landlord wants to come round and collect his mail

sniggings

skivenov wrote: »

How? Why? We used to have a student let or 3 and it was the best way to get in touch without interfering with their delicate sleep patterns or sending them letters they never read.

the point is not the best way of contacting the tenant, but whether they should be texting, writing etc about somehing that has nothing to do with the tenancy...you understood that right?

Fire_Fox

skivenov wrote: »

How? Why? We used to have a student let or 3 and it was the best way to get in touch without interfering with their delicate sleep patterns or sending them letters they never read.

1. Texting and Facebook are for one's mates
2. Not easy to use in court, not mentioned in any of the legislation
3. Landlord is supposed to give notice of proposed visits
4. People regularly change mobile numbers and lose phones
5. Text messages and letters are not the only forms of communication
6. It costs money to text if they don't have a contract/ can pretend they ran out of credit.

IMO e-mail for quick, semi formal communication (ie. not serving of notices). If you have a student house you likely have three or more tenants, all of whom have daily access to e-mail and probably two addresses - uni and private - if you set it up to message the addresses as a group (six addresses for three tenants) with one click they cannot reasonably say that they didn't receive the message, you can easily keep a copy in a folder and print for court/ deposit service/ guarantor. I believe you can set up delivery reports or read reports but don't ask me how!

chris_m

Fire_Fox wrote: »

I believe you can set up delivery reports or read reports but don't ask me how!

Delivery reports depend on the mail system at both the sending and receiving end being able to hande them. Read reports depend on the receiving email client and whether or not the user has disabled the option or simply chooses not to have a read receipt sent if the client offers the option each time one is requested.
I wouldn't rely on them at all for proof of receipt.

propertyman

Fire_Fox wrote: »

1. Texting and Facebook are for one's mates
2. Not easy to use in court, not mentioned in any of the legislation
3. Landlord is supposed to give notice of proposed visits
4. People regularly change mobile numbers and lose phones
5. Text messages and letters are not the only forms of communication
6. It costs money to text if they don't have a contract/ can pretend they ran out of credit.

IMO e-mail for quick, semi formal communication (ie. not serving of notices). If you have a student house you likely have three or more tenants, all of whom have daily access to e-mail and probably two addresses - uni and private - if you set it up to message the addresses as a group (six addresses for three tenants) with one click they cannot reasonably say that they didn't receive the message, you can easily keep a copy in a folder and print for court/ deposit service/ guarantor.

I suggest that if you want to, you use the small hours to widen your opinion and see exactly how email, text and face book are capable of use for service, and it's not "in legislation".

As for read receipts try here it covers all the email clients http://email.about.com/sitesearch.htm?TopNode=999&SUName=email&q=read%20receipts

propertyman

sniggings wrote: »

So now this property has two delivery points :eek: I hope this extra letter box you suggest is registered as a separate address, as Royal mail are not paid and do not have to stand at a door and sort the mail addressed to one property, into different letter boxes for the convenience of a lazy LL, who either doesn't want to pay for a redirection or change his address on his mail.

Marvellous exercising "rights-teousness" not common sense.

You can

a: both use the box duh
b: put a note "use letter box" ->
c: put it round the back or side

it might not suit every property but at least I have suggested solutions with the least inconvenience to all and a practical approach rather than bleating "renters rights" which say a lot about "chips on shoulders" than a pragmatic approach.

But that is all thanks for playing along " McCains" on a wet afternoon on a dull train journey :rotfl:

franklee

propertyman wrote: »

the indignant "not right" posts, bloviating about privacy and quiet enjoyment and " it's my house if I rent it" are ludicrous.

Perhaps you should read a qualified legal view rather than falling for urban myths:

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/

propertyman

franklee wrote: »

Perhaps you should read a qualified legal view rather than falling for urban myths:/

Mine is a qualified legal view I certainly don't give a lot of credence to the author and their left wing perspective, nor misleading and pandering to urban myths. Your post proves that, and my earlier post explains the correct legal position quiet enjoyment harassment and access are competing rights- which one wins depends on the circumstances in each case.

Asking to call and collect mail could well be both H and QE breaches, a LL would be pressed to provide good reason for that. Where the odd letter inevitably will still arrive it's not, calling every day or week for regular collections arguably is.

The landlord is free to enter, the tenant has the right to refuse or obtain the remedies. Who wins depends on why access was needed. its wrong to conclude " you can't come in" which many would look at such a site and take away.

What I was at pains to do was to get the stampy McCains to think about such their narrow and prejudiced view, based on a faulty premise - that typical of such mindsets, that there is only one way to evaluate things.

Scenario: take an owner who loses job and new job pays nowhere near as much. The only option is to let, but losing a fixed rate and converting to a BLT means that would not add up either. A sale would result in a loss.

While living in an HMO or as a sharer, they manage to make ends meet just but need to still have certain mail sent to the house.

Many posters don't understand that is the case for more than a few landlords and lack the imagination or empathy, or broader world view, that it is feasible that a tenant might take a sympathetic view and live with the odd interruption or make a practical solution.

Or that if some of the posters were their tenant they would rightly fear that they would "put them in it " on some point of meritless principle.

The law is there to protect people from the drawer riflers and weekday snoopers up to the real troublemakers.

While it can, it need not be applied to someone who might be in a bind and needs a little help. That in law is known as equity.

Fire_Fox

propertyman wrote: »

I suggest that if you want to, you use the small hours to widen your opinion and see exactly how email, text and face book are capable of use for service, and it's not "in legislation".

As for read receipts try here it covers all the email clients http://email.about.com/sitesearch.htm?TopNode=999&SUName=email&q=read%20receipts

I was quite clear under what limited circumstances I suggested e-mail and how I believe they can be utilised, that of course assumes you read the post before pontificating.

barnaby-bear

propertyman wrote: »

Mine is a qualified legal view

What I was at pains to do was to get the stampy McCains to think about such their narrow and prejudiced view, based on a faulty premise - that typical of such mindsets, that there is only one way to evaluate things.

Scenario: take an owner who loses job and new job pays nowhere near as much. The only option is to let, but losing a fixed rate and converting to a BLT means that would not add up either. A sale would result in a loss.

While living in an HMO or as a sharer, they manage to make ends meet just but need to still have certain mail sent to the house.

Many posters don't understand that is the case for more than a few landlords and lack the imagination or empathy, or broader world view, that it is feasible that a tenant might take a sympathetic view and live with the odd interruption or make a practical solution.

Or that if some of the posters were their tenant they would rightly fear that they would "put them in it " on some point of meritless principle.

The law is there to protect people from the drawer riflers and weekday snoopers up to the real troublemakers.

While it can, it need not be applied to someone who might be in a bind and needs a little help. That in law is known as equity.

Errr so some financial basketcase can't manage their finances, so can't rent a property properly and to advantage themselves financially lets on a basis breaking numerous contracts and exposing the honest tenant to insecurity of tenure (consent to let gives them the tenure)... yes the law should be their to stop crooked landlords, fraudulently renting out something and offering a tenure that doesn't exist..... imo it should be crinimal to jeopardise a tenant's security in this way... if you don't have the funds to let properly you shouldn't be doing it rather than committing fraud...

Fire_Fox

chris_m wrote: »

Delivery reports depend on the mail system at both the sending and receiving end being able to hande them. Read reports depend on the receiving email client and whether or not the user has disabled the option or simply chooses not to have a read receipt sent if the client offers the option each time one is requested.
I wouldn't rely on them at all for proof of receipt.

Fair enough. I still reckon sending six e-mails to our three imaginary students would stand up as 'evidence' of semi formal communication. The reports were just belt and braces.