Rental worries

Cakeguts

You might not think that 6 months is a long term contract but it could go on for years if you are a good tenant. The 6th months is only the start. It is also a good way to find out if you like the house, the landlord and the area by having only a short contract to start with. Signing a 3 year contract with no break clause would mean that you have got to pay the rent for 3 years even if you decide that you would like to move you can't. These contracts are not one sided. You can't sign a contract for 3 years and then decide you don't like the house and want to move after a couple of months. If you sign a 3 year contract you have signed to say that you will pay rent for the whole of the 3 years regardless of what happens.

Pixie5740

MyOnlyPost wrote: »

Not the best idea, unless as a tenant you can guarantee that you can always be in when the landlord needs to do his 6 monthly check and will always be available for emergency repairs. You can't expect your landlord to fix your leaking boiler the same day whilst you are at work if he can't gain access.

In extreme circumstances if the landlord needs emergency access for safety issues (e.g. neighbour reported gas leak) whilst you are at work or just not in then he has to break the door down which you will be charged for as you denied him access.

Given that the landlord is legally required to give 24 hours written notice before entering the property it is very straightforward for the tenant to either arrange to be there or change the barrels of the lock back.

As for the landlord requiring access in an emergency how often does that actually happen. Surely a tenant is far more likely to be aware that there is a gas leak or water leak in their home, or that their home is on fire that the landlord. Unless of course the landlord sits outside the property 24 hours a day 7 days a week 365 days a year just in case.

If the tenant is not home do you really think the emergency services are going to fanny about trying to track down a landlord rather than breaking the door down?

BJV

AnotherJoe wrote: »

That is not renting. That's letting.
Renting is when you are the tenant.
If you are the landlord, you are letting your property.

Your are right. I read the Op's post and thought they meant that they would be renting out their home. Had only skimmed the other posts and laughed out loud with Bacterial vaginosis. Sorry

"What does everyone worry about most when renting your home?"

AnotherJoe

MyOnlyPost wrote: »

Not the best idea, unless as a tenant you can guarantee that you can always be in when the landlord needs to do his 6 monthly check and will always be available for emergency repairs. You can't expect your landlord to fix your leaking boiler the same day whilst you are at work if he can't gain access.

Change it back then. Its a ten minute job.

In extreme circumstances if the landlord needs emergency access for safety issues (e.g. neighbour reported gas leak) whilst you are at work or just not in then he has to break the door down which you will be charged for as you denied him access.

Indeed, extreme and risibly unlikely. Is an emergency the LL is unlikely to be involved , how woudl they know who to contact? They would either call the tenant or the gas services would break in they arent going to hang around chasing a chain of ownership. You also omitted if the police wanted to raid the house when the neighbour reported drugs, or Martians invade.

MyOnlyPost

I never said don't change the locks, or you can't change the locks. I simply stated my opinion that I don't think it's the best idea. You disagree, fine, but why try to start an argument?

By changing the locks you are immediately saying "I don't trust my landlord" and without any grounds, but I suppose that's a perfectly reasonable opinion too.

Pixie5740

"Why try to start an argument," asks the poster who started an entire thread trying and failing to argue that being a landlord was not a business......

When people buy a new home it is advised that they change the locks because they have no idea who has a set of keys to their new home. Why shouldn't tenants feel just as safe in their new home?

MyOnlyPost

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Why shouldn't tenants feel just as safe in their new home?

Just as valid, if you are going to change the locks, why not give your landlord a key for emergency access? Assuming you are not worried about your landlord entering without permission but previous tenants gainig access.

Pixie5740

MyOnlyPost wrote: »

Just as valid, if you are going to change the locks, why not give your landlord a key for emergency access? Assuming you are not worried about your landlord entering without permission but previous tenants gainig access.

Ah yes, that emergency where instead of smashing the door down the police/fire brigade/ambulance crew/national gas emergency service are going to waste valuable time tracking down the landlord because somehow the emergency service(s) involved know that the property was occupied by a tenant rather than an owner-occupier.

booksurr

MyOnlyPost wrote: »

Just as valid, if you are going to change the locks, why not give your landlord a key for emergency access? Assuming you are not worried about your landlord entering without permission but previous tenants gainig access.

for the same reason I do not give a key to my mortgage company. My home means I control who comes and goes without having to force entry.

In exchange I take a risk that there may be an occasion in the future where I will get hit with a bill for said forced entry by the LL. When that occasion may be is somewhat unlikely and a gamble I am happy with in return for knowing my home is secure.

Speaking as a LL I have proof of ownership, the fact I cannot physically access the building using a key is not a problem and is in fact a safeguard for me. I would rather know that the tenant has changed the locks then there cannot be any possibility of being falsely accused by a tenant of having accessed the property and, for example, having stolen something they are looking to do an insurance scam on (not that a tenant would of course).

MyOnlyPost

Clearly you are all super organised and if 2 or 3 years after you changed the locks you had an issue with your rental property and required the landlord to gain access to make a repair whilst out at work you would remember to change the locks back. Maybe because you wouldn't forget to do this, you have assumed that all tenants are as organised as you and would also remember to do the same. I am sure that if for any reason you forgot about changing the locks back to allow access you would accept that you had to pay the workmans call out charge, as you are clearly such decent people and would accept liability and therefore have assumed that all other tenants would do the same. Maybe you've even assumed that all tenants hand in their keys at the end of their tenancy too, allowing the landlord easy access to his regained property?

I assume you are blissfully unaware that not all tenants are as perfect as you?