Landlord entered flat without permission

thesaint

Soleil lune. You have gone to a lot of trouble posting such a lengthy repost.
It almosts makes me wish you hadn't wasted your time.

I am right, you are wrong. It's that simple.

jjlandlord

I'm surprised at the virulence of the reactions and the lack of critical thinking on this thread.

The actual full text of the law has been quoted but apparently it is still wrong because a bunch of websites, which do not quote their references, and which seem to copy-paste the contents of their articles from one another, suggest otherwise.

Moreover, many replies either ignore what has been said and referenced, or very plainly accuse of things that haven't been said at all. (e.g. below)

Long live bigotry.

Soleil_lune wrote: »

A few posters on here are suggesting that the landlord can just come in as he pleases. Not true. Get your facts straight jjlandlord, (and thesaint,) or you will be up in court for trespassing!

Clearly you haven't bothered reading the thread before commenting...

Soleil_lune

thesaint wrote: »

Soleil lune. You have gone to a lot of trouble posting such a lengthy repost.
It almosts makes me wish you hadn't wasted your time.

I am right, you are wrong. It's that simple.

Unbelievable. How incredibly arrogant.

I am not even going to waste another SECOND talking to you OR jjlandlord, as you cannot seem to admit you are wrong, and imply that anyone who disagrees with you is thick and has 'little knowledge.'

I feel sorry for any tenants you may have. If I were them I would change the locks NOW and put bolts on the inside of the doors.

You are so so so wrong about this.

Just be very very careful. Your lack of education and basic knowledge on this matter are going to get you into trouble. If you ARE landlords, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT! For goodness sake!

jjlandlord

Soleil_lune wrote: »

Your lack of education and basic knowledge on this matter are going to get you into trouble. If you ARE landlords, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!

We are the only ones who quoted a reference that cannot be questioned... So I will take your comment as tongue-in-cheek.

Now you find a serious (read legal professional) source that discuss that very issue, and not just generalities, I will be more than happy to read it in details to further my education.

thesaint

Soleil_lune wrote: »

Unbelievable. How incredibly arrogant.

It's nothing to do with arrogance. I am 100% in what I have said in this thread. I repeat 100%. I have shown the LAW that shows that I am 100% correct. You choose to ignore all this.
I am not going to educate you, as you have a closed mind where random websites "trumps" the law.

Soleil_lune wrote: »

I am not even going to waste another SECOND talking to you OR jjlandlord, as you cannot seem to admit you are wrong, and imply that anyone who disagrees with you is thick and has 'little knowledge.'

You would be wasting your time talking to me, but would gain a lot by reading, and comprehending what I am trying to explain to you.
It is not that hard to understand, but I have been a landlord for many years, and manage dozens of properties on a daily basis, so maybe I should be more patient.

Soleil_lune wrote: »

Just be very very careful. Your lack of education and basic knowledge on this matter are going to get you into trouble. If you ARE landlords, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT! For goodness sake!

Oh the irony.

benjus

Well this is a fun thread...

For me, this is the post that best sums up the situation:

jjlandlord wrote: »

The landlord may enter on 24 hour notice. This is not an opinion, this is not arguable.
This is certainly not the same as requesting and waiting for explicit permission.

Can the landlord land himself in hot waters by entering despite the tenant saying 'no'? Yes.
Should the landlord be careful? Yes.
Can the landlord force his way in? No.

So basically:

• If the tenant responds to the 24h notice by agreeing, no problem.
• If the tenant responds to the 24h notice by refusing access, or blocks access (e.g. by changing locks) the LL should not attempt to force access but should use court action to enforce access. In practice the LL would normally just evict the tenant asap if the tenant repeatedly refuses access.
• If the tenant doesn't respond to the 24h notice and doesn't block access, the LL can proceed, although caution would be advisable.

A lot of people seem to be suggesting that the LL requires explicit permission each and every time they wish to visit. Yet nobody has provided a link to legislation or even to an article written by a legal professional that supports this. The legislation that has been quoted mentions serving notice - this is not the same as requesting permission.

franklee

Just had a read of the RICS Residential Property Standards (the ‘Blue Book’) Section 7.9 Access:

"... you should inspect the condition and state of repair of the property at reasonable times of the day, provided that reasonable notice in writing (at least 24 hours) has been given to the tenant. It is a legal requirement of all assured and protected tenancies that landlords are given access and reasonable facilities to do repairs. This does not allow the landlord to simply enter the property, even with notice, where the tenant is specifically refusing access.

...

The tenant is entitled to quiet enjoyment of the property. You should advise the landlord to exercise restraint in placing clauses in the tenancy agreement which allow you or your client to gain access to the premises. Tenants should be reasonable in allowing access to the premises in order to fulfil obligations under the tenancy agreement. If access is denied you should write to the tenant advising that if access is denied and further damage occurs the tenant may be liable."

jjlandlord

This has already been covered...

In principle the tenant cannot refuse access since there is a covenant that he must allow it. (see actual statute quoted)
A landlord gaining access as legally and contractually specified would not breach quiet enjoyment as quiet enjoyment is 'tuned' (reasonably) by the terms of the lease.

However, as already said, it's probably not a good idea to ignore the tenant's refusal as he can create a lot of undue trouble (I think a few such specimens of such tenants commented on this thread).

Finally, and again, if the tenant is physically refusing access a landlord cannot obviously use force or breach the peace and must withdraw.

clark24

I think it boils down to all parties concerned being reasonable.

Unfortunately there are a very many unreasonable landlords, and a very many unreasonable tenants, put the 2 together and it's a recipe for disaster!

Of course a landlord has every right to keep a reasonable eye on his property, and the tenant has every right to have a reasonable level of living in their home without being pestered, but if the landlord abuses their right, and the tenant abuses theirs then it can very quickly go sour.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Soleil_lune wrote: »

No you can not enter your tenant's home, even with 24 hours written notice; if they do not give permission.

And if they don't give permission, then landlords should issue a section 21 and evict at earliest opportunity.

If tenants want to be uncooperative and refuse the inspections agreed in the lease, then landlords should kick them out as soon as possible.

In today's renting market, with voids measured in days and rents soaring, in most areas it'll cost the tenant a fortune and teach them a lesson, and the landlord will be able to re-let the property quickly and at a higher rent.

Problem solved.:)