LL rights to take photos while tenant is still in the property

G_M

when asked if we have a legal responsibility to allow photos they said "Yes."

Absolute cr*p.

You have a common law right to 'quiet enjoyment', which means the right to live in your home without interference.

The landlord has a contractual right to access (subject to notice).

These rights conflict.

So if you insist on your right(ie via a letter as advised above) the LL would need togotocourt toget a ruling as towhich right takes precedence. This would take time,cost him money, and he will never do it.

Legal discussion here:

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?26589-L-s-right-of-access-for-inspection-or-viewing

Werdnal

graduate wrote: »

Why should I get a bad reference just because the LL is not organised?

Agreed, in an ideal world you shouldn't, but p1ss the LL off and who knows what they might tell someone in a reference.

Indeed, they might exercise their right to refuse to give you a reference at all, which speaks volumes ...

grifferz

graduate wrote: »

Why would someone exercising their legal rights not to have there property advertised on a national website lead to a bad reference?

Because references are written by human beings, who are emotional creatures, and may not accept that their world-view is incorrect even if an impartial observer (and/or the law of the land) might.

So it is possible to get unfair landlord references just as it is possible to get unfair employer references. The only remedy you are left with is to sue for libel/slander, which obviously isn't a great one.

But you must know this is the way the imperfect world works, right?

You have a better chance of getting a good reference if you act reasonably when the landlord acts reasonably. Put aside for the moment the limits of what the law allows. Just consider what is reasonable.

The landlord wants to market their property. This would seem to be reasonable. So if you are in turn a reasonable person, you should find a way to agree to this reasonable request.

You seem to have some issues with your possessions appearing pictured on a public web site. Maybe you should examine why that is, which possessions those are, and find a way to tidy them away out of shot? Between agreeing a day and time for the photos to be taken, and you being allowed to shift your stuff around out of shot, that seems like reasonable give and take on both sides.

Of course the law does not oblige you to have to do this. It allows you to refuse access, and/or refuse photographs. But you have to ask yourself if that is reasonable.

Find a compromise!

ValHaller

graduate wrote: »

Do you know which law etc. I can direct them to when refusing photos?

Put the question the other way. Put it onto them to prove a right to take photos.

graduate

grifferz wrote: »

You seem to have some issues with your possessions appearing pictured on a public web site. Maybe you should examine why that is, which possessions those are, and find a way to tidy them away out of shot?

I resent the implication in the above quote. I have already explained my reasons for not wanting the photographs - SECURITY.

Put it another way if you were a would be thief you could randomly break into houses and see what you could find or you could look on rightmove and find the one property that includes photos of people property. All it would then take is a phone call to the letting agent asking for a viewing to get a rough idea of times when the tenants are not going to be at home. While looking for our next property I had one agent tell me that the tenants where on holiday for a week so we couldn't view! I couldn't believe it.

I still find it odd that so many people seem to think that it is confrontational to try protect myself and my family.

grifferz

graduate wrote: »

I resent the implication in the above quote. I have already explained my reasons for not wanting the photographs - SECURITY.

What implication? You seem to be very eager to take offence. I said you have issues about your possessions being photographed and put on the Internet. Is that not correct? At no point did I say your issue was not reasonable.

I personally cannot imagine what it is you have in your home that would not be in countless other homes, but that doesn't matter. I completely understand if you do have something that you'd rather not be pictured. What did you think was being implied?

graduate wrote: »

Put it another way if you were a would be thief you could randomly break into houses and see what you could find or you could look on rightmove and find the one property that includes photos of people property.

Which is why I suggested that one way to reach a compromise might be for you to clear away any expensive valuables so they are out of shot.

I am not you so I cannot come up with the compromise for you that suits you. How about you expend some effort in reaching a reasonable compromise that gives you and your landlord a solution instead of complaining about it on the Internet?

It's almost like you enjoy flailing around in a state instead of just sorting it out.

graduate wrote: »

I still find it odd that so many people seem to think that it is confrontational to try protect myself and my family.

Reaching a compromise that suits everyone is the opposite of confrontational; it's called being civilised.

I still find it odd that so many people seem to think that the best way to sort out their issues is to go on about it to third parties on the Internet regarding their rights and the law, before they even try to have a sensible conversation.

Landlord: I'd like to do X
Tenant: No. The law is on my side.

Doesn't sound particularly non-confrontational to me. How about this?

Landlord: I'd like to do X
Tenant: Well that doesn't work for me because of $REASONS and I believe I have the law on my side here. How about we do Y instead, which also achieves your goals and satisfies me too?

The time to wave the law in their face is when they won't be reasonable. Them wanting to market their property, with photos, does not sound unreasonable. It's just a question of how that is achieved.

If we all went through life doing whatever we like up to the limit of the law then it would be pretty hard to get along with anyone and doesn't sound like much fun.

But you already had your answer - if you do not care about generating bad feeling between yourself and your landlord then go ahead and point blank refuse to give them access and/or right to take photographs. No need to jusitfy yourself to them and no need to elaborate. Change the locks if you think they'll do it against your will anyway when you're out. The law is on your side.

Werdnal

TBH I think you are a little paranoid! There are 1000s of property photos on rightmove and other letting/sale websites in the country, and I cannot see how any would be at more risk of burglary because of it. Unless you have £1000 worth of gadgets, PCs, jewellery etc on show in the photos, what makes you think your property would be any more likely to attract unwanted attention than any other.

What will you do if you are ever in a position to buy a property and then want to sell it? Clear the house and leave it empty for the photos?

But then, as everyone has said already, you have a right to refuse, so exercise that right and tell the LL to stick his photos where the sun don't shine!

Blackpool_Saver

It's a cheek, simply say no

ValHaller

graduate wrote: »

grifferz wrote: »

You seem to have some issues with your possessions appearing pictured on a public web site. Maybe you should examine why that is, which possessions those are, and find a way to tidy them away out of shot?

I resent the implication in the above quote. I have already explained my reasons for not wanting the photographs - SECURITY.

Put it another way if you were a would be thief ....

I still find it odd that so many people seem to think that it is confrontational to try protect myself and my family.

Apart from the word 'should', grifferz is making a generally reasonable suggestion IMO. I can hardly imagine you want to protect your dirty washing up or your newspapers for recycling, so if you could work out which possessions you were concerned about, you might find that the problem is not as big as you imagined.

JuicyJesus

You're moving aren't you? So, security or not, it won't be your home for very much longer anyway, will it?