Tenancy Agreement Clauses

mrginge

segedunum wrote: »

...but the right to protect privacy and property are sacrosanct in law and in tenancies.

Hi.

Which particular piece of legislation are you referring to?

Thanks,

MrG

sniggings

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

That's incorrect.
As long as a clause for access is reasonable then it is valid and you are not legally entitled to refuse access, and the landlord does nothing 'wrong' by accessing the property pursuant to the clause.

you can refuse access, then if the LL wishes they can go to court to get an order to force access, which in the last 2 months they are unlikely to do.

sniggings

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

It is always reasonable to use a lawyer to deal with legal matters.

The level of wishful thinking and delusion is unbelievable!

small claim courts are designed not to need a lawyer, try and claim for a lawyer if awarded costs and you will be lucky to get enough to pay for his lunch.

anselld

sniggings wrote: »

you can refuse access, then if the LL wishes they can go to court to get an order to force access, which in the last 2 months they are unlikely to do.

The fact that either party could choose to breach the terms of the contract does not make it invalid.

Guest101

segedunum wrote: »

Privacy and property protection rights are not that complicated. When a landlord signs a tenancy agreement they accept that the space and property within is not theirs. That comes with responsibilities.

The thing is, a landlord can argue the case for entering in the case of an emergency, something is unsafe, or you have a tenant who has left the place unattended for two or three weeks. Common sense has to be applied. But, you better have a bloody good reason and 'the tenant denied me visitation rights as in the agreement' is not one of them I'm afraid no matter how utterly desperately some questionable characters around here would like to tell people otherwise. A landlord trying to get a new tenant in as the old agreement ends is simply not a tenant's problem.

In this case, I can't remember the particulars but I think there was an inspection clause or something and the tenant denied access at a certain date and time, but the landlord went anyway at another time and got caught. Needless to say, the landlord's desperate pointing to the inspection clause was met with short shrift.

So LL hadn't given notice... You see not all as simple as you've made out

- I support tenant rights, probably more than most on this board, and even in inclined to agree that these types of clauses are ok

sniggings

anselld wrote: »

The fact that either party could choose to breach the terms of the contract does not make it invalid.

didn't say it does make it invalid, what it does do though is make it useless!

burnoutbabe

I had an allow access for viewings in last 2 months clause.

We had 17 before we left. a couple every single week for 2 months. And phone calls from 4 agents every day trying to arrange viewings.

A nightmare really. Also with a landlord emailing and basically threatening us if we did not allow it and he had a void.

Lovely flat BUT it was opposite a building site with a tower block blocking the view to the river. Hence so many viewings before we left.

I did not want to try and constantly fight this "right of access" in the contract - landlord was a corporate lawyer. But its all very unclear as to what is or is not reasonable. You expect a few viewings at the end but 17??