Pet approved, (QLD) but now trying to disallow

Came across a situation where a tenant has Pet approval on their lease (2 outside dogs)
The original 2 dogs have left, so they went and got another dog of a similar type as noted on the lease.
The Landlord is now trying to refuse the pet (as this specific dog wasn't approved), stating they got the pet without prior approval. They are also using this as the reason to not approve the tenants partner to stay there. Even though the dog belongs to the tenant.

Partner was rung and told approved then 5 mins later rung again and told not approved because of the dog.
They put the partners approval request and the pet approval request in at the same time. (The pet request was a courtesy to let hem know there would be a pet there again)

They are also threatening breach if the dog and partner continues to stay there.

Where do they stand?
Lease has approx 9 months to run.
See attached item 17 from the lease

My take is the Landlord is actually in breach of their obligation under the current lease.
I feel they even if the dog gets through the Landlord will still refuse the partner out of spite.
I have advised them to ring the RTA to get their take on the situation

 

1. If the premise is suitable for the number of occupants, the Lessor/Agent can't unreasonably refuse that, this is classic example of where a Tenant may bring on a co-tenant to assist with affordability, which is reasonable.

2. If pets were permitted, then the same end result but with just different pets, also now with the new legislation coming in re: pets, the Lessor/Agent, IMO, would not be successful arguing this at QCAT and seeking a termination based on this or the point above.

Going forward, Tenant should do everything they can to try and get the partner added to the lease as a co-tenant, at the very least, there is nothing the Lessor/Agent can do to stop them residing there as a guest in any event. If the Lessor/Agent issues a Form 11/12 for the pets, or the "unapproved" occupant, just hold your ground, go to QCAT, and present your case to the adjudicator.

 

Specific animals are listed, so for the moment they do need to seek approval for a different dog even of the same breed.

Agree as above with Michael- Landlords can't unreasonable approve applicants.

If the second applicant had no issues with their application and was in fact approved, and the Dog is basically just replacing another Dog which was already approved, I don't think the Landlord would be likely to win in QCAT.

That said, what has driven the Landlord to act in this way? If there were no concerns, why would they refuse to approve the changes? Are you sure you have all the facts?

 

The landlord stated they would not approve as they got the dog before seeking approval. The dog belongs to the original tenant.
They did put in an approval application for the dog and the partner at the same time. The REA/LL looks to have taken the stance the dog belongs to the new partner.
they have stated unless the dog goes the partner will not be approved.

 

The house is a 3 bedroom house with 2 bath rooms large yard. Currently only 1 room is occupied by the existing Tenant.

Item 15 on the lease states Max 2 occupants.
I have advised them about the subletting option, even though the LL will most likely try to refuse this request as well. (and that they would have to go to tribunal)

 

Yesterday they made contact with the RTA and were advised as item 15 allows 2 people at the property they don't need LL approval for the partner to stay there.
They have also advised the dog is approved under the original conditions of the lease.

The RTA have also advised if they have further trouble to lodge a dispute form