Landlord causing problems. Please help.

franklee

thesaint wrote: »

It is my belief (Maybe wrongly) that locks form part of the fixtures and fittings of the building, so I would expect that a tenancy agreement stating that these things can't be changed without the express consent of the landlord would be unlawful.

I think so too, if the AST attempts to override the tenant's other rights the offending term can be ignored.

My AST sys I have to clean the windows inside and out once a month. Well tough they get done every few months. So I'm in breach of the tenancy agreement. Terms in the AST are not necessarily enforceable, the landlord can put any old rope into the AST, doesn't mean it stands up.

If the AST says the locks can't be changed then that term can be struck out if it takes away other rights in law that the tenant has, rights to control who enters the property and when, rights to quiet enjoyment. Guppy has already explained this in post #47. But a tenant changing locks should not cause damage and should reinstate the old locks at the end.

guppy

thesaint wrote: »

What you say is too 'technical', could I ask for you to reply in 'Plain English'.

Is there provision in English law for a tenant to change the locks?

"Exclusive occupation" means what it says on the tin It means the tenant has the right to occupy the property and keep out anyone else, including the landlord.

You might only be renting for six months, but for that time, you still own an interest in that property. If you "buy" a flat on a 99 year lease, you wouldn't expect the freeholder to let himself in when you're in the bath. The principle is the same with a shorthold tenancy, though the praticalities are obviously different.

The landlord or his agents may only enter with permission, though this can't be refused for essential maintenance etc. The landlord can't just let himself in though. He can in an emergency, i.e. if the bath is overflowing, but then so can your neighbour whose house you are flooding, in theory at least.

Most contracts say you can't change the locks, but there's no fundamental law against it. So long as you don't steal the old lock and don't wreck the door, what's the legal harm?

There's no lawful reason why a landlord should need a key unless the tenant wants him to, and why would a tenant not want a new lock when they start renting a new property with who-knows-how-many former tenants.

thesaint

guppy wrote: »

Most contracts say you can't change the locks, but there's no fundamental law against it. So long as you don't steal the old lock and don't wreck the door, what's the legal harm?

There's no lawful reason why a landlord should need a key unless the tenant wants him to, and why would a tenant not want a new lock when they start renting a new property with who-knows-how-many former tenants.

Thanks for your reasoned reply.

I don't want to go over whether the landlord can enter the property without permission etc, no one (Well not me) is suggesting that.

I suppose it would be helpful if there was a law regarding this, as it is one of the most contentious issues in housing.

I think that there is a law in Scotland that allows you to change the locks, the omission in England and Wales leads one to think that this is not allowed.

If there isn't a law, it is open to a Judges 'judgement' which can lead to even more confusion.

Loretta

If the tenant changed the locks how would anyone know?

I think a landlord has give some notice, is it 24 hours? before he can enter the property to inspect or do any repairs or maintenence, so if he attempts to enter without giving the required notice would he then say why have you changed the locks? when he should not have been there.

Sometimes you can talk too much about things.

I would have thought that when you take on a new house, either rented or bought it would be normal to change the locks for security purposes, without all of this going on. when my daughter used to rent and we helped her move we always changed the locks and the loo seat!

If the landlord has given other people permission to go in to your home and given them keys I would definitely change the locks and let the landlord decide what he wants to do about it, the ball is then in his court and he may decide to do the right thing and discuss it with you

guppy

thesaint wrote: »

Thanks for your reasoned reply.

I don't want to go over whether the landlord can enter the property without permission etc, no one (Well not me) is suggesting that.

I suppose it would be helpful if there was a law regarding this, as it is one of the most contentious issues in housing.

I think that there is a law in Scotland that allows you to change the locks, the omission in England and Wales leads one to think that this is not allowed.

If there isn't a law, it is open to a Judges 'judgement' which can lead to even more confusion.

I think the law aims to let the parties involved decide on relatviely minor things like this. In practice, most leases specify you mustn't change the locks; so if the tenant does this, he's in breach of the contract.

It would be up to the Landlord to act on that though. It certainly wouldn't be grounds for eviction and I can't really see how a landlord could claim it had caused him any loss. If it had been done properly, I'd be tempted to argue it was either repair or improvement to the property (albeit unauthorised).

I'm not even sure how a landlord would know, unless he is of the intolerable sort that enjoys visiting once a week/collecting rent in person/coming round for a shower etc.

Of course with students, I can understand a landlord's urge to do this Most put up with it anyway.

P.S. I'm not sure any of the above applies to OP's situation. Depends if the contract is for the room or a joint contract for the whole house. If it is for the room, is the particular room let clearly identified on the lease? If not, might be a hard contract to enforce

thesaint

Loretta wrote: »

If the tenant changed the locks how would anyone know?

guppy wrote: »

I'm not even sure how a landlord would know, unless he is of the intolerable sort that enjoys visiting once a week/collecting rent in person/coming round for a shower etc.

I can tell if the 'Yale' lock on my property has been changed, i'm sure if the lock on your house had been changed as well if you were stood at the front door.

Unless someone changed the lock for one of the same make, colour age etc, it's quite easy. You don't realise the minute details of something like this until you think about it.

Loretta wrote: »

I think a landlord has give some notice, is it 24 hours? before he can enter the property to inspect or do any repairs or maintenence, so if he attempts to enter without giving the required notice would he then say why have you changed the locks? when he should not have been there.

The 24 hours thing is a guideline which the tenant can refuse anyway.
I am not debating the in's and out's of the landlord entering the property, just the changing the locks.

What do you mean "He shouldn't have been there?

As a landlord, there could be a million reasons why he could be at his front door.

franklee

With the type of lock here you can just change the cylinder it it doesn't show, just means undoing two screws and the new cylinder costs about twenty quid.

But I think the main point has already been raised by guppy, it may well be a breach of the AST but what actual loss could the landlord claim it has caused him given he's not got the right to use the key anyway?

A tenant can stipulate they wish to be present for visits and then the tenant can open the door. Even if the tenant refuses visits then the landlord cannot just let themselves in. So the landlord's loss in not having a key is practically nothing, a good price to pay for all the benefits control of access provides the tenant.

So even if the locks clause in the AST stands, and I'd think it doesn't, then the landlords loss is insignificant. The tenant has the right to quiet enjoyment.

Generali

thesaint wrote: »

Thanks for your reasoned reply.

I don't want to go over whether the landlord can enter the property without permission etc, no one (Well not me) is suggesting that.

I suppose it would be helpful if there was a law regarding this, as it is one of the most contentious issues in housing.

I think that there is a law in Scotland that allows you to change the locks, the omission in England and Wales leads one to think that this is not allowed.

If there isn't a law, it is open to a Judges 'judgement' which can lead to even more confusion.

According to this you can change the locks as a tenant so long as you are renting the entire house. Or at least Croydon Borough Council seem to think so.

Hounslow Borough Council agrees here.

If the tenant changes the lock, landlords are not entitled to a key unless it says so in the contract. If you do change the landlords locks it is advisable to preserve the fixtures and fittings. However, the tenant should not unreasonably withhold access, and if he or she does, the landlord can apply to the county court for an injunction.

Winchester Council actually recommend it here!

if other people such as previous tenants could still have keys that fit, change the locks.

guppy

thesaint wrote: »

As a landlord, there could be a million reasons why he could be at his front door.

This is the crux of the issue, and most of these other debates. People seem to have trouble getting their heads around the system of land ownership in this country. Especially the landlord and tenant system.

When a property is rented under the landlord and tenant system, ownership becomes seperated from possession and use.

For the duration of the tenancy, it isn't the Landlord's front door. The Landlord may own the door, but he's given up the right to use it in exchange for rent. The tenant is in possession of the property.

So, really, there aren't a million reasons. There are only a handful, and frankly they'd better be genuine ones, because if the Landlord decides he wants to come and see his front door every week for no real reason at all, I'd say that's harassment

thesaint

Generali wrote: »

According to this you can change the locks as a tenant so long as you are renting the entire house. Or at least Croydon Borough Council seem to think so.

Individual councils will (and do) say opposing things.

If I searched I probably could find two councils who say that tenants can't change the locks.

Some rules do not need clarification, this one I believe does.

guppy wrote: »

So, really, there aren't a million reasons. There are only a handful, and frankly they'd better be genuine ones, because if the Landlord decides he wants to come and see his front door every week for no real reason at all, I'd say that's harassment

Obviously 1 million was an exaggeration to show a point.

I don't believe that anyone mentioned a landlord coming to see his door every week? It would only take one visit whilst dropping off some flowers for his tenants.

franklee wrote: »

So even if the locks clause in the AST stands, and I'd think it doesn't, then the landlords loss is insignificant. The tenant has the right to quiet enjoyment.

I agree that the landlord would suffer no loss monetary or otherwise, what's more important to me is whether a Judge would rule in the tenants or landlords favour if it were to go to court?

Whoever loses picks up the bill for court costs.
I think that this should be considered before people advise people to change locks.