Landlord selling house and I'm 6 mths pregnant

EastMidsGal

yes, I received it last Wednesday

EastMidsGal

Is the latest draft ok? Shall I get it sent off to the LA? I am not dropping myself in it am I? I am not blanket refusing viewings, just saying right now they are not possible because of how I am currently feeling due to the pregnancy, but as and when I feel able to allow viewings I shall let them know so they can arrange them

BitterAndTwisted

I think your latest draft letter is absolutely fine. That you've couched it in such terms to let them believe that you shall allow viewings at some point but not right now is pretty clever. I just hope that you won't change your mind about that and keep the blighters out until you're good and ready to leave.

Please pay attention to the info about not sending your correspondence purely by email as I think that it's quite important. Also, I think that you really should change the barrel of at least one lock on the front and on the back door to prevent them sneaking in as I absolutely wouldn't put it past them even after they have received your letter.

I've got everything crossed for you EastMids

GDB2222

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Originally Posted by GDB2222
If your lease requires you to allow viewings, the TRO is quite right that you would be in breach of the lease if you put a blanket ban on viewings.

I completely and utterly disagree with you about this. No contract or rental agreement can override the law! No matter how much one party would like it to. Who has more welly in this country: HM's government or a landlord/letting-agency?

It is perfectly reasonable for the tenancy agreement to have a term allowing viewings in the final month or two - on reasonable terms. Many leases have this term in. If the tenant refuses to comply, the tenant is in breach of the lease. The landlord's right is then to sue for damages in the civil court. I agree that the LL can't just force entry.

Of course, if you can find a law banning such a term in a contract, I will stand corrected. But you won't.

You might find it helpful to read the OFT guidance on residential leases:

3.32 We would object to a provision giving the landlord an excessive right to enter the rented property. Under any kind of lease or tenancy, a landlord is required by common law to allow his tenants 'exclusive possession' and 'quiet enjoyment' of the premises during the tenancy. In other words, tenants must be free from unwarranted intrusion by anyone, including the landlord. Landlords are unfairly disregarding that basic obligation if they reserve a right to enter the property without giving reasonable notice or getting the tenant's consent, except for good reason.

3.33 The same principles apply to terms giving excessive rights to the landlord to demand access for prospective new tenants or purchasers to view the premises.

BitterAndTwisted

But that's GUIDANCE not the law. The laws of this country over-ride any contract or any guidance. I'm not a judge but I can't see what material loss a landlord might suffer from by a tenant exercising their right to refuse unwarranted intrusions when they also have an exclusive right to occupy a property.

If this particular landlord wants to sell their property they should wait until it is vacant and stop harassing their tenant

GDB2222

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

But that's GUIDANCE not the law. The laws of this country over-ride any contract or any guidance.

I'm only answering you because I don't want EMG to be misled by you - however well-meaning your intentions are.

My point is that there is no law banning these terms in leases, and I would have thought it would be obvious that that the OFT would have mentioned it if there were. However, if you think there is a law banning these terms, please point to it.

I'm not a judge but I can't see what material loss a landlord might suffer from by a tenant exercising their right to refuse unwarranted intrusions when they also have an exclusive right to occupy a property.

The tenant has every right to refuse unwarranted intrusions. However, an appointment for viewing that is made in accordance with the lease and with reasonable notice is not unwarranted. I expect that the tenant being too ill to cope with the viewing might make it unwarranted, but you'd have to check case-law on this.

As far as loss is concerned, the landlord could miss a sale, prices could drop, or at the very least his sale would be delayed by however many months viewings are delayed leading to extra interest payments on the landlord's mortgage.

In practice, I doubt the LL will sue, as EMG hasn't got enough assets to be worth suing.

....................................

EastMidsGal

Got a reply to my email from the agents

I am very disappointed that you will not cooperate. To me a viewing seems a lot less hassle than taking the time to write this and the future problems it may cause. We will approach our lawyers now to see what the next steps are.

:mad:

ViolaLass

This might be a good moment (if you can) to go to your doctor and get a note saying that you need to rest and generally backing up your health claims. That way you'll have it to hand if you need it.

silvercar

EastMidsGal wrote: »

Got a reply to my email from the agents:

I am very disappointed that you will not cooperate. To me a viewing seems a lot less hassle than taking the time to write this and the future problems it may cause. We will approach our lawyers now to see what the next steps are.

:mad:

Don't know why the "mad" face. I think it is positive.

a) you know they have taken note of the contents of your letter.

b) they will take legal advice before turning up at the property.

sequence

EastMidsGal wrote: »

Got a reply to my email from the agents


:mad:

That's a very good result. It means "we know we're screwed, but we'll try and use the threat of our lawyers to get you to change your mind".