Letting Agent lets themselves in...

speedtwin

Premier wrote: »

The Protection of Eviction Act 1977 appears to speak of "a person occupying the premises". What happens if the premisis is not occupied at the time?

If the L/L or agent is entering a property without permission regardless if the tenant is there or not I would say that is tantamount to harrassment surely this then brings into play the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 as the landlord is probably in breach as a result.

But I could be wrong.
.

tbs624

poppysarah wrote: »

Change locks. They should only need a key in an emergency and they should feel free to break the door down or put a window in if it's actually an emergency.

missed this one earlier - yes, the LL may indeed "feel free" to smash the door or break a window in an emergency but if that has to be done because a tenant has changed the lock, then the tenant will be the one facing the bill for the necessary door/window repairs to be done.

paintpot

tbs624 wrote: »

missed this one earlier - yes, the LL may indeed "feel free" to smash the door or break a window in an emergency but if that has to be done because a tenant has changed the lock, then the tenant will be the one facing the bill for the necessary door/window repairs to be done.

And just to show emergencies do happen, I had to break in to a flat about 3 weeks ago late at night. A tenant in an upstairs flat contacted me to say the cmmunal hallway was flooded. I sent a maintenance person round about 11pmish who found water coming out of the ground floor flat. I couldn't contact the tenant who was seen leaving the same morning with a suitcase.

I had the fire door broken down as the tenant had changed the locks because I had no choice to find the flat deluged with sewage from a massive backup of sewage in the drains that came out of the tenant's toilet. It was grim but by breaking down the door we saved the vast proportion of her possessions and she doesn't have contents insurance.

By the time the flat was secured again for the night it was the early hours of the morning.

The tenant hadn't changed the locks for any sinister reason by the way I have since found out as I certainly never go in there without permission and fortunately for the tenant I found a spare key in their flat enabling me to repair the lock without another new one being fitted but the doorframe was smashed to smithereens. It would have been far simpler if the key worked!

The tenant has now been rehoused and will be for some time to come as the flat is totally uninhabitable.

The tenant was actually grateful for my actions. I was nervous about doing it but it needed to be done.

ruggedtoast

Incisor wrote: »

But can you tell us if it is effective at stopping letting agents letting people in?

Garlic and holy water imo.

poppysarah

tbs624 wrote: »

missed this one earlier - yes, the LL may indeed "feel free" to smash the door or break a window in an emergency but if that has to be done because a tenant has changed the lock, then the tenant will be the one facing the bill for the necessary door/window repairs to be done.

Most lanlords don't happen to be passing and most of the time the neighbours don't have the emergency out of hours contact for them.

If the fire brigade want to put out a fire they don't wait for the keyholder to turn up. Ditto gas.
Water? You can turn it off in the street if it's that dire, but normally by the time the water's through to downstairs the damage is done.

There's no excuse for a landlord, or any of the random people they may give the key to, to ever enter your home without permission.

paintpot

poppysarah, did you not read my post above yours. Are you saying I had no reason to break and enter? It *was* an emergency! I think I had every right to break in given the circumstances and my tenant doesn't disagree.

In fact, as I am feeling that way inclined at the moment as it's been a nightmare, I will say you are talking rubbish. If you'd walked in my shoes for the last three weeks then you'd understand where I am coming from.

I've been told by Dynorod and chemdry who have been appointed that it either the worst situation they have ever seen or the worst they have seen in a very long time despite operating in an area that has suffered major flood damage over recent times. The flat is in a dreadful state but my actions "did" stop considerably more damage. I managed to stop other tenants in the building using their facilities that were contributing to the problem and they all co-operated.

poppysarah wrote: »

There's no excuse for a landlord, or any of the random people they may give the key to, to ever enter your home without permission.

SpoonyOh

Rather than changing locks, is it not possible to add a deadlock? Just one of those asterisk-profiled keys that goes at the top of the door? Or even a slide bolt to stop them from actually going through the door? It'd stop them from strolling in whilst you're in the nip, if nothing else.

Premier_2

SpoonyOh wrote: »

Rather than changing locks, is it not possible to add a deadlock? Just one of those asterisk-profiled keys that goes at the top of the door? Or even a slide bolt to stop them from actually going through the door? It'd stop them from strolling in whilst you're in the nip, if nothing else.

Perhaps, but all those solutions only work if a person is actually inside the premises (unless you fit a proper deadlock that can be operated from both sides with a key).

The question posed by the OP relates to a landlord (or his agent) saying they would have entered the property if there was no one in (having already provided written notice of their intention to call)

Btw, the addition of a deadlock to a door may be an expensive thing to return back to the original state the property was let in. Always best to seek the written approval of the LL (or his agent) before deciding to carry out such work on the LL's property.

Premier_2

speedtwin wrote: »

Premier wrote: »

The Protection of Eviction Act 1977 appears to speak of "a person occupying the premises". What happens if the premisis is not occupied at the time?
....

If the L/L or agent is entering a property without permission regardless if the tenant is there or not I would say that is tantamount to harrassment surely this then brings into play the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 as the landlord is probably in breach as a result.

But I could be wrong.
.

I'm not sure any claim of harassment under such conditions would stand up.

According to the Protection from Harassment Act 1977

1...
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—
(a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,
(b) that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or
(c) that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

Furthermore:

Although harassment and unlawful eviction are criminal offences, prosecutions by local authorities are rare, and that the sentences given by courts are unlikely to act as a deterrent....

Source: http://privatesectorhousing.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=4787712

I think these figures are quite revealing:

speedtwin

Premier thanks for the detailed reply i think you have too much time on your hands.

It was a long shot i know but if mentioned to a L/L it may help it he thinks he could get into trouble.