Landlords viewing rights vs tenants.

PasturesNew

sooz wrote: »

most LA t&cs include that. Someone on here there was a poster who managed to avoid that fee. I think they were the tenants..it involved packing everything into the car, having the LA do the check out inventory, & then moving in again! :T

Yes, I remember that one too. Genius.
I laughed.

PasturesNew

Guy_Montag wrote: »

For the first time in my life, I'll not be alone on Valentine's Day.:cool:

Ah, you got the present we sent you from http://www.realdoll.com for Xmas then.



Except ... you received the one called "Mike"

Sisyphus

any differing opinions on this from Landlords or EAs on here?

JoeA81

Sorry, a little OT, but reading this thread intrigued me:

My previous tenancy was through a Letting Agency who made a big fuss about coming round for inspctions every 6 weeks, during the working day when of course I wasnt present. I wasnt happy but let them do it anyway. They has all sort of clauses in the AST which said how they must be allowed access to inspect every 6 weeks without fail, so I just assumed they had the right to do it as I had signed the AST, and of course they always sent a letter at least 24h in advance of each of these inspections.

But do I understand from what everyone is saying that if I had refused, then legally (regardless of what was in the AST) there would have been nothing they could have done about it, as it was not an 'emergency'? (Although if I had refused access, I imagine they would not have made things easy for me when it came to getting my deposit back at the end of the tenancy).

Although currently I am with a private landlord, I may be moving soon (where a LA may be the only option), and it would be interesting to know if I could actually stop these inspections if a LA was hell bent on them occuring so frequently.

Guy_Montag

PasturesNew wrote: »

Ah, you got the present we sent you from http://www.realdoll.com for Xmas then.



Except ... you received the one called "Mike"

He's very sweet & gentle, would have thought you would have liked him for yourself

Guy_Montag

JoeA81 wrote: »

Sorry, a little OT, but reading this thread intrigued me:

My previous tenancy was through a Letting Agency who made a big fuss about coming round for inspctions every 6 weeks, during the working day when of course I wasnt present. I wasnt happy but let them do it anyway. They has all sort of clauses in the AST which said how they must be allowed access to inspect every 6 weeks without fail, so I just assumed they had the right to do it as I had signed the AST, and of course they always sent a letter at least 24h in advance of each of these inspections.

But do I understand from what everyone is saying that if I had refused, then legally (regardless of what was in the AST) there would have been nothing they could have done about it, as it was not an 'emergency'? (Although if I had refused access, I imagine they would not have made things easy for me when it came to getting my deposit back at the end of the tenancy).

Although currently I am with a private landlord, I may be moving soon (where a LA may be the only option), and it would be interesting to know if I could actually stop these inspections if a LA was hell bent on them occuring so frequently.

It's not entirely clear - read the OFT guidelines (as linked above) which are fairly opaque. 6 weeks seems unreasonable to me, I would say 3 months is more than enough.

JoeA81

Guy_Montag wrote: »

It's not entirely clear - read the OFT guidelines (as linked above) which are fairly opaque. 6 weeks seems unreasonable to me, I would say 3 months is more than enough.

Hmm. Thought as much.

I will just have to look into the small print in great detail for my next tenancy!

Cheers.

Edit: Reading your sig - Charlie Brooker....what a Legend!

clutton_2

i bang on about "quiet enjoyment" quite a lot - it means that the tenant is entitled to "quiet enjoyment" throughout the length of the tenancy - this mean that no one can come into the property without the tenant's permission, unless it is the landlord and it is an emergency - eg. gas leak, fires, water leaks etc.

but as others have said, cooperation is the key to a good landlord-tenant relationship, and communication is the key to that.

you cannot just write something into an AST and say ""This Is Law" - especially if a particular clause attempts to withdraw legal rights accrued under other legislation. Just because someone signs an AST does NOT mean, necessarily, that s/he has to abide by all the clauses in it. BUT each tenancy/tenant/breach of agreement must be discussed on its own merits - i have seen an AST of less than half a page and equally i have seen one 20 pages long. Anyone can write an AST - but that does not mean to say that all the clzuses in it are lawfully binding.

That is why when newbie landlords want a "free AST" - i shudder - this is THE most important document you will need to use (next to the inventory) - and you will not know its efficacy until you are in court - if you have got it "free" from any old joe-soap you cannot possibly know its provenance.

Tenants - before you sign it READ IT - ask for it 2 days ahead of signing and take it to CAB if necessary or get some chums to read it with you - and CROSS out anything you dont like.

Gorgeous_George

As far as I know, there's not a lot the LL can do at this stage.

As a LL I would pay my tenant to allow access.

It's all well and good having an agreement that specifies that access would be afforded but what does the LL do if the tenant reneges on the deal? Much better to charge rent at a level that assumes no access (and therefore a longer void) and then pay the tenant to allow access.

PPPPPPP

GG

SquatNow

If the tennants allow access in their absence they will invalidate their home contents insurance.