Landlord entering your property whilst you are in bed

rrtt

I share everyone else's outrage at your LL's completely and obviously unacceptable behaviour. I'm female and I would have dialled 999 ...

However, before you go changing the lock/s, just check in your tenancy agreement that it's actually legal to do so...you don't want to go putting yourself in the wrong in any further way (ie on top of being late with the rent I mean). When I let part of my property some years ago, there was a clause in the agreement re the Tenant must not do anything by the way of alterations that hadn't previously been agreed in writing by me ...

G_M

benson1980 wrote: »

GM, the latter bit that you quote applies to squatters/travellers on land and powers to evict them- there is nothing that covers 'criminal trespass' on its own in the circumstances described. There's no such offence as 'criminal trespass'- it simply doesn't exist. Guest101 won't be able to assist; as above I don't really think they have a working knowledge of criminal law and as such any advice they give on the subject is a bit pointless I suspect.

Errr... I know!

Sometimes I am a bit obtuse in my posts...I was tying to point out the Act did NOT apply here, and there is NOT an offence of Criminal Trespass.

Must remember to be more explicit!

G_M

rrtt wrote: »

However, before you go changing the lock/s, just check in your tenancy agreement that it's actually legal to do so...you don't want to go putting yourself in the wrong in any further way (ie on top of being late with the rent I mean). When I let part of my property some years ago, there was a clause in the agreement re the Tenant must not do anything by the way of alterations that hadn't previously been agreed in writing by me ...

This should not be a concern.

If there is a clause prohibiting changing the locks, this could only be enforced by the LL applying to court for an enforcement notice requiring the tenant to replace the original lock. Given the circumstances, no court would award this.And anyway, the LL is highly unlikely to apply to court.

The only other 'penalty' the LL could impose would be to refuse to extend the tenancy and/or issue a S21 Notice. Given the current state of relations, this is hardly likely to be a concern!

Keep the old lock, andput it back when the tenancy eventually ends and you leave.

newsgroup_monkey

unreasonable conditions are still unreasonable in a contract.
Putting them in doesn't make them legal.

It's like saying "The LL must give 2 weeks notice". It's not legal so not worth the paper it's written on.

It's not an alteration if it can be put back to the original condition too.

duchy

thesaint wrote: »

It is simply not normal to check who is "knocking horrendously on doors and windows" of your property.

It sounds like a typical tenant who is ducking the landlord because they can't pay their rent.

Apparently the police were knocking on my door at 11.30pm on Friday night (I was out) as my next door neighbour had his car stolen about 8pm that night and some plod knocked either side to ask if we'd seen anything !!

I can't look out to see who is knocking (without showing myself) so I wouldn't have answered the door to anyone at that time of night either. When my neighbour told me they had knocked at that time..... I thought it was completely irresponsible of the police.

(Oh and I own my house so don't fit your rather odd theory of a "typical tenant" either !! )

rrtt

newsgroup_monkey wrote: »

unreasonable conditions are still unreasonable in a contract.
Putting them in doesn't make them legal.

It's like saying "The LL must give 2 weeks notice". It's not legal so not worth the paper it's written on.

It's not an alteration if it can be put back to the original condition too.

I accept what you say about locks (didn't know that re making good with original) but surely it's totally reasonable for me to expect that (eg) tenants do not go knocking my house walls down or putting new walls up without getting permission from me to do so!!

G_M

rrtt wrote: »

I accept what you say about locks (didn't know that re making good with original) but surely it's totally reasonable for me to expect that (eg) tenants do not go knocking my house walls down or putting new walls up without getting permission from me to do so!!

Reductio ad absurdum!

A lock can be unscrewed, removed, then replaced & screwed back on.

Changing a lock is not a structural alteration.

rrtt

G_M wrote: »

Reductio ad absurdum!

A lock can be unscrewed, removed, then replaced & screwed back on.

Changing a lock is not a structural alteration.

Landlords do however have a reasonable right of entry under certain conditions (as previously stated by other posters). Unless the tenant gave the landlord a new key to fit the new lock (which would obv defeat the object of the exercise) the tenant would therefore be breaking the law.

theartfullodger

rrtt wrote: »

Landlords do however have a reasonable right of entry under certain conditions (as previously stated by other posters). Unless the tenant gave the landlord a new key to fit the new lock (which would obv defeat the object of the exercise) the tenant would therefore be breaking the law.

Nopo rrtt... They might be breaking the contract but that ain't necessarily breaking the law.

GM is (as usual..) correct..

Cheers!

Artful (LL since 2000..)

rrtt

theartfullodger wrote: »

Nopo rrtt... They might be breaking the contract but that ain't necessarily breaking the law.

GM is (as usual..) correct..

Cheers!

Artful (LL since 2000..)

Well if that is actually the case and I wouldn't be able to enter my own property without breaking the door down if (eg) the tenant were out and had left a bath-tap running, you have just between you successfully ensured that I will never again rent part of my property out. Which is a shame, as I'm just now buying a house with a s/c annexe. No wonder prospective tenants find good quality rented accom hard to come by ...