L demands access to property- what are T's rights?

[Mamf]

Please can someone help me with regards to the rules surrounding landlords (and their girlfriends?!) having to give tenants 24 hours notice/ask their permission to enter the property? I have been trying (without much luck!) to find the actual piece of legislation which states this, or at least something which confirms that this is a statutory right, in order that I can reference it in a letter to my landlord ('as stated on the website of the office of the deputy prime minister' just doesn't seem to be official enough).

Many thanks in advance for any help you can give me.

[P.Pilcher]

IMHO there is no such right. In granting a tenancy, a landlord must give a tenant "quiet enjoyment" of the property. This means that a landlord cannot enter said property (except in an emergency) without the tenants permission. Despite most tenancy agreements (including mine) requiring a tenant to permit a landlord or his agent to enter at a reasonable time provided 24 hours written notice is given, this clause in unenforceable as it contradicts the requirement of a lease to give "quiet enjoyment".

P.P.

[Mamf]

Many thanks for replying. So just to make sure I understand you correctly, the landlord and his girlfriend should seek our permission before they enter the property - that bit is part of our 'quiet enjoyment' rights as tenants? The length of time between them seeking such permission and when they want to enter the property is the bit that isn't included in our rights, but we would not be unreasonable in asking for 24 hours. Correct?

At present, the landlord enters the property whenever he likes, as does his girlfriend. We've already had the embarassing situation of him showing a prospective tenant around, unannounced, when my housemate was in a state of undress. There have also been a number of occasions when prospective tenants have turned up on our doorstep (again, unannounced) saying that the landlord had arranged to meet them at the house to show them around - 45 minutes and a cup of tea later, the landlord has still not arrived and we've ended up showing the poor people around ourselves - embarassing for all concerned!

Thank you again for your reply

[zoe]

mamf

The LL cannot enter the property without your permission. Even if they ask 24 hours in advance you can still say no. The property is yours so enjoy.

I would write to the LL pointing out their breach and suggest that they request access at least 24 hours in advance. It would not be unreasonable for you to call the police next time...

Zoe

[P.Pilcher]

I think that it is only right to point out that although your LL's actions are totally unnacceptable, he is entitled to take the "hump" and not renew your tenancy agreement when it expires should you wish to stay, but to be quite honest, who wants a landlord like that anyway.

P.P.

[Mamf]

Many thanks to Zoe and P. Pilcher for replying. We gave our one months notice last Friday as we have already found somewhere else to live (thank goodness). We also wrote them a letter yesterday requesting they seek our permission before entering the property. :)

We do, however, fear that they are now going to try and retain our deposits as they have (conveniently) found a scratch in the softwood flooring of one of the communal areas and have threatened to charge us for its repair. As none of us have ever been given an inventory of the house contents and its state of repair, no-one can prove whether or not the scratch was there before we even moved in. From what I have read on this site, and that of the old forum, I understand that they cannot keep our deposits under these circumstances, even if they were to provide us with quotes and receipts for work done.

Please can someone confirm for me that I am right in thinking this (and if not, advise me what to do next!!)? Many many thanks in advance.

[Jennifer_M]

If there isn't an inventory the LL cannot prove that the scratch was there or not before you moved in.
Also it would probably be considered fair wear and tear as in the communal area there probably is a lot of people moving around.

In any case if the LL tries to pull a fast one just write to him stating that without an inventory he can't keep your deposit for this and that if you haven't received the deposit back within 7 days you will take him to small claims court. (allow him a month first to send the deposit back though, send the letter to him only if he tells you you won't get your depsoit back or if he takes longer than a month to send it back)

[Mamf]

Many thanks for that Jennifer_m, it has helped to put my mind at ease. I don't suppose you (or anyone else reading this) might be able to give me an idea of the potential cost of taking the matter in question to the small claims courts?

Thanks!

[Jennifer_M]

I'm not 100% certain but I think small claims court cost £50 to start proceedings.

I've never used them so couldn't help you more than that.

[Muse]

The cost would depend on how much you were suing for, check out the online small claims site which I think will contain all info required.

https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/csmco/index.jsp

In an un-property related matter I found that the follwoing worked well and meant I didn't have to serve papers.

1. Give the person you are thinking of suing a deadline date of when you require the money.

2. If it is not forthcoming start the paperwork for small claims court online and print out the paperwork BUT don't submit it.

3. Write again to said person giving them an additional time to pay (I used 7 days but what ever you feel is fair/you are comfortable with) and enclose the printed paperwork with a polite note stating that if the money is not received by said dealine you will have to submit the papers and start proceedings.

4. If the money is still not forthcoming submit the papers as they are all prepared, however when I used this method as soon as the person saw I was serious and prepared they paid up....which was nice!

I found the site was easy to navigate and eliminated the hassle of having to go to court to submit the papers.

Hope this helps and you get sorted.

[Paul_f]

At the start of the thread the poster wanted to know what rights of entry the landlord has and none of you have yet used the lawful procedure the landlord has at his disposal.

Under S.11 Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 the landlord has an implied right of entry in order to check the state of the property to uphold his own statutory obligations of repair. If the tenant refuses, which has already been stated they can do (but not indefinitely, and at their peril), they would then be inviting the landlord to write to them, or better still get his solicitor to do so, to state the landlord's legal position. The tenants should repsond positively otherwise they are extremely naive.

Failure to obtain entry could allow the landlord quite legitimately to start evicting the tenants on grounds 12,13 & 15 of S.8 although these are only discretionary grounds, but a judge would cetainly take the landlord's view that he has a right to enter the property under such circumstances.

Be careful therefore when stating the landlord has no powers, as he in fact has plenty; I know he can't forcibly enter the property, or do so without the tenant's permission even if he asks nicely or gives 24 hours wirtten notice, but if the tenant in unco-operative, court is the answer.

[Mamf]

Paul_f,

Thank you, but I think you'll find that this is not a case of us refusing entry to our landlord: we are not even being given this as an option as he is not asking for our permission in the first place. His girlfriend let herself into the house just last Friday and entered my housemate's room while my housemate was being physically unwell in her en-suite bathroom. Despite my housemate explaining that she was not well, the landlord's girlfriend still proceeded to speak to her in a raised and abusive tone of voice regarding the fact that 3 of us are moving out at the same time. We are not the ones who have done anything wrong here, and if you read my previous posts, I'm sure you will agree that we have always been more than co-operative with the landlord. Under our rights to the 'quiet enjoyment' of our home, I do not think we are being unreasonable, or naive, to request that the landlord asks us before entering the property, especially in light of the embarassing situations which have already occurred, as detailed in a previous posting. I have never so much as implied that we would refuse him entry, but a little consideration on his part is long overdue. It is as much for his benefit as ours, as we would then be able to ensure that none of us were in the bath, or some other compromising position, when he shows prospective tenants around (or when we have to show them round for him because he's failed to turn up...).

Perhaps phrases such as 'extremely naive' (even if only aimed at a hypothetical tenant) are unnecessary in this case?

Many thanks once again to everyone who has been so helpful in this matter.

[Paul_f]

Mamf. I've posted on this before but your landlord is in serious breach of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and if you were to take court action they would find themselves on the wrong end of damages which could be as much as £5,000 (if not more) - seriously!

They are in effect trespassers, just like any stranger walking off the street into your property uninvited. You have an extremely powerful tool in your possession now so start getting really tough. Write to you lanmdlord reminding him/her that what they have done is completely out of order and that you will be taking court action against them unless they are prepared to settle for damages out of court. A good solicitor would be worth appointing. There's plenty of case law on this! :mad:

[Mamf]

Paul_f - Thank you for your reply. Sadly, I am serious. Our landlord has finally replied to a letter we sent him asking that he requests permission before entering the house (we did not mention court action). His reply is that he has every right to enter 'his house' and claims that we are each only renting a room in the house. In actual fact, we each have an AST which does not specify 'one room only'. We have shared use of communal facilities (kitchens, bathroom, living room etc.), and our bedrooms do not have locks on them.

Am I right in thinking that, as we have ASTs (with arrangements as specified above), that we still have the same rights to 'quiet enjoyment' of the property as if there was just one AST with all our names on it? If this is the case, and the landlord is still in breach of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 you mentioned, please can you (or anyone else) recommend a good solicitor in the Cambridge region for this sort of case?

Many many thanks

Mamf :(

[Paul_f]

The nearest solicitor that I can recommend is Michael Taylor or Gail Sykes of Greenwoods in Peterborough both of whom are experts in Landlord & Tenant matters. Another alternative is Marveen Smith at Pain Smith in Crowthrone, Berks - there's information on both these firms that can be accessed from the home page, and Pain Smith has a clickable link when opening this forum.

By the way I've just recently seen a case Cooper v. Sharma in Brentford County Court in February 2004 where the tenant had damages awarded to him of £23,500 for general damages, £4,000 aggravated damages, & £2,500 exemplary damages; Total £30,000. Perhaps you should show this to your landlord?

[Mamf]

Firstly, many many thanks to Paul_f and everyone else who has helped me out so far on this thread.

Following on from my last post, we have now moved out of the property. My housemates' tenancy agreements ran from the 1st of the month (i.e. their payment periods were the 1st - last day each calendar month), so we moved all their belongings out on the 30th April. My AST, however, ran from the 4th of the month - infact, it began on 4th November 2004, so to ensure I didn't breach the 6 month clause, I paid my rent up until the 3rd May, despite starting to pay rent on the new place from the 1st May. Although I moved most of my belongings out on the 30th April with my other housemates, there were still a few things of mine in the house which I went back to get on the 2nd May. I had also planned to do a final clean of the room at this time. Imagine my surprise, therefore, when I entered my bedroom to find somebody else's things in there! Apparently my less-than-honourable landlord had moved a new tenant in before my own agreement had expired, despite his last letter stating that even if he did come into the house without our prior permission, he would certainly never go into our rooms without asking first?!

I realise this might seem like a rather petty thing to get annoyed about with the short timescale involved (i.e. 3 days), but given the amount of grief the landlord has created throughout the whole tenancy and the hassle I had moving in in the first place*(see below) I think I have every right to be a little peeved.

*(My previous tenancy had expired on the last day of the month, but the landlord told me I wouldn't be able to move in until the 4th, effectively rendering me, and all my belongings homeless for the best part of a week - after I moved in, it transpired that the landlord had been wrong and that the room had been vacant and ready for possession earlier).

I am now just waiting for him to withhold part of my deposit on the grounds that the room wasn't clean enough for his liking, but given that the new person had already moved in, I could hardly clean around them!

Does anyone know what the legal implications of this whole situation might be?

Sigh :(

[MrWoof]

Paul F has already given you the tools, use them. If you had paid rent to the 3rd then you are the legal tenant until then and the landlord has no right to be in the place without your permission. You need legal advice but from what you've said its the landlord who will end up paying your costs.

[jenniferL]

:( Please can anyone help ....

I have been renting a flat for over a year and the property has consistenly been accessed by various estate agents, surveyors and tradesmen, without my prior knowledge or consent. I have tried everything bar changing the locks, to ensure that this stopped, but to no avail.

What concerns me more than anything is that keys are being handed out to 3rd parties i.e surveyors and builders and they are accessing the property unsupervised, and without my knowledge, this can't be right ?

Yesterday, it was only a key left in the latch that stopped a lone surveyor from walking in on me while I was in the bath.

There must be some kind of law that can protect me ? I'm at breaking point.

[ATI]

No one has the right to access your property without your conscent except in an emergency. usually with in 24 hours if they have a pipe burst etc..

[jenniferL]

That's what I thought but there has been no such emergency. The Landlord has the property on the market. I don't know where to turn or what action I can take ?

[Surrey]

That's what I thought but there has been no such emergency. The Landlord has the property on the market. I don't know where to turn or what action I can take ?

Change the lock on the front door.

[jenniferL]

But if I change the lock I still have to give the landlord a key though then I'm no further forward ? That's my understanding anyway.

[Ericthelobster]

Yes change the lock and don't give the landlord a key - he's clearly forfeited his right to have one. If he whinges just threaten you'll sue for the breach of your privacy: a serach of this forum will tell you more.

It will probably result in you being given 2 months' notice to quit, but as the LL is selling anyway, do you care?

[P.Pilcher]

Let's spell it out even more clearly than the above posters have made it: As the holder of an assured tenancy agreement, you have a complete right to "quiet enjoyment" of the property. This means that nobody, repeat nobody may enter the property without your express permission and despite what it may state in your tenancy agreement. This is the LAW!
Advise your landlord that any further breaches of your rights by him or any of his representatives will result in you taking action for harassment - the penalties for which are quite severe. As advised above, change the locks and do not give your landlord a copy of the new keys.

P.P.

[jenniferL]

All noted with thanks. I took the spare set of keys from the surveyor, and the estate agent who has the property on the market has told me that should should be very careful as I could be acting illegally. They also said that I have no choice but to give access, they have stated this on more than one occassion.

Could recoupe the cost of the lock change ? I am actively trying to move because of this anyway but it is taking longer than planned.

[RichieP]

the estate agent who has the property on the market has told me that should should be very careful as I could be acting illegally. They also said that I have no choice but to give access, they have stated this on more than one occassion.

There's a strong smell of bullsh!t somewhere.

You don't legally have to give access at all, unless it's an emergency. Many people stick this in the AST for their own convenience, hoping you're not aware of your rights. Of they're a member of any organisation such as ARLA, I'd consider complaining to them.

As for recouping the cost, probably difficult but I suppose you could try, seeing as you've asked them to stop enough times.

[jenniferL]

Sorry it's this one again, I've listened to all advice and advised the letting agent that no further access will be granted as I am taking legal advice. And hey presto I was served with a section 21 today. Not the end of the world as this has driven me out anyway.

I have an appointment to get legal advice next week, but in the mean time I just want to be left in peace without the constant intrusions.... The letting agent again quoted that I have to allow access if I am given 24hrs notice. I really don't know where this leaves me ?

[MrShed]

Again just refuse. And tell them that you will change the locks and charge them for it if they continue to enter the property, and that you will sue for compensation if they continue to breach the tenancy in this way.

[jenniferL]

Your response is appreciated, but that is exactly what I have done. The response is still you have to allow access or I could be breaking the law. I don't want to be a nightmare tenant, I just desperately want privacy and peace of mind.

[Ruth Less]

The response is still you have to allow access or I could be breaking the law. I don't want to be a nightmare tenant, I just desperately want privacy and peace of mind.

Have they put any of this in writing, even email? Try to make all correspondence in writing and keep it as evidence of their threatening behaviour and harassment.

[RichieP]

Just to offer further support, you are not breaking the law. They are harassing you. Are the agents a member of any organisations such as ARLA? Complain to them if so.

[john carling]

hi ,yes you can change the locks stop anybody comming in etc but i think you like the landlord want to be fair,( at least i hope he a fair landlord) if you tell the estate agents they can come around to view but you give them times when they can and they must give you notice,i have looked at several properties that are rented and you just arrange a viewing the next day no problem. same with everyone what i am concerned about is you and the landlord falling out and i guess he has a deposite of yours. you could both make it difficult for each othere which nobody wants.you may need a reference from him. i had a tennant who started making acess dificult even when i was giving notice it escalated she stopped paying rent now 2 years after she left she has a ccj good luck john

[wannabe]

I would have thought that the only time you could be acting illegally is if you refuse "reasonable" requests by the landlord for access to the property.

As for a definition of reasonable I would always go with an infrequent request given with good advance notice which offers you a choice of dates/times; ie you can't constantly have requests for access at a specific time dropped on you at the last minute! That would be denying you your right to enjoy the property.

The only exception to this would be refusing to allow access for essential emergency repair work to be carried out (gas leak etc).

[pippay]

I have to disagree .... and in this case, I feel the OP is being totally misled and harassed by the Agent. There is NOTHING in statute that states she must give access for viewings.
I would have thought that the only time you could be acting illegally is if you refuse "reasonable" requests by the landlord for access to the property. Not true. A tenant does not have to comply with any request however "reasonable" except if it were for tradesmen (possibly the LL/Agent accompanying them) to carry out emergency repairs. However, in the promotion of goodwill between tenant and LL, then a reasonable request would be as you state below

As for a definition of reasonable I would always go with an infrequent request given with good advance notice which offers you a choice of dates/times; ie you can't constantly have requests for access at a specific time dropped on you at the last minute! That would be denying you your right to enjoy the property.

The only exception to this would be refusing to allow access for essential emergency repair work to be carried out (gas leak etc).

[jenniferL]

Thank you for all comments. Visits in the last few months alone, have been every week or every couple of weeks 1-3 viewings a week that I know of...there was one week where I begged to be left alone and in peace for just a week which they agreed to.

The other issue I have is the fact that I have caught them out on more than one occassion, where they have given a set of keys to a stranger to let themselves in unsupervised and without my knowledge, this for me is the bigger issue.

I find it bizarre that you can agree a years contract with a tenant then 3 months in, decide to put the property on the market and expect constant access ?? Apparently it common ??????:o

[pippay]

Then you must write to them telling them of your intention to change the locks due to their breach of contract by violating your legal right to quiet enjoyment by allowing this to happen.

Unfortunately, I get the impression that unless you take this course of action they will continue to abuse their position and your rights.


Thank you for all comments. Visits in the last few months alone, have been every week or every couple of weeks 1-3 viewings a week that I know of...there was one week where I begged to be left alone and in peace for just a week which they agreed to.

The other issue I have is the fact that I have caught them out on more than one occassion, where they have given a set of keys to a stranger to let themselves in unsupervised and without my knowledge, this for me is the bigger issue.

I find it bizarre that you can agree a years contract with a tenant then 3 months in, decide to put the property on the market and expect constant access ?? Apparently it common ??????:o

[Worldlife]

It may be worth the tenant having a word with the local Council to determine whether or not the actions taken by this landlord could be construed as

"an act likely to interfere with the peace and comfort of a tenant or anyone living with him or her:"

Whilst a one off unauthorised entry might not be regarded as an offence under The Protection of Eviction Act 1977 I am wondering if persistant unauthorised entry after a warning by the tenant amounts to harassment.

A tenant is entitled for peace of mind to change the locks on a rented property but IMHO should not be forced to do so because of a failure of the landord to comply with the law or conditions of tenancy.

[MrWoof]

Read and inwardly digest the replies from senior members. NO-ONE has the right of access to your home except in an emergency. If you have any copies of letters, emails etc that you have sent to the landlord or agent, take them to a solicitor or the CAB. You already have a case. Contact the landlord and make sure he/she is aware of what is happening because it is the landlord who is responsible and the landlord who will pay the (severe) penalty..

[Sarah Carey]

Hello,

This is complicated.

I rent out a 2 bed flat. My tenant has been in for over a year and with few problems. However, I have to gain access to the property on Tuesday. I have called him, leaving several messages since yesterday and finally he gets back to me to tell me he is on holiday. I have asked that I go there myself on Tuesday with the keys, however he now tells me I cannot because the keys I hold do not work (he changed one of the locks without telling me) He also says that I am legally not allowed to go in while he is not there. I have suggested that I drive to Portsmouth where he is on holiday and collect the keys. I live in Hastings and the rented flat is in London. He says he will think about it and let me know this afternoon. I feel I am being held to ransom. What are my rights? How much pressure do I put on him if at all? I cannot afford to lose his rent.

He is fully aware of the reasons I need to gain entry. The flat itself is the subject of litigation due to a defective title. My solicitor has arranged a quantity surveyor to attend on Tuesday. We need his report back before the hearing on July 24th. This has been ongoing now for 3 years and I have kept my tenant fully informed of what is happening my end, even though this is no threat to his tenancy.

Can anyone offer advice on this. Please, I am in a panic, as this could effect a long awaited hearing. I have potentially lost £60k that I need to claim as a loss.

Thank you in advance.

Sarah:confused:

[jeffrey]

Why not warn T that you will:
a. report his non-co-operation to the Court;
b. join him as a party to the litigation; and
c. ask the Court to make him responsible for all costs flowing from his failure to assist?

[Planner]

I dont think you have a lot of choices really. The locks have been changed so the only way you are going to be able to get in is if you break in. You would have the righ to break in I suppose in an emergancy i.e. flat on fire, gas leak, water burst, but what you describe while obviously an emergancy for you due to the amount of money involved is not the type of emergancy that means you can gain access under the above.

In retrospect was a little more notice of the surveyors visit to the property not possible to the tennant? what would you have done if he had gone away to the states or europe?

If things are now so desperate why not suggest a monetary incentive for access to the flat this time?

I dont believe going down the route suggested by Jeffery will get you anywhere and is likley to put your tennants "back up".

[pcwilkins]

What does the agreement say about your right to access the property? If it allows you to do so without T's consent, I suggest a good locksmith might get you in. Not sure what it would cost but probably less than £60,000!

I would also wonder why it is such short notice, but perhaps it was inevitable.

Peter

[Planner]

Tenants back isnt up (yet) as they are going to make a decision this afternoon (which will hopefully be a positive one). The tennant is quite entitled to change the locks no matter what the tennancy agreement says, may be you ought to suggest a clause where the tennant shouldnt go on holiday either?

I think you would be on extremley dodgy ground breaking into the property if the tennant says no. If a LL ever did that to me I would take them to the cleaners.

The situations as obviously arrose from the tennant not being informed with enough notice of a non emergancy visit. As there is so much money at stake Sarah needs to make some consesions to gain access as the tennants "quite enjoyment" is paramount, esspecially if there have been no previous problems and sarah doesnt want to lose the rental income.

[pcwilkins]

The tennant is quite entitled to change the locks no matter what the tennancy agreement says

What, even if the agreement says that the T cannot change the locks without notifying L? Seems a bit odd to me. After all, the locks don't belong to T, they belong to L.


i think you would be on extremley dodgy ground breaking into the property if the tennant says no. If a LL ever did that to me I would take them to the cleaners.

Surely depends on the wording of the agreement. Maybe agreement specifies that L can access property (even if T doesn't want him to) as long as T is given X hours notice?


The situations as obviously arrose from the tennant not being informed with enough notice of a non emergancy visit. As there is so much money at stake Sarah needs to make some consesions to gain access as the tennants "quite enjoyment" is paramount, esspecially if there have been no previous problems and sarah doesnt want to lose the rental income.

Have to say that I prefer this approach to Jeffrey's suggestion. Both T and L are entitled to be annoyed (L because T changed locks, T because L gave short notice) so surely some sort of compromise would be best to keep everyone happy.

Peter

[Sarah Carey]

Thank you all so much for your replys.

Firstly, I too am frustrated with the lack of notice for the surveyor. This was agreed by both sides several weeks ago and my barrister has apparently spent sometime in finding one to assist with the hearing. I was advised by him only yesterday that the appointment was made for Tuesday. He pointed out to me that the terms of my tenancy agreement state that I only need to give 24 hours notice.

To give you more background, the flat was on the market 3 years ago. My buyers solicitor questioned that there was no planning permission for a single story extension to the rear of the property, which houses the 2 bedrooms. This had not come up when I purchased the flat myself and the solicitor had ticked all the boxes. As this was the case, I was confident I could get retrospective certification for building regs. This uncovered several defects and a clear case of negligence from my original conveyencer. The flat was devalued by £60k. I have continued to let the flat, as I now cannot sell until the case has settled. A valuer appointed by the court stated that I could still sell at market value, but after putting it on the market again 6 months ago, the sale fell through for the same reasons and was de-valued this time by £50k. The court has now allowed us a quantity surveyor to assess re-building costs of the defective extension. I am hoping we will be able to settle after this has been done.

I am currently a tenant myself so I see from both sides. I certainly don't want to upset or anger the guy, after all it is his home, however you see the seriousness of my situation and this has been ongoing for 3 years now.

I am not sure I want to break the locks, however it does state on the tenancy agreement, which I believe to be standard that he cannot change the locks without permission or without providing me with a key.

I will wait until he comes back to me this afternoon. I just need to be armed with as much info as possible before I speak with him. I have tried my litigation solicitor, but he is in court all day and I cannot get hold of him.

Thank you all again. Any further thoughts or suggestions would be very much appreciated.

Sarah

[Planner]

Changing the locks in not prohibited, a quick google search of "tenant changing locks at rented property" will show you as much, here is croydon councils advice;

The tenant has changed the front door lock
When a tenant rents a whole flat, house or room in the house and has exclusive use of it (e.g. does not share it with anybody else), they are entitled to change the locks and exclude any person from entering
A landlord should not enter a tenant's accommodation without their prior consent or permission

NO MATTER WHAT IS IN THE AGREEMENT.

Same with the 24hr notice, only with consent, or in an emergancy no matter what is in the agreement.

Best of luck.

[Colincbayley]

Changing the locks in not prohibited, a quick google search of "tenant changing locks at rented property" will show you as much, here is croydon councils advice;

The tenant has changed the front door lock
When a tenant rents a whole flat, house or room in the house and has exclusive use of it (e.g. does not share it with anybody else), they are entitled to change the locks and exclude any person from entering
A landlord should not enter a tenant's accommodation without their prior consent or permission

NO MATTER WHAT IS IN THE AGREEMENT.

Same with the 24hr notice, only with consent, or in an emergancy no matter what is in the agreement.

Best of luck.

Question:- If the above is correct, would the tenant not have signed this right away within the AST?
or not, as the case may be?

[Planner]

No. An unfair term is still a unfair term. All this is a mute point anyway. The priority is gaining access LEGALLY, which hopefully sarah will try and do.

[jeffrey]

No. An unfair term is still a unfair term. All this is a mute point anyway. The priority is gaining access LEGALLY, which hopefully sarah will try and do.

Yes. An unfair term, whilst still an unfair term (as you say), is still binding unless and until struck-down by a court of lawful jurisdiction. The OFT does not make the law, despite its own belief!

[Sarah Carey]

Thank you again.

So basically, if I was in the position where I had no choice and to break the lock, I would in effect be breaking the law? I prefer to stay on the right side of the law.

Is my tenant then within his rights to deny me access at all unless he is there in person, which is where I think we are going with this.

My flat is in South Norwood, so it comes under Croydon Council.

I will keep you all informed of the outcome.

Thank you all again.

Sarah

[Planner]

Spooky! I didnt know you where in Croydon its just the first one that came up on the search!

If you do break in and need to replace the locks after doing it i.e. the lock smith cant "jimmy" it open or something, you would have damaged the tenants propoerty i.e. the lock and should refund them as well as for any additional keys they have had cut.

What will you do if you do break in and the tenant claims something is missing? large sum of cash? valuable small item?

How will you ensure the tenant gets any new key beforethey return off holiday? if they arrive home at 2 in the morning and cant get in, then your possibly guilty of unlawful eviction and could be in serious trouble.

[Sarah Carey]

Hi all,

The tenant called yesterday afternoon and has agreed to return to the flat on Tuesday. He had been to speak to Citizen's Advice. Quite right too, as we all need to know where we stand, which is why I posted here. He went to Portsmouth for a few days and decided to stay longer, but will now return to be at the flat.

It looks then that all will be fine. I will get a key on Tuesday as well!

I have offered to pay towards the tenant's expenses for driving back as a gesture of good will!

Thank you all for your help and support.

Best Regards

Sarah

[Chris Long]

I'm in need of a little help for my partner.
She signed a tenancy agreement with Andrews Letting Agency in Bristol (a very large company) to take a property on from the 20th July 2007, on 2nd July we contacted them to find out about picking up the keys on the 20th to be told that the landlord would no longer be renting to us, as they were redeveloping the property.
We have in our posession a full tenancy agreement which is signed by my partner, and (I quote from the ageement) "Signed by the landlord/Andrews Letting and Managment for and on behalf of the Landlord" with the letting agents signiture and date following.
Where do we stand with this? Is it worth persuing through the courts? or will we just fall flat on our faces?
Anyone who could help with this would be great, and also, for compensation / damages, what figure would we be looking at?

[attilathelandlord]

Unless the tenancy was witnessed as a deed, you are not a tenant until you have possession of the property (ie keys) and there is nothing you can do about it. Your girlfriend should receive back any monies she has given the agency re fees, deposit, rent etc in full.

[justaboutsane]

Paul_f mentioned about the fact that tenants should take up possession for the tenancy to commence. Therefore you have no agreement. You should get back ALL costs you have paid out to date on this. Try and find something as soon as you can.

[Chris Long]

Seems a little pointless then for having a tennancy agreement signed and sealed if it isn't valid until you actually pick up the keys! Its not the greatest of situations, she signed the tenancy agreement back in June to make sure she had a place when she returned to the UK, so now shes going to have to fly back early to make sure she has somewhere to live

[Chris Long]

I'm very tempted to take this to court actually, surely the contract must mean something.
The landlord has relented now and said we need to contact them with "what we want from it" What should we be looking at claiming?

[cillitbanger]

I'd be looking for all costs plus about £300 for distress and inconvenience;)

[lorenzo]

I'm not sure if you need to if there is no AST in place. Depending on when she moved in and what you've said to her, it could be argued that she has no right to live there anyway.

Peter
As jeffrey has written here before, an AST exists despite there being no written agreement. Therefore, an s21 is still required.

[Planner]

As jeffrey has written here before, an AST exists despite there being no written agreement. Therefore, an s21 is still required.

Dont think anyone is saying there isnt a tenancy, however that tenancy might not be an AST, depending on when she moved in. Section 21s are only good for ASTs.

[sharemaster2]

Hi all,

I have an issue. I have a FLAT, I want to sell but have a tennant in the FLAT whom I have had for more than two years with no problems.

I now want to sell up. I mentioned this to the Tennant and he was interested in buying the place but his income will not give him enough funds to meet the requirement for a mortgage so I have decided to sell in the open market.

For viewing purposes, the tenant does not want any viewing done in the daytime as he is not there but at work. But viewing can be done in the evenings and weekends he says but agent says that this will be a problem as most viewings are done in the day and in the week.

What is the best way to approach this because if the agents can not access this FLAT, I technically can not sell!! Tenants say he has expensive equipment and work stuff he is afraid will be NICKED blah blah.

I really need to come to a compromise with this Tennant even if it is only one daytime viewing in his absence that he agrees to in a week. Surely, that can not be too much to ask. I do not see why he is being like this. Agents will not STEAL peoples stuff as this will put them out of business soon.

I do not want to resort to giving the Tennant Notice to Vacate as he has been a good paying tenant and I don’t know how long it will take to sell the flat so I do need the rental income coming in.

Any advice is appreciated.

Thanks:(

[jeffrey]

Hi all,

I have an issue. I have a FLAT, I want to sell but have a tenant in the FLAT whom I have had for more than two years with no problems.
...
I now want to sell up. What is the best way to approach this because, if the agents can not access this FLAT, I technically can not sell!
Wrong. You CAN sell, even without access. Obviously this is not the best way, but a sale can nevertheless proceed. For example. often an auction lot is offered without any internal viewings.

[pcwilkins]

For viewing purposes, the tenant does not want any viewing done in the daytime as he is not there but at work. But viewing can be done in the evenings and weekends he says but agent says that this will be a problem as most viewings are done in the day and in the week.

It's the tenants home, and he can decide who he wants to let in and when.


What is the best way to approach this because if the agents can not access this FLAT, I technically can not sell!! Tenants say he has expensive equipment and work stuff he is afraid will be NICKED blah blah.

Wait 'til the tenant's moved out.


I really need to come to a compromise with this Tennant even if it is only one daytime viewing in his absence that he agrees to in a week. Surely, that can not be too much to ask.

It is too much to ask, if T doesn't want to give it.


I do not see why he is being like this.

I don't think it's that unreasonable for a person to say that they don't want strangers wandering around their home whilst they're out. You should be glad that he is willing to let people look round in the evenings; I wouldn't!


Agents will not STEAL peoples stuff as this will put them out of business soon.

Stranger things have happened...


I do not want to resort to giving the Tennant Notice to Vacate as he has been a good paying tenant

Is he on a fixed-term or rolling agreement? Frankly if he knows you are selling he is probably looking for a new place anyway.


and I don’t know how long it will take to sell the flat so I do need the rental income coming in.

If you "need the rental income coming in" then you better keep your tenant happy. You can sell a flat without people viewing during the day, but it will just take longer. If you are in a hurry to sell you're better off getting the tenant out first, then you can have viewings any time you like. Swings and roundabouts.

Peter

[Nic]

Can't you arrange to show viewers around at evenings or weekends if the estate agent is not willing. If someone is really interested in your property these times would be fine. I usually go to view properties at these times as my other half is usually working during the day as normal working people are.

[Subway]

Who is responsible if goods are alleged to have been taken during a viewing, have you checked that out or are you just going to pay to cover any alleged losses? Would their possessions be insured under your cover?

I have been on plenty of viewings where I have been let walk around the property completely unsupervised by the agent and that would be in my mind if I was your tenant.

From the tenants perspective I can't see any reason why they would want to take the risk of having strangers in their home when they are not there, having to keep a check on your belongings to be able to notify any losses, not to mention annoyance or emotional impact of having property stolen and potential hassle from work if that equipment gets stolen.

I can only think I am down one of the extreme of finding it very worrying to think of people in my home when I am not there and just don't want my privacy invaded or the hassle of checking for and dealing with potential losses.

You seem to want everything your own way without considering your tenant's perspective and who seems to have been more than reasonable.

[offenderuk]

The tenant is completely within their rights to refuse access during the day. All you care about is selling the place, regardless of whether it is their home or not, the tenant cares about their property, privacy and most of all, their peace of mind.

They don't want to be at work worrying that something is going to go missing or that an absent minded agent may leave the door unlocked afterwards.

[fallenlord]

[QUOTE=offenderuk;53548]The tenant is completely within their rights to refuse access during the day. All you care about is selling the place, regardless of whether it is their home or not, the tenant cares about their property, privacy and most of all, their peace of mind.

This is not always true. A well written Tenancy Agreement will allow "at reasonable times of the day" and with advance warning of normally 24 hours, landlords and/or estate agents access to the property, normally within the final 2 months of a tenancy. Frankly, if the tenant has signed an agreement which includes such a clause I see no problem with a landlord or ea entering a property whether the tenant is present or not. I would interpret "reasonable times of the day" to mean normal working/daylight hours.

[fallenlord]

From the tenants perspective I can't see any reason why they would want to take the risk of having strangers in their home when they are not there, having to keep a check on your belongings to be able to notify any losses, not to mention annoyance or emotional impact of having property stolen and potential hassle from work if that equipment gets stolen.


It is certainly not in the interest of either an estate agent or potential purchaser to be accused of stealing anything. The arguement here is simply that people do their job properly - viewers must apreciate the circumstances and agents must accompany and be with the viewer at all times, so there is always a witness who could refute any such claim. If such simple precautions are taken I see no moral reason why viewings cannot take place in a tenants absence, provided it is in accordance with the tenancy agreement.

[sharemaster2]

Hi all,

Once more I come here for all your usefull advice.

I have always woundered if the refferences an EA does before letting a LL's flat can be requested for by the LL. Also what of Guarantor details, if one is asked for before a Tennant takes a flat can these information be open to the LL??

I would have thought that since EA is only an AGENT for the LL, the LL should legally be entituled to such information without falling short of DATA PROTECTION. Why should the EA be the only person with access to this information when the SUBJECT MATTER in question originates from the LL.
Can any one advice on this as I am about requesting for such from EA I used as the Tennent they found for me has not paid any rent since three months they moved and I want to see what refferences were done before property was given to T.

Thanks all.

[lorenzo]

[QUOTE=offenderuk;53548]The tenant is completely within their rights to refuse access during the day. All you care about is selling the place, regardless of whether it is their home or not, the tenant cares about their property, privacy and most of all, their peace of mind.

This is not always true. A well written Tenancy Agreement will allow "at reasonable times of the day" and with advance warning of normally 24 hours, landlords and/or estate agents access to the property, normally within the final 2 months of a tenancy. Frankly, if the tenant has signed an agreement which includes such a clause I see no problem with a landlord or ea entering a property whether the tenant is present or not. I would interpret "reasonable times of the day" to mean normal working/daylight hours.
What's in the AST is irrelevant if the tenant withdraws permission to access. Plenty of threads here that detail tenants common law right of peaceful enjoyment overriding AST entry clauses.

If tenant say no, tough. Best to work with tenant's legitimate wishes, otherwise he/she can withdraw access altogether.

[justaboutsane]

The Landlord is entitled to see ALL references as the agent is just that! An Agent! The Agent collects the references on behalf of the LL and as such the LL is entitled by law to see the references!

[Bel]

For the sake of clarity, the agent should state on the tenants application form who will be party to the tenants information, otherwise the tenant may not actually consent to the LL being shown the info, as at the time of application there is no business relationship between the LL and T.

[Surrey]

I would give the tenant notice if you can. You will more likely to sell if it is empty. But I'm sure others on the forum will disagree.

I tend to agree with you there, unless you're intending selling with a tenant 'in situ'. And if you ARE intending selling with tenant in situ, you really should try and keep him sweet and not try to railroad him into something he doesn't want to do with his own home.

If you're thinking of selling it vacant possession, could you cope with the property being empty for 3 months? If the tenant decides to be awkward and not move out and you've agreed that the property will be empty when sold, you could find yourself in all sorts of hot water. You might also find that if the property's empty you can spend a bit of time dressing the place nicely and a couple of hundred quid's worth of paint, clean curtains and fresh smells in a place can add thousands to the value, or persuade more people to get in there and make an offer to buy.

As for EA saying it's not possible to do viewings in the evenings, get another agent. It IS possible, and for many purchasers preferable, to view in the evenings. Tenant's being very reasonable in allowing viewings.

[justaboutsane]

You have confused the issue Bel... the AGENT is EMPLOYED by the LL therefore the references are carried out on BEHALF of the LL and therefore LL has right to see them.

[Bel]

You have confused the issue Bel... the AGENT is EMPLOYED by the LL therefore the references are carried out on BEHALF of the LL and therefore LL has right to see them.

I agree that the agent is employed on behalf of LL, but they also have obligations towards the tenant. I think for the purposes of data protection, the agency must be clear about obtaining authority to who they are allowed to show references to. They should also make it clear to LL before they reference, as to if LL is entitled to see references, to avoid any disappointment.

Also see thread:
http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=6138, where the agent does not allow the client to see references.

[jeffrey]

I do not know much law about data protection; but is it seriously being suggested that an agent cannot disclose to his principal? How can DP rules interfere with principal/agent relationship? And how could agent owe any duty (except for negligence) to T as a third party?

[Bel]

I do not know much law about data protection; but is it seriously being suggested that an agent cannot disclose to his principal? How can DP rules interfere with principal/agent relationship? And how could agent owe any duty (except for negligence) to T as a third party?

I'm no expert either.

The principles of data protection include data only being held with consent, and not processed further than the specified and lawful purpose. So if a credit referencing agency provides details to its member letting agent that have been stipulated as "for the agent's eyes only", the agent would be breaking confidentiality and the agreement by revealing all to the landlord.

The agent has the duty of care to the tenant; including the way they handle their information, and the quality of advice given.

[jeffrey]

The agent's eyes are those of the principal. That's what an agent is: an extension of the principal in person.

[Bel]

You know more about agency then I do, Jeffrey, but I have read on the forum about agents witholding info to landlords on several occasions. This may be because of mis-informed data-protection induced paranoia.

At the end of the day, surely an agent only has to do or show what his terms and conditions say he will do or show.

[fallenlord]

[QUOTE=fallenlord;53631]
What's in the AST is irrelevant if the tenant withdraws permission to access. Plenty of threads here that detail tenants common law right of peaceful enjoyment overriding AST entry clauses.

If tenant say no, tough. Best to work with tenant's legitimate wishes, otherwise he/she can withdraw access altogether.

Forgive me if I repeat comments already posted, but this is an interesting point you raise. A tenant can always dispute such a clause, but whether they will be sucessful would depend on the wording of the clause in the Tenancy Agreement and whether the clause can be certified as unfair under Office of Fair Trading contract terms regulations. Our Tenancy Agreements are prepared by the Letting Centre (can I name drop?) and the wording of this particular clause has been approved by the OFT. If a tenant disputed this with me I would be happy to refer them to a good solicitor, but I would advise any EA that viewings proceed.

[jeffrey]

What is the Letting Centre? Is it:
a. a solicitor's trading name;
b. a quasi-official/quango body or similar tentacle of HMG; or
c. a voluntary body?

[jeffrey]

[quote=fallenlord;53749]
What are you going to do? Kick the door in? Be prepared for a criminal charge.

If the tenant says no, you're stooofed. All you can possibly do is s21 them. I doubt that even an s8 would succeed.

I'm useless at finding old threads, can someone point FL in the right direction please?

Try macrosearch for OFT or Office of Fair Trading. This will reveal the previous bouts of "yes, it is; no, it's not" dialogue!

[Planner]

The OFT stuff is pretty irrelevant when talking about access rights of landlords. All that the OFT are interested in is if a term is written fairly. So obviously a "landlord can just walk in at any time" term is unfair and they recommend that its removed and placed with a much fairer one, possibly like what the good old lettings centre (who ever they maybe) has agreed with the OFT. All that the OFT stamp means is that it is "fair" nothing more, nothing less.

None of this overides the Tenants commonlaw right to "quite enjoyment";

The landlord has the right to 'reasonable' access to carry out repairs for which s/he is responsible, but s/he should always ask for the tenant's permission, and should give at least 24 hours' notice (s11(6) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985). If the landlord wants to enter the property for any other reason, for example, to show round a prospective purchaser, s/he can only do this with the tenant's agreement. The tenant is fully entitled to refuse his/her permission if the date/time is inconvienient. The tenant should not refuse without good grounds, as it may cause a breakdown of relationship with the landlord.

The tenant has a right of quiet enjoyment of the tenancy. This means that s/he can occupy the premises without being disturbed by the landlord or her/his agents. Quiet enjoyment is an implied contractual right whether or not it is written into the tenancy agreement.

Same old, same old.

[jeffrey]

...so T's refusal of access, in breach of s.11(6), could hardly rely on OFT Guidelines, as the clear statutory wording overrides them. For the same reason, an AST that follows the s.11(6) wording must be OK too.

Glad that this is clear.

[fallenlord]

What is the Letting Centre? Is it:
a. a solicitor's trading name;
b. a quasi-official/quango body or similar tentacle of HMG; or
c. a voluntary body?

Heres their link:

http://www.letlink.co.uk/

[Harry]

This question comes very close to home for me.

I have despaired of ever making money on my flat, so I want to sell.

The tenant is a nice guy, who has always paid his rent on time, and I don't want to deprive him of his home.

I have written to him, explaining the position, and offering to sell him the flat at a discount, as well as making him a low interest-only loan of the deposit, with the capital to be repaid when/if he ever sells. I've yet to hear back from him.

I would imagine I would have to just trust him on the repayment, as the building society will have the first and only call on the property, and wouldn't be very amused if they knew he wasn't finding the deposit from his own resources.

Viewings would probably put people off, as he's a bachelor who is slumming it. The place is filthy. Even if people saw past that, if he wants to stay, a tenant can easily put off prospective buyers.

[Surrey]

... This may be because of mis-informed data-protection induced paranoia...

How often has the DPA been quoted at me! As an aside, did you know that the DPA only applies if the person whose data you are requesting is actually alive? If you're trying to find info for sorting out probate for example and someone tells you to DPA off, they're wrong. There is most definitely a paranoia around. Either that or people hide their laziness behind it, another common happening.

[heather5]

As tenant - this is such a regular occurence for me it's depressing!

Particularly as everytime I rent - I check out whether they are going to sell - and everyone says no.

Okay from a tenant perspective - all of the viewings requested - were out of office hours - i.e. between 6-8pm and numerous at weekends!!!

Only one was requested during the day - so I'm not in total agreement of what the agent says for starters.

I had to work hard to get the EA to show during 6-8pm and during Saturday only - but I did it.

However, in the past - I've had to suppervise myself, viewings at 9pm and early morning!! With no notice given.

So I'd work with your tenant if you can and make sure the EA does his job - most people who want to view are on working hours - unless you're selling a 4/5 bed property in which case it's the woman who views first - in my experience. Sexist - yes but it does tend to be the case. Women view first - men do the second viewings.

Don't know what the terms are - I still have 3 months to run - but the property went on market 4.5 months to run of 1 year - and I've been under such circumstances many times.

However, once a buyer has been found and contracts exchanged - I'm not sure what happens - I'm in that situation now - I'm a tenant in situ but do not have a landlord, just been told to move out without any formal notice given.

Time and again I've offered to move out if my moving costs were paid - but no LL yet has ever taken them up - even this one who has sold and exchanged - but it is not a buy-to-let sale.

Ignore the EA - make them work for their money - and work with the tenant.

I kept the place increadibly tidy and clean for viewings but only allowed them 24-hours in advance - so I could do so - less than 24-hours I refused!

[Mrs Dingle]

This area is so complex that even the police have problems with this on a day to day basis.So I was informed today.The council can ask for data on a person for rental persons and thats ok.If a private landlord asked for it it it may be a problem.There are a lot of instances where this information is readily given i.e. drivers of school buses ,foster carers,teachers.If an agent payed by you the landlord.Has been given information about a potential clent(tenant).For your purpose.I cannot come up with any reason why you should not be party to all information.I,m no expert.Just my opinion.Mrs Dingle

[sharemaster2]

Hi all,

Wow, I have been reading all the input on this topic and can say it has been a good responce.

In the end, I went ahead and asked the LA for the details and was actually faxed all the details as requested.

I then called my Tennants' mum who was my Tennant's Guarantor. I called her at work and explained what was happening and how I intend starting legal proceedings against her and my tennant. She was shocked to hear that her daughter was not paying rent, as asked me to hold off any proceedings as she was going to SORT her daughter out. Two Hours later T who has refused to call and avoided all my calls for weeks was on the phone being nice and telling me her mum has been on to her and this was going to be sorted. SHE NEEDED more time. I refused any more time!! and made sure cash was paid in to my account TODAY or else I was going back to her MUM. It worked!! Money was paid in to my account this afternoon for all RENT OWED. So it was a nice conclusion.
Just to point out this was only possible because the LA did not try to hide behind DPA. They gave me the details I needed to chase the guarantor whom I threatned with legal action. So, I hope people on this forum can see that excuses from some LA's with DPA can be FLOORED indeed. If not for the LA being reasonable and letting me have the information, this would have draged on for more weeks and months and most likely I would have lost out in the end as Tennant could have just WALKED with all that CASH owed.

Thanks again all and I hope we all make strides in our endevours. Long Live This ZONE for LANDLORD.

[davidjohnbutton]

Read this carefully - then print it out and put it where you can see it every day - notice board, wall or whatever.

"35 Disclosures required by law or made in connection with legal proceedings etc (1) Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is required by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court.
(2) Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is necessary—
(a) for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings), or
(b) for the purpose of obtaining legal advice,
or is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights."

and then when someone quotes "I cannot tell you because of the data protection act" - you can say to them "But you can under the provisions of Section 35 of the Data Protection Act 1998 which says (read out above text) because I may have to sue that person/am in the process of issuing legal proceedings/need to obtain legal advice/or whatever your reason is that fits the criteria.

Learning this text and quoting it will pay dividends - believe me!!!!!

[ageddes99]

I am selling my property. The tenant has already received S8 and S21 and I am about to instruct proceedings to evict and recover arrears. The tenant has hinted at obstructing viewings of the property which we have agreed to be on one day in every week. What access am I entitled to and can the tenant refuse or obstruct viewings or access if they have already agreed to them to be on a certain day each week.

I think reality biting that the tenant is on their way and sour grapes but wish to make sure all is done properly

[P.Pilcher]

Regrettably, despite owing you considerable amounts of rent, the law still entitles your tenant to "quiet enjoyment" of the property thus he is within his rights to prevent any form of access for the purpose of viewing by potential purchasers. You will probably do best to evict him and then, once you have obtained vacant possession start marketing. Unfortunately, if you start before this, your tenant's antics are a good excuse for a potential purchaser to offer an artificially low price.

P.P.

[ageddes99]

Thanks for that which I did fear was the worst case scenario. The S8 notice expires tomorrow and I expect no sign of an money being coughed up so I do expect I will also have to instruct proceedings.

I have also found today that the tenant is also a bankrupt that is undischarged indefintely, so it just gets better. Not sure what my position is now in terms of proceedings. Do I still petition to evict and claim arrears and then if I do get an order do I then pass that to the insolvency office already dealing with the person

[MDM]

If the tenant is bankrupt then all his finances should be in the hands of the court who would consider rent an allowable expense from whatever income he had. When did he go bankrupt ? before he became your tenant ? if so how did he pass credit checks ? if after his rent - I believe - should have been handled by the court.

You still go to evict and claim arrears but at this point you may simply be adding your name to a long list of creditors.

good luck

[ageddes99]

Yes they were bankrupt before entering into tenancy agreement and I did not credit check so there is a lesson learned!

Sounds like a notice to evict and then and I will be on the list of creditors. I suspect the person has been here before when the bankruptcy went through and I suspect has used their double barelled surname to their advantage to evade detection since the bankruptcy in 2000!

[Surrey]

As for selling, you'd be much better off, if cash-flow allows, to get the place empty, spend a few hundred quid throwing paint at the walls and new cheap carpet on the floor and a bit of set-dressing. You'd be able to ask a higher price and would be more likely to get more viewings than when a smelly tenant is in there. I know I wouldn't buy a house with a tenant in it if it was for myself to live in.

[dippydora]

To clarify I have just phoned the Information Commissioners Office website [URL="http://www.ico.gov.uk"]URL] and they stated that LL has NO right to the information given to the LL agent. In the case of criminal proceedings, you can ask them to give you the information, but they do NOT have to and there is no way you can make them. (They may give the info.with a solicitors letter (just to absolve themselves of any responsibility, but again they do not have to.
I also asked.. if when first obtaining references etc. that LL would require information was passed on to him stated on paperwork,then that is OK if they have given permission. Even though Landlord's agent is acting solely on LL behalf, Agent does NOT have to release the information to them.
This is ridiculous and is something Landlord's should know about

[Surrey]

And another thing - if you happen to be seeking information about a deceased person and someone chucks the DPA at them, bear in mind that it refers to information only about someone who is alive. Useful to know if you end up having to sort out affairs after a death.

[steve42]

I have a good agent, they make a point of showing me tenant references up front.
I trust my agent has made sure they have the right to do so. If they need authority from prospective T and T refuses then we get another T.
If your agent does not show references, get another agent.

[BusyBee]

We have a tenant who has given us notice to vacate the property on 24th February. As I understand it from the AST, during the last 2 months of the tenancy he must allow the Landlord or Agent to access the property to do viewings. The tenant is not allowing this at all. Is he in breach of his AST? Can we withhold some or all or his deposit because of this? Any help would be appreciated.

[justaboutsane]

Tenant has the right to quiet enjoyment right up until they leave. If they say no to viewings that is their right.

However, I would try and arrange a meeting at the property to take a look around ... you never know what they could be hiding! .. OR it could just be that they want to pack up and move in peace without having to make sure the house is spotless for viewings.

[heather5]

i'm still amazed how many times this comes up on this site from LLs - you have no rights if the tenant refuses you entry that's it - under the right of quiet enjoyment.

unless the property is on fire and emergency conditions - i.e. boiler gas leak etc.

up to you to develop relationship so that you can get in and anyone else acting on your behalf ... with tenant - offering incentive sometimes works depending on circumstances.

[pcwilkins]

Is he in breach of his AST? Can we withhold some or all or his deposit because of this?

Even if T is in breach of the AST, that doesn't mean you can withhold his deposit! The deposit is there to cover damage to the property, not for you to take money from to punish the tenant for not doing what you want.

Peter

[Bel]

He is within his rights to so, but he is breaching the AST.

Drop it gently that you won't give him a good reference in the future unless he makes an effort; that's your only weapon.

[ololon]

Greetings all! I'm a tenant with a question about right of access at the end of an invoked break clause.

We gave two months notice in writing, as stipulated by our break clause. Our notice period ends on April 5th; we are moving into our new flat on March 6th. We wrote to our landlord to tell him that, as we were moving (which he knew), we would no longer be as readily available for viewings as we have been. We said we needed at least 24 hours' notice and that he should tell his agents that 48 hours is better for firm appointments. We did stipulate that we cannot show the apartment before 1pm (we have a child in nursery), nor after daylight hours.

Our AST simply says we must allow the landlord access "within reasonable hours in daytime" and "with reasonable notice."

Landlord has responded by stating -- not asking, stating -- that he will show the house himself if a prospective tenant needs to see it with less than 24 hours notice and he'll let us know if he does that.

We said no, we don't give permission to any one to enter the house without at least 24 hours notice, not even him.

Can he come in without our permission? Is our insisting on at least 24 hours notice within specific hours (but we are offering at least 5 hours a day) unreasonable, by law? Does the fact that the property will no longer be our primary residence effect our status in any way (the place may be "empty" for 27 days, although we will check on it and may well stay there within that period)?

Thanks.

[swinefever]

No, the Landlord cannot enter the premises without your permission. Whatever, the tenancy agreement says, by law, the landlord still has to give 24 hours written notice to inspect the condition and repair of the property at reasonable times of the day. Your statutory rights override the tenancy agreement.

Even with this notice, the landlord cannot enter the property without your permission, unless there is an emergency.

[pcwilkins]

Swinefever is right; unless it's an emergency, LL cannot enter property without your permission. If it's just for showing new T's around, you aren't obliged to let him enter at all, either with 24hrs notice or without, no matter what AST says.

However, I am confused. If you are not going to be living in the place after March 5th, why do you object to LL showing new T's round? Surely if you're not there, it doesn't matter when he enters.

Why not say you will allow LL to enter when he wants provided he releases you from your obligation to pay the rent from March 6th to April 5th?

Peter

[graham08]

Well there's 2 points here: first of all the landlord won't be able to enter without giving 24 hours notice first and thats the same everywhere regardless of anything else going on.

Secondly I would say that given your current circumstances, only giving a maximum viewing hours of 12 - 6pm will allow most people to view but there will be a substancial amount of people wanting to view in the evening after work and such, so I suggest being a little bit more flexible. Even when you're not in the house people could still be shown around like pcwilkins said, where's the problem with that? Hope this helps :)

[islandgirl]

This one comes round so often....! Tenants DO NOT have to allow a landlord to enter, even with 24 hours notice. It is as simple as that. If you are paying for the property it is your choice. PC Wilkins is as usual correct - it does not matter one jot what the AST says, LL cannot come in unless you say YES!

[Paul_f]

Please note - it's 24 hours WRITTEN notice. The landlord has an implied right of entry only to inspect for repairs or damage and that would be about every quarter as a reasonable guide.

[jeffrey]

Please note - it's 24 hours WRITTEN notice. The landlord has an implied right of entry only to inspect for repairs or damage and that would be about every quarter as a reasonable guide.
...except in case of emergency, when imediate access must be given (or, if it's not, L can force entry).

"Dear Sir,
This is a one-month written notice that I need access to the house let to you, as it's in the process of burning down."

[AndyT]

My HB tenant on a 12 month AST beg 1st Nov 2007. On 21st Dec we issued a s8 notice for various breaches of AST and 2 months partial rent arrears. One ground listed was she allowed the deterioration of flat due to serious condensation and lack of adequate ventilation.

Tenant blamed LA for incorrectly assessing HB and us for inadequate ventilation of flat. Early Jan 08 I received notices from local CAB they had contacted LA and a rent reassessment would be done soon, and EHO saying they followed up a complaint from tenant about unhealthy living conditions, we responsible as the L and they suggested works to rectify.

We have 5 instances where we have given the required 24hr Notice in writing and the tenant has either not given or refused us or our contractors permission to access the flat for the remedial works. We have gained access the last 3 occasions by calling EHOs asking their help as tenant hasnt consented for the time/date stated, EHO's chase her for consent,she says yes to them but not us - we live next to rental so she not going far.

We have nearly completed the remedial works, but access really an issue, we have had 2 tradesman say no to jobs as we cant guarantee access so they may lose a days work. On Sunday we have to give notice requesting access to flat on Tuesday pm to show tradespeople through to get quotes for painting/decorating.

We want to say in notice if we do not receive her written authorisation (will provide a form so she only need to sign) we will go to county court to gain access. Is 5 recorded instances enough of a history, she made the complaint now it appears she deliberately delaying the works? EHO's say they happy we trying to get work done, they want this case off their books, T shouldn't be refusing access following her complaint.

After EHO sign off the works we will continue the eviction process, or should we do it sooner. The HB reassessment came through, she remains in rent arrears.

The T/L relationship is hostile, her boyfriend very aggressive, we've reported him to police for verbal threat of violence he made direct to wife. T and boyfriend badgering us for compensation for damaged clothes and personal items, at first I said you should have contents insurance, now I say put concerns in writing and forward or take us to Small Claims court as you advised to do. Implied threats of physical violence are made to me by the boyfriend every time I enter flat even with a tradesman, I document and report to police, they say implied is not a direct threat so cant follow up. The wife getting friendly with members of the SNT as she calls regularly as each new threat made, they say wait continue documenting but wait until eviction process begun then they will visit Tenant for a friendly chat. The SNT team and we believe the tenant will counterclaim we harassing and threatening them by being in property constantly and will begin calling police to complain about our behaviour. We are having cctv installed around our home as a security measure.

We are convinced Tenant trying distraction techniques to delay possession process. She has packed all her belongings up said wont move out until forced to and wants cash compensation for the items ruined by mould and condensation.

Would appreciate advice re access and eviction process and anything else legal we could do to protect ourselves.

[ololon]

Thanks everyone. If the LL would release us from our obligation to pay, he can do with the place what he wishes -- it's his.

He won't. What he wants is free access but we still have to pay. His argument is that if we want the place rented before the end of our notice, we'll let him come and go as is necessary.

We have done already for over three weeks. Average 5 appts. a week, only once 24 hours notice, only once in writing. We never said no to an appt. and always made sure the place was presentable. Tell all prospective T's that we're moving because of space, and that the LL is great.

Sound like dream tenants, don't we? We're not -- when we need something done, we need it done properly and without fuss. But we've never withheld rent, never even paid late, are quiet, clean, and don't need LLs to change our lightbulbs. And we make it a point of not being vindictive, as tempting as it may be.

AST states that T agrees to allow LL reasonable access during daylight hours with reasonable notice for the last two months of the tenancy. Break clause addendum does not mention access, but our assumption is that the AST stipulation applies.

Can we really just say, "No, we aren't available that day and you can't enter without us?" The LL knew we were leaving and when, knows we have a child, and knows we use public transport -- what would reasonable access be?

Thanks again.

[Grange]

Ts, don't you just love them. Complain to EH and then don't let you in to remedy the defects that EH raise. Been there, done that. I'd be inclined just to wait until they've been evicted before doing anything; talk to EHO and see if you can agree this. Save both of you a lot of time.


at first I said you should have contents insurance,

Yup.

This goes back to my oft-repeated suggestion that all rental flats should have humidistat-activated extractor fans in bathroom and kitchen - and maybe other rooms too.

[johnboy]

You dont want tenants like that in your property GET THEM OUT ASAP.

Get your section 8 checked out to make sure it is valid and the grounds you are seeking possesion are they mandortory?

As soon as the tenant is 1month and one day in arrears apply to council to get payments paid direct to yourselves (they have to) also section 8 grounds 8,10,11. Look into grounds 14 no notice has to be given and you can apply for a hearing but it is not mandortory though.

Has the contract got a break clause in it??

[ololon]

Hi everyone. Thank you again. The situation I posted about a couple of days ago has come to a bit of a head, so I want to be clear about what I am doing.

Notice was given. Two months as per break clause. We let our new flat "early" and are effectively paying two rents from March 1st -- April 5th. We told LL what we did and asked that he market the place early. We have accommodated at least 15 prospective tenant visits (not including those canceled) since, only two of which were preceded by at least 24 hours notice. No complaints made, as we wanted the place let.

We are moving next week -- with a child, no car, and being 6 miles away, we cannot show this place much. Issue of access has come up. It is my understanding that I need not admit anyone, and that my permission is needed. Am I correct? Except in case of emergency. As we have shown the place, repeatedly and with little notice, the LL cannot claim we have not offered reasonable access, correct?

LL does not want to take possession. He wants us to pay through the end of our notice and has informed all agencies (so far, 5) that the place is not available until April. This will not change; landlord just told me that our notice runs until April and he won't get a tenant in earlier. Why he won't protect his own investment is beyond me. At this point, I feel I've done my part and shown it repeatedly for weeks, without once turning down a request for viewing and without insisting on my notification rights. We will no longer be local and, as we are paying, we don't want anyone in without us.

Am I wrong?

[Subway]

I sympathise with your situation. Are you worried about damage to the property and thus impact on your deposit or will you still have contents at the flat? Regardless you should have the right to stop someone coming in.

If its the former can you negotiate handing back the keys and settling condition / deposit meter readings etc early? I know this would be galling as you are still paying for the property but it might be a low stress route and moving is going to be stressful enough for you.

If you do want to stop him it seems you are in a situation where you would need to enforce that right rather than rely on this being respected. The only sure way I can see a tenant can do this is to physically stop the LL coming in by changing locks. I guess it depends on the cost, time and energy this will take if doing this is worth it to you at this stage in the tenancy.

I'd be interested to know how anyone has actually been able to enforce or their right not to have someone in their home unless they are actually there to stop entry. The landlords on this forum seem very reasonable in respecting this right but I don't think this extends to most landlords / agents who seem to think they do have the right even if you say no in advance to enter your home with only 24 hours notice (or less in your case) and no permission.

At the moment I would suggest putting your foot down and refusing any more visits I can't see this is unreasonble in the midst of moving. You will be there to enforce this by refusing entry so that he perhaps gets the message.

[ololon]

We know we can't stop him without kicking him out, but we've already refused one request for a viewing. Let's see if he wakes up.

We still cannot believe he shot himself in the foot like this.

[AndyT]

Unfortunately no break clause. We are first time LL, a nightmare experience we will be certain to never live through again.

Yes to humidistat fans. Only the bathroom left to complete then slap on the paint. All works finished. We will call EHO Monday to discuss delaying work till tenant gone, we concerned tenant will counterclaim withholding some rent due to substandard property - it wasnt before she went in.

Currently we receive HB directly, I have checked with LA Benefits Team about change of payment re 7th April, they say wait for official notice advising of change over, at the moment they themselves not received any information how the rollout happening. The wife mentioned this to SNT, the cops rolled their eyes and said what a nightmare, very few LL will make properties available to HB tenants now, sitting ones will fight to stay where they are - espec the bad ones like ours.

[AndyT]

10 - 4 months partially in arrears, calculated by new HB allowance
11 - we've sent monthly reminders of the arrears and payment expected by next rent due date.
12 - never paid deposit was a condition of AST.
The batteries deliberately removed from smoke alarms invalidating our insurance, our written request sent 4 weeks ago to rectify this oversight still ignored as alarms not functioning.

----------

12 - We know why she took out the batteries, the boyfriend smokes like a train. We will be fitting hardwired connected alarms, direct to fusebox, if these disconnected we prepared to go to court and claim deliberate criminal damage, seek cost for repairs. We dont expect to receive any money, but want to get a ccjs so all LL can see she was in rent arrears and damages. No decent responsible LL deserves sc*m T such as her.

[jeffrey]

If there are partial arrears in respect of four months, does the total exceeds eight weeks' rent? If so, use ground 8 too [mandatory ground].

[peri]

Bought a flat with a sitting tenant, has statuory rights ive been told as he has been living there since the 70's..
The T will agree an appointment for access to the flat but is never there apparently.. I understand I am liable for a gas certificate each year, I have sent a person to do this after arrangeing an appointment with the T and he just doesnt open the door.. this has been going on for a few years..
I have also got issues with unpaid rent, I notify a solicitor wich I cannot afford, the solicitor will send a notice of eviction , no reply, we set a court date and on the date of the court appearance his solicitor will contact mine and make the outstanding payment. I have also applied to the fair rent office to increase the rent, wich was done 2 years ago. The T. refuses to pay this new rent, and according to my solicitor his solicitors respond with "I cannot get in touch with my client".. I am now at a stage where I can not afford to pay my solicitor any more fees and unsure what to do.. I have been told from neighbours in the building that the flat is fillled with old newspapers, as I understand it that is a health and safety hazzard if a fire breaks out.
My solicitor has set 2 court dates since owning the flat, for eviction and this just seems to go around in circles.. I am now unemployed dont have a flat of own to stay in anymore and am wondering if there is any definate course of action to finaly evict this tenant?

[jeffrey]

1. T is probably protected by the Rent Act 1977. Nothing you do can detract from this protection. You surely knew all this before you exchanged contracts and completed your purchase.
2. However, you do have rights re the arrears. In limited cases, you might be able to terminate the tenancy.
3. Local Housing Authority may be able to intervene, on public health grounds. Social Services could also be a useful way to T.

[Bel]

Jeffrey, even if the tenant pays up before the hearing, can't it still go to court as tenant is in breach of tenancy for arrears; the own poor circumstances of the landlord might be taken into consideration, and perhaps the the cost of court fees be charged to the tenant??

[jeffrey]

Jeffrey, even if the tenant pays up before the hearing, can't it still go to court as tenant is in breach of tenancy for arrears; the own poor circumstances of the landlord might be taken into consideration, and perhaps the the cost of court fees be charged to the tenant??
See s.98 of 1977 Act. Rent arrears ground is case 1 in Schedule 15 but still only discretionary.

[Esio Trot]

See s.98 of 1977 Act. Rent arrears ground is case 1 in Schedule 15 but still only discretionary.

And whilst an outright possession order may not succeed, a suspended one is much more likely - but only if asked for. e.g. the order might read "Possession Order suspended for such time as the defendant does not become more than one month in arrears".

Makes it much easier then to get rid if the arrears situation arises again.

[ivrytwr3]

Hey all,

I have given the tenant notice that they will be required to leave mid Jul 08 time; no problems with tenant we just want to live in the property ourselves. The tenant has been there approx 18 months.

We informed our letting agent that we would like to have new radiators installed in the upstairs (downstairs is done) and would require a couple of tradesmen to gain access to quote for the job. We are looking at getting the radiators installed asap, so tenant would have some benefit from them.

The letting agents seem to be dragging the heels and left arm/right arm doesn't know what each is doing syndrome seems to be happening here. So much so that a tradesmen turned up today and no-one was present at the property.

How can i ensure an appointment is kept and they can gain access? Does the tenant HAVE to be present if we give sufficient notice etc?

ta!

[bagpuss]

In fact, you can't. Your tenants don't have to give you or your tradesmen access to the house unless it's for safety reasons. You can ask them nicely if they'll let your tradesmen in to do this work, but they are quite within their rights to refuse and there's nothing you can do about it. You may even have to wait until they move out.

If they do give you access, though, you'd have to agree with them as to whether or not they want the tradesman in the house alone, if they want him supervised or if they're willing to be there themselves and let him in. They make the decisions, not you.

I can't comment on the relationship with your agent but really he should have told you that this is the legal position.

[agent46]

In fact, you can't. Your tenants don't have to give you or your tradesmen access to the house unless it's for safety reasons. You can ask them nicely if they'll let your tradesmen in to do this work, but they are quite within their rights to refuse and there's nothing you can do about it. You may even have to wait until they move out.

If they do give you access, though, you'd have to agree with them as to whether or not they want the tradesman in the house alone, if they want him supervised or if they're willing to be there themselves and let him in. They make the decisions, not you.

I can't comment on the relationship with your agent but really he should have told you that this is the legal position.


That's assuming an awful lot without asking about the terms of the tenancy relating to access.

[Colincbayley]

That's assuming an awful lot without asking about the terms of the tenancy relating to access.

Maybe, but even if access terms were written into the AST it would be a damm hard job enforcing them!

[agent46]

Maybe, but even if access terms were written into the AST it would be a damm hard job enforcing them!

You're right - you would not be able to force the tenants to be present, but one mustn't jump to conclusions without asking about the terms of the tenancy.

Why don't the LAs oversee the works or just open the door?

[islandgirl]

Jeffrey is needed but as I understand it it does not matter what is in the AST - if a tenant refuses access you cannot enter. It is like a term saying "the tenancy ends if rent is unpaid for 14 days" - sounds good but not worth the ink on the typewriter ribbon!

[agent46]

Jeffrey is needed but as I understand it it does not matter what is in the AST - if a tenant refuses access you cannot enter. It is like a term saying "the tenancy ends if rent is unpaid for 14 days" - sounds good but not worth the ink on the typewriter ribbon!

That analogy doesn't work as the "rent is unpaid for 14 days etc" term is what's known as a forfeiture clause, which is absolutely necessary to allow the LL to bring possession proceedings for rent arrears.

[islandgirl]

Perhaps not but I stand by my view that access is not allowed, whatever it states in the AST if the tenant refuses. Anyone else have an opinion or is it just you and I who are sad enough to be on here at 11.20 on a Wed night Agent46!

[jeffrey]

Look: T can give access rights, in Agreement or otherwise, but- equally- T can withdraw those rights.

[agent46]

Look: T can give access rights, in Agreement or otherwise, but- equally- T can withdraw those rights.

In which case, if the tenant should be minded to sue for trespass, then the LL can counterclaim breach of covenant. As to what the quantum of damages would be on each side - who knows.....

Obviously, that doesn't really help the LL if the tenant decides to exercise self-help and throws him out on the pavement, but in the absence of that remedy, and so long as he knows the sky is not going to fall in the moment he turns the key in the door, then the LL may actually get his radiators fitted.

[Mark Hessel]

I would add my two pence as a litigator who has dealt with the fallout of such situations - try all you want to argue it is in the tenancy you will get no joy with the Court when you are sued for breach of their right to quiet enjoyment, trespass, harassment and intimidation (plus whatever else they can think off, possibly illegal eviction if they feel so scared they felt they were being forced to leave). What you "know" happened and what the Tenant "says" happened is far far different; the Court will view you as greedy landlord and the tenant as downtrodden and impoverished, especially if they are unrepresented, crying and holing a new born baby (that's a great day out in Court you can be sure).

From the description of the works you may also get to witness some very funny (when it is not happening to you that is) legal logic when a clearly dissatisfied Judge says "So what you are telling me Mr/Mrs X is that you want some lovely new radiators to keep warm with when you live there, should I take that to mean you have left your tenants living in some unsatisfactory and unfit habitation? That sounds suspiciously like disrepair, does it not?" That is one lovely little trap for you right there.

I spent two hours last Friday arguing over an injunction and why my client should not pay a lot of costs to the other side. I had every legal argument under the sun and had picked about ten legal defects in their application. It got me nowhere as the Court simply kept saying "Yes Mr Hessel, but your client trespassed and carried out work they should not have done, is that not why we are here after all".

[susanne]

i have read somewhere - maybe the brains here in LLZ can comment - that there was a case taken to court by a Tenant against the LL for infringement of his "quiet enjoyment" because the LL had let himself in to accompany the CORGI guy for the Landlords Gas safety inspection - the tenant won - as the judge reckoned the right to "quiet enjoyment" over-rode all other rights except those of an emergency such as gas leak etc

is that an apocryphal story or the truth ?

[agent46]

i have read somewhere - maybe the brains here in LLZ can comment - that there was a case taken to court by a Tenant against the LL for infringement of his "quiet enjoyment" because the LL had let himself in to accompany the CORGI guy for the Landlords Gas safety inspection - the tenant won - as the judge reckoned the right to "quiet enjoyment" over-rode all other rights except those of an emergency such as gas leak etc

is that an apocryphal story or the truth ?

That rings a bell with me.

I'm going to concede the point on this issue (it was always going to be a pretty unsupportable view). :p

I was only putting forward a contrary view in order to get people to think a bit more carefully about, or to support the bare propositions they were making.....(ie: a dialectic).

[boredbird]

Letting Centre ?.............a friend who worked in lettings went on a legal course with them about 5/6 yrs ago. They covered a legal problem that she was facing at the time, after the course she clarifyed the answer with the tutor, just to make sure she had got it right.
Went back to the office, and set the action in motion, just as she had been told..................went to court and judge awarded the tenant £5k, as the action the agency took was illegal !!!!!!!
Needless to say they did not use them again. So be careful who you trust, even busineses with printed books can be wrong !!!!!

[Usa007]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before I had a quick look round and couldnt see anything specific.

We have tenants in our property (which is being run by a letting agent), part way through he brought his girlfriend in - the letting agent agreed, then his rent became late and then came in two parts (it is not currently in arrears). then he sent me an email to tell us he has moved in his dog - I told the letting agent no and to get an inspection of the property and get the dog out. This was maybe 6 months ago and after repeated unanswered phone calls and letters and emails he has ignored all of them. A section 21 was issued to co-inside with the end of his lease in July. We still have had no contact with him nor has the agent and I need to start marketing the property. He also seems to be running a business from the address which again is in breach of contract and also the convenants of the proepty.

How can I legally gain access to asses the damage and make sure its not been trashed if he wont answer calls etc. I have a feeling he will just do a runner in July and although I have the bond the house is a 5 bedroom 1 acre lot and if damage is significant its not going to get me much further than dog soil removal.
Thanks

[SALL]

Are you from the USA?

This is a UK forum and I don't think people here would be able to help you. As the Law in USA is different to UK Law.

[Editor]

If a tenant won't allow you access when you give notice there's not a lot you can do legally.
If you persist you could be accused of harassment, so it's just not worth the risk.
I would wait until the tenancy is up now (as it is so close) and if necessary go for a possession order - if tenants won't communicate you will not gain much by persisting as they won't see reason if you do get through.
Hopefully you have a good inventory recording the condition on entry which will help you evidence any dilapidations claim.
Is your deposit in one of the schemes? If so you will probably need to provide evidence to an arbitrator to get recompence.
As he is in breach of contract on more than one count (especially damage by the unauthorised pet) hopefully this will strengthen your claim if you go to the Small Claims Court for any additional damages.
If he is self employed it is more difficult but total up all your expenses and go for a claim - no body wants their credit record destroying with a CCJ, especialy the self-employed.
If he absconds you can easily do a skip trace on him.
See: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/dir/tenant-tracing.htm
See also: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/small_claims_court.htm
and http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/BlogNews/LandlordLOGJuly07.pdf#search="small claims"

[Editor]

SALL - don't think he's from the USA if he issued a s21!

[Usa007]

I live in USA now but I rent out or former home in UK,

[Usa007]

I believe the deposit is with the letting agent in a designated account, it was let out in July 2007 and I have heard nothing to the contary - he is a well established letting agent and has numerous properties so I hope he has done everything properly - we pay him enough!!

[Paul_f]

I think you had better ask your agent what he has done otherwise you might not be able to evict using S.21 if the agent is not registered with one of the tenancy deposit schemes. I trust that they are but you never can tell!

[bonzo]

Hi

Just joined for some advice for my daughter.

My daughter has her birthday this weekend and has arranged for some friends to come and stay at the house she is renting (her fellow tenants are all away at the moment). However the landlord has sent her a text today saying they intend to come this weekend to do some internal repair work (not emergency repairs). I think they are intending to come both days.

Is my daughter within her rights to refuse entry on the grounds that it is not convenient this weekend? She's perfectly happy to allow access any other time, just not this weekend.

Thanks for any advice.

[Paragon]

Yes, it is her right to say this weekend is not suitable. After all, she could be in bed with a very contagious bug - just for example.

[bonzo]

Thanks for replies.

She's sent a reply text to the landlord so await a response. As a matter of interest does a text from the landlord count as written notice?

I've had a chance now to do a bit of searching around the forums and this (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=8710&highlight=access) thread is a bit worrying because pcwilkins didn't get an answer to the last post where he/she posed the question

"So access must be granted for repairs; but not for inspections/viewings of new tenants or buyers?"

[islandgirl]

Don't worry. If the tenant says no, it means no. As I understand it access is by mutual agreement ONLY. The landlord can only enter in an emergency. A politely worded response to say that you are totally prepared to allow access at a mutually convenient time but that this weekend is not convenient should sort out the situation.

[bonzo]

Well despite my daughter stating that this weekend is not convenient and requesting that the landlord suggest an alternative time, it looks as though they still intend to enter and carry out the work.

Part of the work is to re-tile behind the work surface in the kitchen and my daughter had said in her text that she will be cooking for guests. The landlord has basically said that the work will not interfere.

My daughter feels there is really nothing she can do to stop this.

This is the last month of the tenancy and I suspect the landlord (actually a landlady) is banking on my daughter not wanting the hassle of taking her to court over it.

:mad:

[Paragon]

Well despite my daughter stating that this weekend is not convenient and requesting that the landlord suggest an alternative time, it looks as though they still intend to enter and carry out the work.

Part of the work is to re-tile behind the work surface in the kitchen and my daughter had said in her text that she will be cooking for guests. The landlord has basically said that the work will not interfere.

My daughter feels there is really nothing she can do to stop this.

This is the last month of the tenancy and I suspect the landlord (actually a landlady) is banking on my daughter not wanting the hassle of taking her to court over it.

:mad:

Why don't you go and stay with her for support? Do not let them in. I am a LL and if a tenant told me a certain time was not suitable, I would arrange another time.

[Southcoast Landlord]

Well despite my daughter stating that this weekend is not convenient and requesting that the landlord suggest an alternative time, it looks as though they still intend to enter and carry out the work.

Part of the work is to re-tile behind the work surface in the kitchen and my daughter had said in her text that she will be cooking for guests. The landlord has basically said that the work will not interfere.

My daughter feels there is really nothing she can do to stop this.

This is the last month of the tenancy and I suspect the landlord (actually a landlady) is banking on my daughter not wanting the hassle of taking her to court over it.

:mad:

Seems a little unreasonable to me.
I always try to be reasonable with all my tenants, whether in the first or the last month of the contract. A reputation as a **** landlord could spell disaster in the long run.
I wonder what would happen if when the LL called round the house, your Daughter simply didnt answer the door?

Cheers
Lee

[rajeshk4u]

Well you need to get your daughter to tell the Landlord that they cannot do the works as it is her birthday and she has people round. And that the Landlord should have made an appointment with her to agree to that date.

Having workmen round will disrupt the birthday party....

[bonzo]

Why don't you go and stay with her for support? Do not let them in. I am a LL and if a tenant told me a certain time was not suitable, I would arrange another time.


It's rather a long way for me to go but have considered it. Waiting for confirmation if any of her friends will arrive today or not. The LL has a key and there are no bolts on the doors so if my daughter is on her own she will not be able to stop them.

[Southcoast Landlord]

It's rather a long way for me to go but have considered it. Waiting for confirmation if any of her friends will arrive today or not. The LL has a key and there are no bolts on the doors so if my daughter is on her own she will not be able to stop them.

Sounds like a Rogue LL she's got there. It's unfair of the LL to behave in this way. Have you tried speaking to the LL? Maybe if you say that you will be there, and that they will be refused entry under the guidelines of the tenancy agreement, it may make them think twice about carrying out the work that weekend. If you can do this over the phone and they agree, it will save you the journey.
Unpleasant situation - I hope you manage to resolve it.

Cheers
Lee

[Paragon]

Ask your LL what kind of liability insurance he or the workmen have, as there MAY be little children running around in the kitchen because of the party.

[jeffrey]

If (but only if) you've deep pockets and feel bold, you could seek an interim injunction. I'm simply mentioning (NOT recommending) this option!

[Paragon]

If the LL lets himself in and your daughter isn't fully dressed, I would have the police over there ASAP. It may be time to get rough with this LL. Just tell him that he may done as a sexual deviant.

[bonzo]

Just thought I would ring the police in the area where my daughter lives just to see what there take on this situation was.

They said the LL is within their rights to enter the property to carry out non emergency repairs provided they have given notice and my daughter has no right to refuse entry if notice has been given.

The police would only get involved if there were a breach of the peace or something.

[jeffrey]

The police...said the LL is within their rights to enter the property to carry out non emergency repairs provided they have given notice and my daughter has no right to refuse entry if notice has been given.
They're wrong, of course. That's why they administer criminal law. Don't ask Police about L&T!

Old joke follows:
Man is fed up of trying to report burglary in progress.
Tells police that they're not needed now, as he just killed the burglar.
They arrive 2 mins. later.

[islandgirl]

I would send a very polite text message saying you have taken legal advice and that you do not have to allow entry. Say you are happy to allow the work to take place on a mutually agreed date/time. Also that any attempt to enter will be considered harrassment. Then enjoy the party!
ps - the police are wrong, as already stated!

[jeffrey]

And invite a local journalist or TV reporter/cameraman to the party.

[bonzo]

My daughters just got home and the LL and husband are already in there and working! Also because evidently one of the boys in the house has not paid his rent for the last month they plan to actually use the boys room and stay in the house this weekend!!!!!!

Daughter's too upset and doesn't feel she can speak to them anymore and is outside crying.

What can we do?

[islandgirl]

Your daughter has a right to quiet enjoyment. I suggest that she calls the LL (or you do) and tells her to leave along with her husband within 30 mins or she will call the police re harrassment. This is unacceptable. They do not have the right to stay overnight! It is time to get tough.
By the way ignore what the police say and insist that these people are intruders and that you have a harrassment case against the LL - they will need some persuading to turn up but they should do so.
Tell them you have spoken to a solicitor whether you have or not!

[bonzo]

When I mentioned harassment to the police they weren't interested. I think they said it was not harassment because the LL have the right to enter property and the police have no right to enter the property to do anything about them.

I'll try and get LL's number from my daughter and phone. :mad:

[islandgirl]

As Jeffrey our "resident" solicitor has said the police are wrong - LL has no right to enter unless it is an emergency or with tenants express agreement. They will say this when you "enquire" to try to avoid having to come out! I would ring the local station now, say that people are in your daughter's flat who have no right to be there. It is a clear case of harrassment (you need 2 events to prove this, this is the first). Tell them you know the law and they had better get there as there could be a breach of the peace or something along those lines! Police turning up may make the LL think twice. Do not let the police fob you off. Your daugher has a RIGHT TO PEACEFUL ENJOYMENT of the property. Stress this to the police.
Tell LL when you ring this is what you are going to do. Alternatively they can pay for daughter in a hotel tonight and tomorrow...good luck and let us know what happens

[Ruth Less]

My daughters just got home and the LL and husband are already in there and working! Also because evidently one of the boys in the house has not paid his rent for the last month they plan to actually use the boys room and stay in the house this weekend!!!!!!

Daughter's too upset and doesn't feel she can speak to them anymore and is outside crying.

What can we do?

If there was an unknown male staying overnight in a house with my daughter without her or her housemates consent I'd breach the peace myself. How is your daughter supposed to sleep in there. In fact I doubt any ll would be that stupid, he's laying himself open to all sorts imposing himself in a young girls house overnight like that!

[nick..]

So sorry for the trouble you and your daughter are having with this scumbag landlord

The police are absolutely WRONG, and you must ring the local council office and speak to whoever deals with rental issues, then call the Cab, then call Shelter

All three of those organizations will be able to help, the council may even call the police for you and explain the situation

Do not be bullied by this person!!

In the worst case, if you cannot get him out this weekend, you must get the advice of Cab/solicitor Monday and take him to the cleaners

[islandgirl]

I think you daughter has been treated really badly but as paragon says the fact (just mentioned) that he is the father of one of the occupiers and is staying with consent will probably change things substantially. Hope she is OK - let us know how you get on

[bonzo]

LL's daughter was there yesterday evening too (and another female tenant).

The husband started working in the bathroom next to my daughters bedroom yesterday and he began again at 9 this morning (banging, screeching drills or whatever) while she was still in bed. All her toiletries, toothbrush etc. were in that bathroom exposed to dust etc. (there is another toilet [perhaps full bathroom, not sure] on a different floor).

I eventually got through to Shelter yesterday evening. They gave me what they said was the out of hours number for the Tenancy Relations Officer for the area where my daughter is. Shelter thought the TRO would be able to assist/mediate.

I rang this yeterday evening but nobody answered but I left a message. As yet and despite ringing again today I have had no response.

I've rung the Council for the area but they could only give me a number for the Social Services Emergency Duty Team who they thought might give advice.

I rang the SSEDT and they could probably help with emergency (but not very nice) accommodation if my daughter felt she couldn't stay there and had nowhere to go. Other than that, they advised perhaps composing and giving/sending a letter of complaint to the LL and seeking further advice on Monday from various possible sources (CAB, Student Accommodation office, Student Union, Council etc.)

I did try and locate a solicitor in the area my daughter could seek immediate advice from but haven't found one available on a Saturday.

CAB on Saturday until 12 midday I believe is appointments only and their phone number just says "Sorry your call cannot be connected at present. Please try later"

My daughter has now packed a suitcase and is getting a train to her boyfriends having cancelled all birthday arrangements. She feels intimidated and cannot face the LL who hasn't spoken to my daughter and kept pretty much out of sight evidently while the husband gets on with the work. I don't know yet if she has found out for sure if the repair work will be confined to only the weekend.

She doesn't want to go back Monday but I said she will have to if she intends to follow this up. Assuming she does I think I will try and go too.

One of my daughter's fears is there will be problems getting her deposit returned from this unpleasant LL at the end of the tenancy, which is this month.


Edit
She has another house already arranged for July onwards.

[davedarave01uk]

So the landlord did not give 24 hours written notice?
On paper?

Im sorry but if its not written in the Tenancy Agreement that he/she can visit when they want then the landlord has broke the Tenancy agreement regardless of what he/she thinks they can do and I would not put up with it.
The only way the landlord can enter is if there real emergency that has to be sorted asap.

And Im sorry if I arrived home and they was there I would remove them myself if the police would not do so.


Not disturbing tenants
Landlords may need access to the accommodation to inspect it and do repairs but they must let you live in your home without unnecessary interference. If you are a tenant then your landlord can't come in whenever they feel like it, and should give proper notice and arrange a suitable time if they need to visit. The amount of notice they have to give might be set out in your agreement. If you have a licence, your right to restrict your landlord from coming in is more limited, so get advice before you do anything.

You can ask your landlord to stop entering your home without your permission. It may be classed as harassment if s/he persists.

You may even be able to change the locks if you want to. However, this doesn't apply to:

excluded occupiers (eg people lodging in the landlord's home and most people living in hostels), or
certain occupiers with basic protection (eg students in halls of residence and people who have to live in their home in order to do their job).

[Planner]

The way im reading this is that its a student house. Can you confirm if your daughter actually rents the "house" or mearly a room?

I was under the impression with this kind of set up that the LL or his workmen have the right to enter the "communal" areas of the property at anytime with no consent required?

[bonzo]

She has a room with a lock on the door but I haven't seen the agreement and don't know exactly how it is worded.

The Tenancy Relations Officer has contacted me and seems to think it is all very much a grey area.

He did say that the LL staying in someone's room, even if they had missed a rent payment, would be trespass.

[mo999]

A fellow landlord owns a freehold commercial, shop on ground floor with a flat above leased for 99 years. The flat is tenanted. The tenants have caused damage to the flat to the extent that water is leaking to the ground floor premises, which my friend occupies. He wishes to send in a surveyor to compile a schedule of dilapidations. However knowing the leaseholder, he is likely not to be too welcoming of a visit, even though the lease allows it. If he went and knocked on the door and the Leaseholders tenant let them in, would they be able to inspect the premises. The worry here is that if a notice (Section 146) was then served on him, would he have any right to challenge the notice on the basis that he was not given notice of access. Is anyone able to help on whether this would affect validity of the notice.

Thanks.

[jeffrey]

1. Yes. Lessee (T) has sub-tenant (ST). ST can permit L access to inspect, even without T's own consent.
2. Section 146 does NOT demand access! Instead, it must:
a. contain details (what breach; required remediation; required compensation) demanded by s.146(1); and
b. be accompanied by Notice under Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938, if breach relates to disrepair etc.
3. If L then takes action against T, T's personal lack of consent would not be a defence as far as I can see.