Landlord entered flat without permission

thesaint

mrginge wrote: »

Can you just confirm that and provide reference please.

Every AST has a contract term that forbids the changing of locks?

Sorry, I thought you were talking about rights of access.
The changing of the locks is a red herring, as the tenant could keep the same lock, and add another one to prevent the landlord entering.

The issue isn't the changing of the lock per-se.

It all amounts to going back to the landlord having a right of entry laid down in statute in black and white.

jjlandlord

The landlord might not bother getting an injunction simply to be able to inspect the property.

However, let's not forget a more important occasion: the annual gas safety certificate.
Any serious landlord will not give up on that one.

He will liaise with the local council, get access with his key if he can, and get a court injunction if he cannot.
The injunction will be granted, the tenant will have incurred costs needlessly and probably be evicted at the first occasion, and, if he persists, he'll be in contempt of court.

mrginge

thesaint wrote: »

Sorry, I thought you were talking about rights of access.
The changing of the locks is a red herring, as the tenant could keep the same lock, and add another one to prevent the landlord entering.

The issue isn't the changing of the lock per-se.

It all amounts to going back to the landlord having a right of entry laid down in statute in black and white.

Its not a red herring, its a potential tool to help a shall we say 'disreputable' LL understand their requirement to allow quiet enjoyment. I don't state that actions like that will ultimately prevent access, but it can delay it to the point that it becomes pointless to pursue it.

Aside from that i don't disagree.

thesaint

mrginge wrote: »

Its not a red herring, its a potential tool to help a shall we say 'disreputable' LL understand their requirement to allow quiet enjoyment. I don't state that actions like that will ultimately prevent access, but it can delay it to the point that it becomes pointless to pursue it.

Aside from that i don't disagree.

"Quiet enjoyment" is another much misused term.
A landlord using his right of access may or may not be interferring with a tenants "quiet enjoyment". A bad landlord has a multitude of tools to do so.

It can never be pointless to pursue it, as ultimately, a landlord will 100% gain possession of his property let under an AST, and access it as much as he so chooses.