oppressive, unreasonable, or otherwise contrary to law.
A common reason some bodies corporate use to reject an application for a pet is on animal welfare grounds because they have concerns for an animal living in a confined space.
When that gets raised, and it does quite often, adjudicators have considered that animal welfare is really the responsibility of the pet owner.
It’s not really a concern of the body corporate to consider how often a pet will be exercised and there is no such thing as a body corporate complex having a no-pet policy.
Year | Pet Matters
15-16 160
16-17 160
17-18 168
18-19 144
19-20 135
20-21 142
21-22 139
22-23 113
(Source: BCCM Commissioner)
Of the pet disputes that come before our office, many of them are resolved through conciliation although many bodies corporate know that an application to keep a pet is not something they can refuse lightly.
They must consider each application on its merits and there may be some circumstances where having a pet is not suitable and they can say no.
Keeping pets in a body corporate is conditional upon each party agreeing to a set of conditions appropriate to the individual circumstances and the body corporate.
If they do say no, the body corporate should remain open to further negotiations with the pet owner. If they can’t agree, then it’s time to lodge an application with our office.
Even if a tenant has a phobia or there are allergy issues there are ways to manage and mitigate those circumstances and that’s where conciliation can be most helpful.
We bring the parties together to discuss the options and work through the issues, and there needs to be give and take on both sides.
* Jane Wilson is Queensland’s Body Corporate and Community Management Commissioner.
MORE QUEENSLAND REAL ESTATE NEWS
Originally published as Puppy love: Disputes involving pets drop by a third in Qld