Notice given letting agent wants to come and inspect

On_Stanley_on

DRP wrote: »

For all we know he has a collection of irreplaceable antiques or has set up a complex domino run throughout the house. Good reasons for not wanting to risk the agent entering the house.

HAha Nothing so radical!! I just would like to have some time to make it look presentable, as at the moment I wouldn't let my mother see the state of it let alone a stranger! Its normally clean and tidy (even with 5 kids) but due to the time spent at the new house thinks like washing, ironing and general tidying has gone out the window.

I have emailed the agent asking for a change of date but haven't had a reply yet.

mrginge

Tbh I wasn't expecting G_M to be the culprit

:eek:

Guest101

jjlandlord wrote: »

It is reasonable to inspect once in a while.
It is not reasonable to inspect daily or in the middle of the night.

They want to inspect, they have the right to and the tenant has to let them.

This arguement has been gone over dozens of times.

No the tenant doesnt have to do anything. Unless a court orders it, the tenant can choose their own actions

thesaint

Guest101 wrote: »

No the tenant doesnt have to do anything. Unless a court orders it, the tenant can choose their own actions

You could say that about absolutely anything, including drink-driving, rape etc etc.

Flashmanchop

thesaint wrote: »

You could say that about absolutely anything, including drink-driving, rape etc etc.

Bit far reaching, but can see your point.



All these tenants that bleat on about changing the locks,not allowing access for gas safety checks, not allowing access for periodicinspections etc etc.



As a normal individual I want an easy life, that alsoincludes the majority of the day and evening when I am also a landlord, which, Iwould like to think I am always reasonable about. This “anti” brigade alwaysfall on their sword when it comes to requiring references, or confirmation thatrent has always been paid on time etc etc. There is often a “thou is holierthan holy” type demeanour with them, however, scratch the surface a littledeeper and you find and they are trying to deflect from their own issues,insecurities, failures etc etc and trying to put barriers up left right andcentre.



Not sure where I was going, however, I think the moral ofthe story is, the majority of issues happen at move in or move out, so don’t makeit harder for your self than it need be.

dodger1

PasturesNew wrote: »

There's no emergency ... there's no need. They can wait until the tenant's vacated and had a chance to put it back to how they desire to leave it.

When my daughter was moving the agent (excellent throughout the tenancy) went round about three weeks prior to the check out. The sole purpose was to let my daughter know if there was anything that needed doing to ensure the full deposit return. A couple of things were brought up, these were fixed and the full deposit was returned without any need for disputes after leaving. It was a good idea which worked well for all concerned.

jjlandlord

Guest101 wrote: »

No the tenant doesnt have to do anything. Unless a court orders it, the tenant can choose their own actions

If that's your (misguided) opinion, surely you would accept the same as reply from a landlord if you, as tenant, asked him for repairs or anything else, right?

What I said, was not an opinion, or an argument. It was the legal position.

G_M

Oh dear! Yet again?

Landlord has right of access. I don't dispute this and all my initial advice was based on that.

Tenant also has right under common law to 'quiet enjoyment'.

Neither right takes automatic precedence.

My advice to change the locks (which followed my initial advice to negotiate and facilitate access) was in a scenario where QE might be at risk. LLs & agents do sometimes exceed reasonable behavior & take the p*ss.

In such circumstances a court would rule on whether the tenant was being reasonable in protecting their privacy by denying access or the LL was being reasonale in requiring access for a valid reason following appropriate notice.

I'd be interested to hear from other LLs what they would actually do where a tenant of theirs stood up for ther right to QE by denying access via the locks? Force the door perhaps?

As in most things in life, of course, compromise and reasonable, civil behavior is the ideal solution on both sides of a dispute, rather than resort to legal dispute.

G_M

mrginge wrote: »

Tbh I wasn't expecting G_M to be the culprit

:eek:

Ah! But no one is immune to the wrath of jj.

jjlandlord

Oh yes, yet again:

The landlord has a right of access for inspection, as such exercising it does not breach the covenant of quiet enjoyment because that covenant is not absolute.

Suggesting otherwise just shows that the issue is not understood.

The excuse of "protecting privacy" is completely nonsensical.

Furthermore, immediately suggesting to change locks just because the landlord used his right and issued proper notice is extremely bad advice that serves only to antagonise tenants and landlords.