Our we being reasonable regrads to viewings?

abbadon3

That is not the same trail of logic. How can people really be that stupid? That is not in any way an example following the original example.

Let's break it downm shall we?

So, situation A:

LA/LL contact Tennant on both phone numbers left with them. They request a viewing and say that should the tennants not get back to them, they will assume they are agreeing.

The Tennant does not agree so contacts the LA/LL to arrange viewings on different occasions.

Situation B:

A random person breaks into my house.

Please explain how these are the same things?

ViolaLass

abbadon3 wrote: »

Let's break it downm shall we?

So, situation A:

LA/LL contact Tennant on both phone numbers left with them. They request a viewing and say that should the tennants not get back to them, they will assume they are agreeing.

The Tennant does not agree so contacts the LA/LL to arrange viewings on different occasions.

If the agent or the LL were then to try to enter the property, it would still be trespass. The tenant shouldn't have to contact the agent to say no - as has been pointed out above, what if the tenant hadn't received the message?

As it is, the OP may just be dealing with an agent who worded their request badly and they may have no bad intentions but it's still worth being aware of your rights.

abbadon3

Or, maybe you are going on the basis that the Tennant never gets back to the LL and just ignores this phone message?

In which case the situation is:

LA/LL contact Tennant on both phone numbers left with them by the tennant as the way to contact them. They request a viewing and say that should the tennants not get back to them, they will assume they are agreeing.

The tennant does not get back to them and thus so far has been uncontactable.

The LL is looking to get new tennants in as soon as possible so as to minimize his financial costs. The tennant is still ignoring the message.

The LL assumes that since he has contacted the tennant on both numbers available to him and left a message on both and has left it a reasonable amount of time that the tennant agrees.

abbadon3

I agree you should always be aware of your rights. Putting them into practice is a different hting entirely.

And yes i completely agree that should the LL/LA try to enter the property afetr the tennant has told them not to - that he/she is trespassing. I haven't anywhere at all said the LL can turn up as and when he pleases.

Infact i have tryed to stress in several of my replys that being reasonable and working with a LL is different to bending over for them.

There is literaly no reason for anyone to think the LL is in the wrong unless he actualy turns up and enters the property without permission.

MsHoarder

abbadon3 wrote: »

Or, maybe you are going on the basis that the Tennant never gets back to the LL and just ignores this phone message?

In which case the situation is:

LA/LL contact Tennant on both phone numbers left with them by the tennant as the way to contact them. They request a viewing and say that should the tennants not get back to them, they will assume they are agreeing.

The tennant does not get back to them and thus so far has been uncontactable.

The LL is looking to get new tennants in as soon as possible so as to minimize his financial costs. The tennant is still ignoring the message.

The LL assumes that since he has contacted the tennant on both numbers available to him and left a message on both and has left it a reasonable amount of time that the tennant agrees.

LLs only have the right of access for repairs and for non-urgent issues the LL is required by law to give 24 hours notice. There is no right of access to allow potential buyers to look around the house, this is purely at the tenants digression.

And you are ignoring the point that the OP doesn't have her phone with her all day (many jobs require this) so can't respond to phone messages immediately. This is fairly normal and the EA can't assume consent

lilham

When I was renting, I always just let the agents to come in during our work hours. I don't see why it's a problem. They always give us 24h or more notice. Maybe I'm different from the OP, but I'd rather not meet the viewers when I'm at home. That's more invasive to my 'quiet enjoyment'. The agents have no problem on us insisting on no saturday viewings. And they've never mess up anything either.

By the way, we never clean up for any viewings. Just made sure we don't have anything expensive and small (like ipods) left out.

abbadon3

And you are ignoring the fact that the LL hasn't actualy entered the property so has done nothing wrong.

The LL has given notice that he wishes to enter the property and the tennant has replied to say can he come on days X Y Z instead.

What is the problem?

Even both tennants not having access to there phones during there work shifts does not make a difference here.

The LL did not leave this message and then within the next 24 hours turn up and let themselves in.

The LL obviously has left it long enough for the tennant to reply, as the tennant has said on here that he/she has replied.

Now i imagine they will come to an arrangement that suits them both.

Everyone needs to stop with this crap about not entering the property. No-one is arguing that a LL can enter when he wants. Everyone here knows that a LL cannot just turn up when they feel like it.

Mrs_Arcanum

The Estate Agent should not assume no contact equals OK. For example: - One of the couple may be in a meeting, the other on the road both with phones off for different reasons. The EA has telephoned both of them an hour before they wish to do a viewing leaving the message that if you do not reply we will assume it is OK. WRONG. The tenants need to be able to object and this leaves no opportunity to do so.

The EA leaving messages assuming things are OK is a perfectly reasonable thing for the tenants to object to.

abbadon3

But what you have described isn't what has happened here is it?

The LL/LA hasn't rung up an hour before arriving, left a message and then turned up.

The LL/LA left a message and then waited sufficient time for the tennants to reply. Which they did.

I agree it would not be reasonable to turn up an hour after not getting through to there phone. But that hasn't happened and so is completely irrelevant to this discussion. What has happened is the LA/LL has tryed to contact the tennant and the tennant has got back to the LA/LL to make different arrangements.

As far as we know from the information provided the LA/LL hasn't at any time tryed to access the house without permission.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

abbadon3 wrote: »

And you are ignoring the fact that the LL hasn't actualy entered the property so has done nothing wrong.

The LL has given notice that he wishes to enter the property and the tennant has replied to say can he come on days X Y Z instead.

What is the problem?

The problem is that of "presumed consent" equating to the right of entry. It is not good enough to assume that a lack of response to a request defaults to "please go right ahead and help yourself to my home." Letting is a business, and in any business it is not professional to proceed on the basis of assumptions.