Warning: rant. (viewings on my rental house)

butler_helen

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Throw a strop and tell them no more, you had it up to here. If they don't answer the phone, turn them away at the door. And read the riot act to your BF

Oh the riot act has been read.

We have had another call but they are asking permission so if I can't call them back it isn't an agreed viewing... So the door shall be locked from the inside I'm sure they will be in contact again then!

On a side note; domperidone and tramadol are working today I will get that mixture above - anything that might work is worth a chance!

inmypocketnottheirs

G_M wrote: »

Rubbish!

I've seen tenancy agreements that say the landlord will retain the deposit (ie not use a registered scheme). Or that at the end of the Fixed Term the tenant must give a months notice.

Just because something is in the tenancy agreement does not make it legal or enforcible!

If there is a 'no changing the locks' clause in the TA, what will/can the LL do to enforce?

* Evict? No.
* Charge a fee? No (provided the tenant puts the original lock back at the end of the tenancy).
* Go to court and get a court order for the lock to be put back? Perhaps - but he'd have to explain to the judge how he knew the lock had been changed ie he had attempted to enter without prior permission from the tenant and after receiving a written notice from the tenant that viewings/visits should be pre-agreed (That is why it is important the tenant writes a letter as well).

The juudge would not be sympathetic to this breach of the tenant's right to 'quiet enjoyment'. And would then understand wy the tenant had taken the action to change the lock!

Landlords are entitled to inspect and protect their property , just as tenants are entitled to "quiet enjoyment". As a landlord of 17 years experience I have never entered a property without prior notice, unless in the event of an emergency.

One example of an emergency would be when a tenant was on holiday, and the ballcock in their toilet had broken and was flooding. Water was then pouring in through the light fittings of downstairs flat.

Had I not have been able to gain access, due to a tenant contravening the tenancy agreement, you would advocate that the tenant is then liable for all costs incurred by having to call out an emergency locksmith and the damage caused by the delay to both properties? I think not.

Agreements are for the protection of both parties; equally both sides should uphold their obligations.

Just as there are rogue LLs there are also rogue tenants.

franklee

inmypocketnottheirs wrote: »

One example of an emergency would be when a tenant was on holiday, and the ballcock in their toilet had broken and was flooding. Water was then pouring in through the light fittings of downstairs flat.

Had I not have been able to gain access, due to a tenant contravening the tenancy agreement, you would advocate that the tenant is then liable for all costs incurred by having to call out an emergency locksmith and the damage caused by the delay to both properties? I think not.

Tickles me how so many landlords think they will be just passing by when the emergency happens. The tenant can give the keys to a friend or relative and let the neighbours know who to call in an emergency. However if they do not know the neighbours or don't do that it's unlikely a neighbour would call the landlord anyway. I certainly don't know how to contact my neighbour's landlord so if I saw the house on fire I'd be calling the fire brigade and not their landlord. If water was flooding from an above flat then I'd call the flat's managing agent.

However if it comes down to an emergency and the landlord in on the scene then he can arrange for an emergency call out for a locksmith to gain entry. (Locksmiths do it easily enough when people lock themselves out). In that case then the tenant would pay for the locksmith but it's a small price to pay for piece of mind. However if time is of the essence why would a landlord delay while he travels to the property, surely he'd call out emergency services without delay and the door would be forced anyway. Therefore I do not think any short delay while waiting for a locksmith would cause any more damage than would happen anyway whist the landlord travels to the scene. It's not as if landlords appear instantly even when the tenant is home asking them for help directly.

Besides if the landlord has gone in for viewings against the tenant's wishes and the tenant has sent him a written complaint then I do not think the tenant would be liable if changing the locks as they will have proof the landlord had given them good reason to.

allthingsmustpass

inmypocketnottheirs wrote: »

Landlords are entitled to inspect and protect their property

Usually it's the banks property. It's certainly always the tenants HOME, landlords need to show some respect and remember where their money comes from. There's plenty of you to choose from, ever hear of the customer always being right?

BitterAndTwisted

Of course landlords are entitled to inspect and protect their properties, but in this particular instance the landlord is going to have plenty of opportunity to inspect it when the OP has vacated. Until then, it's their home and they are entitled to have control over who enters their home. Some agents (and landlords, too) seem to imagine that they are entitled to unrestricted access whenever it suits them. They are not.

butler_helen

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Of course landlords are entitled to inspect and protect their properties, but in this particular instance the landlord is going to have plenty of opportunity to inspect it when the OP has vacated. Until then, it's their home and they are entitled to have control over who enters their home. Some agents (and landlords, too) seem to imagine that they are entitled to unrestricted access whenever it suits them. They are not.

That's pretty much been their attitude since we gave notice.

I have written and emailed to notify there will be no viewings from July 6th as we have a carpet cleaner, cleaner and oven cleaner coming in (expensive but less stress for us). Even the cats won't be allowed in the house!

We have had some more calls to ask about viewings... We seem to be very popular until people actually see the house - it doesn't match the pictures on rightmove... My other half is going to talk to them about that and the way they are saying its part furnished and the tumble dryer is staying.

Some poor tenant will get a shock when they get an empty house and a crummy washing machine only (it's ok but the drying setting is dyer).

BitterAndTwisted

Why do you care whether the agent is misleading prospective tenants about what will be supplied and what will not? To be honest, I'd stay out of that one completely as it's none of your business, really.

Combined with denying them access when they patently think they have an absolute right to some and go as they wish, it is likely to fan the flames and you might not want that

Slinky

Just a thought, has it occured to you that if you actually have a tidy up, somebody will want to rent it, then all this traipsing through of prospective tenants will stop?

franklee

Slinky wrote: »

Just a thought, has it occured to you that if you actually have a tidy up, somebody will want to rent it, then all this traipsing through of prospective tenants will stop?

Unlike when selling a house, when any move hasn't been arranged yet, you can't make it pristine before viewings when physically in the middle of moving. Helen wrote "our storage boxes are sky high" which if they are anything like mine are tidy piles of removals boxes 6ft plus filling a room. Why should a tenant unpack them before moving and at just the time when they need to be packed? I've not even unpacked many of mine as there isn't time given I only have two months security of tenure.

Besides if the rightmove description is different to reality it's hardly the OP's fault. Perhaps you should be asking why the agent/LL are misrepresenting the property?

allthingsmustpass

Slinky wrote: »

Just a thought, has it occured to you that if you actually have a tidy up, somebody will want to rent it, then all this traipsing through of prospective tenants will stop?

The prospective tenants will stop when they tell the agent to stop. That's a bit easier dont you think? It's not for a leaving tenant to prepare a property for viewings, or to tolerate them at all if they don't want to.

Remember who the customer is.