Landlord wanting to decorate

Tassotti

To Debt Free Chick.

The right to quiet enjoyment WILL stand up in court. There are severe penalties for any LL breaching this right.

You say Landlord's also have rights. Could you explain what these are please?

Tass

barnaby-bear

Debt_Free_Chick wrote:

Why? Plenty of homeowners decorate whilst continuing to live in the property I'd like to know what a Court would think



But the LL has no rental income if they decorate whilst the property is empty. And it delays the time when they can show new tenants around .... that exacerbates the void.

My post was purely a request to understand what a Court would think. There's no point in people posting about "enforcing rights" if they don't stand up in Court. Sooner or later, an MSEer is going to end up in Court on the basis of what's posted here ... so we need to know!





I think you'll find that there are not a lot of profitable BTLs. No-one is forced into rental accommodation - either you have no choice and then have to live with the consequences of being a tenant; or you can buy. That's it. Tenants do have certain rights and most decent LLs respect that. But it's not a one-way street - the LL has rights too and I would hope that this Board's advice to tenants takes account of the LL's rights.

Plenty of precedents - tenant always wins...

ImprovementsYeoman’s Row Management Ltd v MeyrickDraftsmen should take careful noteof this Court of Appeal decision.The tenant had a lease of a flat,which contained covenants toallow the landlord access to‘execute any repairs or work to theinside or the outside’ of the flat.The lease contained an additionalclause stating that the tenantwould not be entitled to object toany noise caused by structuralalterations to the building ofwhich the flat formed part.The freeholder began arefurbishment programme andasked the tenant for access sothat it could refurbish the flat.The tenant refused the landlordaccess and declined the landlord’soffer of alternative accommodationfor the duration of the work.The high court judge ruled that thegoverning word in the covenant was‘repairs’. He considered that theword ‘works’ was intended to covermaintenance akin to ‘repairs’, andthat it did not cover unnecessaryand extensive works of the kindthat the landlord envisaged.The landlord appealed on thegrounds that the tenancyagreement gave it the right to carryout work which it genuinelybelieved would benefit the property.The Court of Appeal rejected thatargument. It took the view that itwould be an invasion of thetenant’s right to quiet enjoyment if the landlord could compel thetenant to submit to theimprovements and dispossess thetenant while it undertook the work.

dougk_2

As with most things reasonable is subjective and it wilsl depend on the judge looking at the case. If the judge is a landlord themselves (you will be surprised how many are!) then it may well go in the LL's favour.

My view is tenants are renting (therefore "borrowing") and should expect to have some minor disruptions when they are moving out in order to allow the LL to rent the property ASAP once they have left - It could be argued that a person under EU law has a lawful right to earn a living and a tenant being "awkward" is obstructing this.


If I was a LL, I would be checking with previous LL's that they hads no problems and tenants were cooperative in allowing access etc before renting the property and as a tenant I would be trying my best to keep goood relations so that I got a good reference in future.

Rosie75

Thanks for all your replies. The landlady (who has always been quite reasonable in the past) has agreed to put off the decorator. The other thing that annoyed me, apart from the individual she had lined up being very unpleasant, was that we have lived with the shoddy decor for the last six years. We would now be putting up with this rude individual, having a house in disarray and not enjoying any of the results.
As the house was originally let on a room-by-room basis and rents were fairly cheap 6 years ago, it would not be a huge financial loss if we didn't get our deposit back. Also we are moving to buy a house so wouldn't need a reference.
Not sure I understand Barnaby Bear's comment about no one being forced into renting. I know plenty of people (including some of my colleagues who are university lecturers) who are unable to buy a house.

barnaby-bear

Rosie75 wrote:

Thanks for all your replies. The landlady (who has always been quite reasonable in the past) has agreed to put off the decorator. The other thing that annoyed me, apart from the individual she had lined up being very unpleasant, was that we have lived with the shoddy decor for the last six years. We would now be putting up with this rude individual, having a house in disarray and not enjoying any of the results.
As the house was originally let on a room-by-room basis and rents were fairly cheap 6 years ago, it would not be a huge financial loss if we didn't get our deposit back. Also we are moving to buy a house so wouldn't need a reference.
Not sure I understand Barnaby Bear's comment about no one being forced into renting. I know plenty of people (including some of my colleagues who are university lecturers) who are unable to buy a house.

I was the one saying people are forced partly by BTL speculators - amature landlords with one or two properties - the professionals never force redecoration and do it in voids because they bought at a time where voids for proper maintenance was feasible, it was debt-free-chick who thinks no-one forced to rent (what planet)

Rosie75

Sorry - got confused there, it wasn't you barnaby. I think I'll go and tell my 30-something year old colleagues that they aren't forced to rent - might get me a punch in the face!

barnaby-bear

Rosie75 wrote:

Sorry - got confused there, it wasn't you barnaby. I think I'll go and tell my 30-something year old colleagues that they aren't forced to rent - might get me a punch in the face!

As a university lecturer forced to commute to buy I know what you mean. I was happy renting but then too many amature BTLers got in and 6 month ASTs meant that, repairs take months, they want to maintain their 'asset' . Prof. LLs don't do this - a lot of pregnant women or those with kids would never choose to have some potential perv. splashing gloss paint over their house, if they decorate it's when fits in with kids and low-odour safe paints.