can't get in touch with outgoing tenants to arrange viewings

olly300

Jowo wrote: »

The clauses in an AST can't over-ride the tenants statutory right in housing law to 'quiet enjoyment' of the property. You need to give notice AND gain consent.

Until the tenant raises an objection the landlord can reasonably believe they have given their consent.

1. By the fact they signed the tenancy agreement with that clause in it. (There was nothing stopping the tenant negotiating the clause and getting it changed. )
2. They didn't raise an objection when the landlord raised the issue again with them.

However the OP has to guess what "reasonable" means though I can guess that showing someone around before 10am on a weekend morning won't be considered reasonable by the tenant.

The only issues I've had personally with landlords is them not taking "No" for an answer when they wanted to do something as they presumed due to that clause and the fact that I wasn't bothered most of the time they could do what they liked at the time they liked because it was a reasonable time for them.

amcluesent

Oh, well when they are gone at least you can keep their deposit on some trifling pretext...serves them rights for being awkward

<sebb>

olly300 wrote: »

Until the tenant raises an objection the landlord can reasonably believe they have given their consent.

1. By the fact they signed the tenancy agreement with that clause in it. (There was nothing stopping the tenant negotiating the clause and getting it changed. )
2. They didn't raise an objection when the landlord raised the issue again with them.

However the OP has to guess what "reasonable" means though I can guess that showing someone around before 10am on a weekend morning won't be considered reasonable by the tenant.

The only issues I've had personally with landlords is them not taking "No" for an answer when they wanted to do something as they presumed due to that clause and the fact that I wasn't bothered most of the time they could do what they liked at the time they liked because it was a reasonable time for them.

The OP can try and chance their luck if they like, but I know if I found out a LL had entered my home without my consent, I'd not be happy. I'd be unlikely to be reasonable about viewings after that too.

However, I'm happy to consent to viewings at mutually convenient times. (Being on holiday abroad would not be one of those times)

olly300

<sebb> wrote: »

The OP can try and chance their luck if they like, but I know if I found out a LL had entered my home without my consent, I'd not be happy. I'd be unlikely to be reasonable about viewings after that too.

If you were silly enough to sign a clause stating that the landlord could enter at reasonable times and then made noises that didn't clearly show that you weren't happy to have people viewing then you have given your consent.

Consenting to something is shown in more ways than one.

<sebb>

olly300 wrote: »

If you were silly enough to sign a clause stating that the landlord could enter at reasonable times and then made noises that didn't clearly show that you weren't happy to have people viewing then you have given your consent.

Consenting to something is shown in more ways than one.

I estimate that 95% of rental contracts contain this clause. I've seen it in all 8 of my rental properties. If I tried to have it removed, I would never be given a place to rent.

So instead, I rely on my statutory right to quiet enjoyment.

lynzpower

<sebb> wrote: »

I estimate that 95% of rental contracts contain this clause. I've seen it in all 8 of my rental properties. If I tried to have it removed, I would never be given a place to rent.

So instead, I rely on my statutory right to quiet enjoyment.

Which trumps!

surreybased

As others say - don't attempt to go there or get access without their specific consent. It is still their place with their possessions. We had a LA let themselves in without due notice - I was livid, having previously been burgled I felt it was an invasion and I did check to ensure nothing had been taken. Would you let anyone into your family house without you being there? If you can avoid a void, that's good luck but you should have it within your rental financial plan to assume a changeover period and a void.

Eton_Rifle

fyang5 wrote: »

The confusing thing is, when I spoke to the tenant and his partner face to face, they were all very nice and seemed happy to have people coming to view the property. It's only when I get to the phoning part when they just disappear off the face of the earth.

People will say whatever they think you want to hear, whatever will make it easy for them. That's just human nature, don't ever take anyone at their word because words are cheap and mean nothing.
They'll just say what is easiest for them, to avoid confrontation and make you go away happy.

It doesn't matter what the situation is - yes viewings will be fine, yes your mother can come round for tea ... but when push comes to shove, they are mysteriously unavailable (another cop-out to avoid actually saying "no" and provoking a confrontation situation.)

Always take whatever people say with a pinch of salt as it's only by their actions that you really know them.

fyang5 wrote: »

From what I can see, they shouldn't against having people viewing, and they aren't even in the flat most of the time.

Speaking as someone who rents in the US and therefore has absolutely no control over who comes in their house at any time for any reason as you have virtually no rights as tenants in the US, believe me it's very upsetting to arrive home to find your cupboard doors open' knowing that strangers have looked though all your things while you've been out. It has really upset my wife in the past.

An important point, that I've noticed being both a tenant and an owner of properties is that viewers are very much less respectful of both your feelings and your privacy when they realise you're 'only a tenant' because they know they don't have to deal with you as they would if you were the landlord or the owner, you just don't matter to them so they can be dismissive and rude.
It's a really big difference in their attitude and you might not realise it until you're a tenant enduring viewings yourself.

It's also a huge security risk for your tenants - people could be casing the joint, stealing small things, looking for paperwork for identity theft etc,
You can't ever leave anything valuable or personal or easily pocketable lying around because viewers cannot be trusted.
Sometimes theft isn't even malicious, young children have a habit of picking things up not knowing any better and you go to turn on the TV (as we once did) and find that cute 4 year old who has just left with his parents has taken a fancy to it!

Edit - I'm assuming the property is in the UK and so you don't have liability issues. For example, in the US, should a viewer slip and hurt themselves in my rented home, I have to pay their hospital bills and potentially huge amounts of compensation even though I wasn't there when it happened and they weren't even there at my invitation. You could actually lose everything you own in this sort of situation, hence the need for comprehensive liability insurance. All for someone whose presence you resented and only suffered because you were forced to in the first place.

G_M

Eton_Rifle wrote: »

Edit - I'm assuming the property is in the UK and so you don't have liability issues. For example, in the US, should a viewer slip and hurt themselves in my rented home, I have to pay their hospital bills and potentially huge amounts of compensation even though I wasn't there when it happened and they weren't even there at my invitation. You could actually lose everything you own in this sort of situation, hence the need for comprehensive liability insurance. All for someone whose presence you resented and only suffered because you were forced to in the first place.

Tell that to your Republican party! Thankfully, here in the UK we live in a 'communist state' and the NHS, for all that we love to complain, takes care of us (still. Just!).