inspection without my presence can they do this?

FTBFun

propertyman wrote: »

If you cannot read and understand a post you are not in a position to say a post is inaccurate or not, not when you state that civil law trumps outweighs contract law, when I have explained that it doesn't, they are reconciled at court.

That wasn't me who said that. Of course they are reconciled at court, that's the whole point of the legal system!

The OP is very concerned and looking for an explanation of their rights not generalisations that are not going to help them.

I am not going to spew out a lot of case law but give them the link to shelter.
http://england.shelter.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/30651/Advice_booklet_illegal_eviction.pdf
A home that you rent is different to a home that you own; many place the expectations of privacy and exclusivity to extend to the former, and it does not.

Yes but whilst there is a contract between the landlord and tenant the property is the home of the latter and not the former. The landlord may own the freehold/be the leaseholder but the rights to occupation are held by the tenant in return for paying rent.

I suspect the main problem in this case is the EA being an !!!!. Was ever thus.

franklee

propertyman wrote: »

But before you do, can I say this; it is your home but it is not yours

Have a see what a legal professional has to say about this myth:

Urban Myth – when a landlord lets a property, its still his
http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2010/08/31/urban-myth-when-a-landlord-lets-a-property-its-still-his/

DVardysShadow

propertyman wrote: »

Then you have to read the forum and see how ineffective this procedure is from both sides. One months deposit is noting if their is extensive damage or alterations.

It is not their home they are renting it and periodic inspections are not an interference if they are on notice and provided for in the contract, and infrequent and in duration.

An inspection should take no more than 5 to 15 minutes in the average flat or house and in this case an entire day is unreasonable.

The civil right is there to prevent excesses, the landlord who rifles through possession or calls in and as and when with no notice or reason. A normal quarterly or 6 monthly inspection will in virtually all cases be accepted by a court as a reasonable basis to enter and award it to the landlord.

Unfortunately that is life in rented accommodation the landlord has right to protect their investment and home.

OP is not refusing an inspection. OP is quite reasonably offering an inspection when they can be present. LA is being unreasonable in demanding a whole day for when you acknowledge should reasonably take 10 to 15 minutes.

GDB2222

DVardysShadow wrote: »

OP is not refusing an inspection. OP is quite reasonably offering an inspection when they can be present. LA is being unreasonable in demanding a whole day for when you acknowledge should reasonably take 10 to 15 minutes.

I agree, but this needs sorting out amicably, not just locking them out.

alta

Regardless of how many properties you have, or how well you know the law ! Unless it is an EMERGENCY, water running through a ceiling and flooding, house on fire, possible abandomant........and before you start spouting, there are correct procedures for that, you are NOT by law able to walk into a property that you own, or the bank does, without permission of your tenant, who is entitled by law to say NO.
Many people are not happy to let strangers wander around there home, and all the time they are paying LL's rent or their mortgage it is their home, they are entitled to the basic right to live in the accommodation with out being disturbed. It is annoying when tenants want to be there, and you have to sort maybe 20 visits around that one.
I do hope that you do not do your own interim visits Mr Property, as a 5 min visit is not worth going for, unless or course it is empty!
Tell them "no come in" do as somebody said go out back door, if they ring to say they can not get in, you can say, did you try despite being told no. And change the lock, keep the old one for when you move out, you are allowed to do this.
Dont forget they are coming to look at the condition of the property, not if you make your bed or not, if you wash up, or but your dirty clothes in the wash, it whether you are keeping the property and fittings in good order.

sonastin

The landlord is free to inspect his home any time he wants to and as frequently as he wants to. However, that does not extend to other properties that he owns and which he has chosen to rent out to tenants. Those properties are the tenants' homes and the landlord must respect the tenants' right to quiet enjoyment of their homes.

I hope for the OP's sake that his LA has more than 2 brain cells to rub together and they've realised that if they put the inspection first on the list for that day, it will solve everyone's trouble. But given that using brain cells isn't a requirement for letting agents, there is no guarantee.

Jessikita1983

Grimbal wrote: »

I'm not at all sure about this post. As far as I understand things, civil law "outweighs" contractual law. So, anything that is in a contract may not necessarily be enforceable.

You are nearly correct. You have got the gist of it, just used terminology in the wrong context. "civil" law is anything that isn't a criminal offence, so contract law IS civil law.

You cannot contract out of the law essentially. So if I had Grimbal sign a contract that I could murder him/her, it would not be worth the paper it is written on. (extreme expample!)

My favourite is "Responsibility is not accepted for any loss or injury, no matter the cause" or the like.

Again not worth the sign it is written on, you cannot contract out of the law, and you are not allowed to be negligent end of.

For example: A child on a trampoline attempts a somersault and injures themselves. The childs own fault

The child on a trampoline, jumps up and down and a spring breaks as it hasn't been maintained/safety inspected and the child breaks their leg - Negligence on the companies part. The sign is not worth the metal it is printed on.

Hopefully that all makes sense.

I have no idea whether it is law that a landlord can enter into a property or not to do "inspections", but if it against the law, merely writing it in a contract would not make it as such, as you cannot contract out of the law.

The law would be pretty much pointless, laws that were put in place to protect people wouldn't be worth anything.

tbs624

propertyman wrote: »

I dont want to engage in troll like behaviour so I will be kind. Your broad comment shows that your understanding is very limited as is my post that you haven't understood.

Her right is a civil right and that where they conflict and are reconciled against a contractual right and or a statutory right is via court action -either the landlord seeking an order to enter or the tenants claim for breach of quiet enjoyment for harassment, even repudiation.

My user name is propertyman for a reason.....

Really?

The OP/T in this case has already said that she (reasonably) wishes to be present during the LL's inspection of her home and that she can be available on the LLs requested (edit: day) until lunchtime. Her LL would get short shrift seeking a court order for access when the T is clearly trying to reach a workable compromise.

Both the right to inspect and the Ts right to quiet enjoyment are covenants implied via statute.

As DVS says, T is *not* refusing access - she is simply expecting the LL/LA to act reasonably. It's called compromise.

tbs624

propertyman wrote: »

You should also ask for the name and address of the landlord under section 3 of the landlrod and tenant act 1985 to report a breach of the tenancy t for failure to attend to items through the non response of the agent.

Your name is propertyman for a reason......?

Try S1 of the LL&T Act85 which refers to the disclosure of the LL's identity. - S3 refers to LLs interests which have been assigned and the subsequent provision of the new LLs details.