Landlord entered flat without permission

starfish_chimp

And SoleilLune, your post was helpful and correct. Just ignore the stupid comments. Some LLs post the same post over and over again on every thread, ignoring the law.

benjus

starfish_chimp wrote: »

And SoleilLune, your post was helpful and correct. Just ignore the stupid comments. Some LLs post the same post over and over again on every thread, ignoring the law, such is their arrogance.

There have indeed been some rather rude posts on this thread, but the fact remains that the posters that SoleilLune was arguing against have posted and quoted actual legislation, rather than opinions and commentary.


In fact, I think pretty much everyone on the thread is actually in agreement over most points. As far as I can tell the only contention is over whether or not a LL can enter a property if the tenant doesn't reply to the notice and doesn't do anything to block access.

franklee

benjus wrote: »

As far as I can tell the only contention is over whether or not a LL can enter a property if the tenant doesn't reply to the notice and doesn't do anything to block access.

Sometimes practicality wins over theory. The tenant should assume the LL will enter in your example and go for prevention. A tenant can of course write to the landlord saying that he wishes to be present for all visits and not to come in unless he's specifically replied to the notice agreeing to that particular visit. However the chances of the LL or agent adhering to it are slim unless there's a really good relationship in which case the issue would not be a problem in the first place.

In short if in doubt change the locks, leave the chain on, get a shed alarm whichever suits.

jjlandlord

I'll ignore the posters who keep replying despite having no knowledge of the matter, or no intention to use their brains... Or both in some cases.

benjus wrote: »

As far as I can tell the only contention is over whether or not a LL can enter a property if the tenant doesn't reply to the notice and doesn't do anything to block access.

On the contrary, I think that this scenario is pretty clear: the landlord has complied with his obligation to give notice of entry and can enter.

If there is one unclear scenario, it should if the tenant replies to the landlord's notice refusing access.
By that I don't not mean a simple request to re-schedule but a definitive refusal.
As explained above, I think that the landlord would be in his legal right to still enter when the tenant is away. However, it may land him in hot waters, rightly or wrongly, so it may be wise to abstain.

In what could be considered the most serious case, access for gas safety certificate, I think that the landlord would not risk much in any case to still enter, especially if he has been liaising with the council on the issue.

jjlandlord

franklee wrote: »

Sometimes practicality wins over theory. The tenant should assume the LL will enter in your example and go for prevention. A tenant can of course write to the landlord saying that he wishes to be present for all visits and not to come in unless he's specifically replied to the notice agreeing to that particular visit. However the chances of the LL or agent adhering to it are slim unless there's a really good relationship in which case the issue would not be a problem in the first place.

In short if in doubt change the locks, leave the chain on, get a shed alarm whichever suits.

So tenants should disregard their obligations, be unreasonable, and give the finger to their landlords?
IMHO such tenants must like moving often...

starfish_chimp

If the Tenant refuses access, the Landlord has to get a Court Order, regardless.


Its really is as simple as that.


The LAndlord would not have a legal right to enter when the tenant is "away" either, again without permission.

starfish_chimp

jjlandlord wrote: »

So tenants should disregard their obligations, be unreasonable, and give the finger to their landlords?
IMHO such tenants must like moving often...

You simply don't know the situation. There may be a very good reason e.g. harassment by LL, unreasonable demands of LL, the personal circumstances of the Tenant, LL wants eviction and viewings, to name a few. It would depend on the Landlord and the Tenant and the specific situation.

starfish_chimp

benjus wrote: »

In fact, I think pretty much everyone on the thread is actually in agreement over most points. As far as I can tell the only contention is over whether or not a LL can enter a property if the tenant doesn't reply to the notice and doesn't do anything to block access.

OK, I see. I would imagine that not responding to a notice is not the same as giving permission for entry myself, but I see your point. And I am not sure why the tenant would need to physically "block access" e.g. change locks to ensure this. But anyway.

jjlandlord

I am no longer arguing: the law has been stated, it is pointless (and borderline insane) to continue claiming that the tenant must reply to the notice to give permission.

MissMoneypenny

jjlandlord wrote: »

I am no longer arguing: the law has been stated, it is pointless (and borderline insane) to continue claiming that the tenant must reply to give permission.

Which law is this and when was did it start?

I've seen letters that go out to landlords from councils' Private Sector Advice Officers; who are employed to investigate allegations of illegal eviction and harassement under the Protection From Eviction Act 1977. Part of their job is to send warning letters to those landlords' who did not comply with the law and instead do things such as entering their let property (or threatened to enter the property) with unauthorised access. Another part of their job is to prosecute landlords who do this.

Those officers go on to inform those landlords' that whilst the tenant occupies the property that it remains their home and that access to the property must be gained in co-operation with the them (unless in an emergency). That for them to enter the property without permission violates the covenant of quiet enjoyment of the home which all tenants are entitled to by law.

EDIT As to the mail the landlord is having delivered to the tenants home, just cross out your addres and write "Return to sender. Not known at this address." and pop it into a postbox. On the landlord's own head be it, if he is up to anything illegal or anything that breaches his contract with the company who sent the letter.