Less than 24 hours notice for inspections?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Less than 24 hours notice for inspections?

    Hi All,

    I am a tenant in a property where the agent provided me with an email at 6pm Tuesday evening saying that they will be coming to inspect the property at 10am the next morning. This is obviously less than 24 hours notice, which we were very unhappy about. Especially as my wife works odd hours and generally sleeps during the day.

    Having received the email I responded by saying you have not provided the requisite 24 hours written notice and that you are not welcome at 10am the next day. In addition my partner contacted the letting manager to say this is unacceptable. He said that it was required due to the owner being available only on this day as he is living OS...

    Despite our protests the agent turned up at 10am and inspected the property using their own keys.

    We have been very good tenants for over 5 years and have not missed rent payments and have cared for the property well.

    I am very angry as this and it is not an isolated case. In the past tradesmen have gained access with less than 2 hours notice - and was not an emergency situation. Our displeasure was expressed here too.

    I feel the agent will simple continue on his merry way if we do not take further action. However, I simply do not know if there is anything we can do other than move out.

    Is there any action we can take other than to move?? Penalise the agent/landlord...??

    Many thanks in advance for your help.

  • #2
    You may wish to contact the agent and explain that as they have entered your home without your express consent and against your express wishes, you are considering contacting the police to report them for suspected harrassment under s.1(3A) of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 which states:

    "the landlord of a residential occupier or an agent [my emphasis] of the landlord shall be guilty of an offence if he does acts likely to interfere with the peace or comfort of the residential occupier or members of his household."

    The individual carrying out the inspection will be personally criminally liable, and could face arrest by the police on the above charge - point this out. Likewise the agency as a corporate entity may face criminal investigation.

    Also say that the entering of the premises without your consent has been treated, as a matter of civil law, as:

    a. trespass; and
    b. a breach of the quiet enjoyment clause under the tenancy agreement.

    Inform them that you are taking legal advice as to what your rights are and what civil remedies you may be entitled to against both the LL and the letting agents.

    A bit heavy handed - but pick and chose which parts of the above you want to throw at them.

    Comment


    • #3
      also change the locks! As long as you change them back again when you leave you are perfectly entitled to
      I would also put in the letter that you are withdrawing any consent to them to enter unless accompanied by yourselves and with appropriate notice - and that you will consider each request and advise them if entry will be allowed.
      You are in control - make sure they know it
      Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

      Comment


      • #4
        I do not think the action amounts to an offence. Section 1 (3A) requires that the person

        knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, that the conduct is likely to cause the residential occupier to give up the occupation of the whole or part of the premises or to refrain from exercising any right or pursuing any remedy in respect of the whole or part of the premises.

        Further, section 1 (3B) states:

        A person shall not be guilty of an offence under subsection (3A) above if he proves that he had reasonable grounds for doing the acts or withdrawing or withholding the services in question.

        It can be debated according to whether the tenancy agreement permits entry and if so in what circumstances if the entry amounts to trespass. The tenant's right to quiet enjoyment is not absolute and whether entry amounts to a breach has to be a question of degree. In either case, whilst the action is unacceptable, I cannot see the court awarding other than nominal damages.

        The real problem in cases like this is that landlords/agents often take a high-handed attitude and this, quite understandably, provokes an equal and opposite reaction from the tenant. A polite request rather than a peremptory demand is far more likely to result in a tenant allowing access.

        I think it is important not to overreact as this may only lead to a souring of the tenant/agent relationship. What the OP should do is to write a very strongly worded note expressing his outrage and threatening dire consequences, print it, read it and then tear it up and throw it in the waste paper basket. The next day, he should write a polite but firm letter expressing his disappointment and the hope that in future all access will only be after agreeing an appointment.

        Comment


        • #5
          You do not HAVE to allow landlord or agent access to your home at any time without a court order - even if it says different in you AST. However, in the interest of good tenant/landlord relations it is often best to come to an arrangement whereby you will grant access providing you are present AND it is convenient. Islandgirls suggestion re the locks is a good one - but the locks must be changed back before you leave.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
            I do not think the action amounts to an offence. Section 1 (3A) requires that the person

            knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, that the conduct is likely to cause the residential occupier to give up the occupation of the whole or part of the premises or to refrain from exercising any right or pursuing any remedy in respect of the whole or part of the premises.

            Further, section 1 (3B) states:

            A person shall not be guilty of an offence under subsection (3A) above if he proves that he had reasonable grounds for doing the acts or withdrawing or withholding the services in question.

            It can be debated according to whether the tenancy agreement permits entry and if so in what circumstances if the entry amounts to trespass. The tenant's right to quiet enjoyment is not absolute and whether entry amounts to a breach has to be a question of degree. In either case, whilst the action is unacceptable, I cannot see the court awarding other than nominal damages.

            The real problem in cases like this is that landlords/agents often take a high-handed attitude and this, quite understandably, provokes an equal and opposite reaction from the tenant. A polite request rather than a peremptory demand is far more likely to result in a tenant allowing access.

            I think it is important not to overreact as this may only lead to a souring of the tenant/agent relationship. What the OP should do is to write a very strongly worded note expressing his outrage and threatening dire consequences, print it, read it and then tear it up and throw it in the waste paper basket. The next day, he should write a polite but firm letter expressing his disappointment and the hope that in future all access will only be after agreeing an appointment.
            Perhaps, which is why you would be reporting suspected harassment.

            However, I do agree that it is better to not to sour the situation further unnecessarily.

            I don't think damages would necessarily be nominal. Remember trespass is actionable per se. Additionally, I think the courts would be reluctant, for reasons of public policy, to effectively endorse this behaviour by, or soften the consequences to, an agent by awarding nominal damages only.

            Also, bear in mind that the feeling of someone else having been round your property against your consent is akin to the feeling victims of burglary will feel. This may alter the position somewhat on how the court measures "loss" and the associated award of proportionate damages.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
              You do not HAVE to allow landlord or agent access to your home at any time without a court order - even if it says different in you AST.
              I remain to be convinced that this is a correct statement of the law without qualification. See:

              http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...t=enter&page=2

              Post 11

              http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...t=enter&page=6

              Posts 58 and 59

              http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/for...c=104406&st=60

              Post 61 onwards

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                What the OP should do is to write a very strongly worded note expressing his outrage and threatening dire consequences, print it, read it and then tear it up and throw it in the waste paper basket. The next day, he should write a polite but firm letter expressing his disappointment and the hope that in future all access will only be after agreeing an appointment.
                I have tried this once or twice. It didn't work.

                You can always iron the crumpled letter flat again. However, if you then sent it, the recipient would detect your wavering (from the residual crumpling) and exploit it even further.

                Best just go for the jugular to begin with.
                'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by dominic View Post
                  Perhaps, which is why you would be reporting suspected harassment.

                  However, I do agree that it is better to not to sour the situation further unnecessarily.

                  I don't think damages would necessarily be nominal. Remember trespass is actionable per se. Additionally, I think the courts would be reluctant, for reasons of public policy, to effectively endorse this behaviour by, or soften the consequences to, an agent by awarding nominal damages only.

                  Also, bear in mind that the feeling of someone else having been round your property against your consent is akin to the feeling victims of burglary will feel. This may alter the position somewhat on how the court measures "loss" and the associated award of proportionate damages.
                  All this is rather straying outside my area of expertise so I had perhaps better not be too dogmatic on these issues. We need the opinion of a litigator. Until one comes along I think the position is something like this:

                  I honestly feel we are talking about something rather less than harassment here.

                  Trespass is indeed actionable per se however insignificant, but by no means all cases of trespass are going to involve significant damages. Whether in any particular case involving entry by a landlord there is in fact a trespass is by no means clear cut.

                  As to a breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment, since that is not a tort but a matter of contract the damages can only reflect loss and penal damages cannot be awarded.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                    I have tried this once or twice. It didn't work.

                    You can always iron the crumpled letter flat again. However, if you then sent it, the recipient would detect your wavering (from the residual crumpling) and exploit it even further.

                    Best just go for the jugular to begin with.
                    MTG - no wonder your hamster is depressed if you always go for the jugular! It may not be feeling a bit 'off', it might have gone off!

                    (for those who don't know what I'm talking about: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...1&postcount=20)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
                      MTG - no wonder your hamster is depressed if you always go for the jugular! It may not be feeling a bit 'off', it might have gone off!

                      (for those who don't know what I'm talking about: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...1&postcount=20)
                      Don't worry, it was just a ploy to stop Jeffrey bombarding me with enough information about Herman's Hermits to fill about five million skips. I don't even have a hamster.

                      I did however receive an absence note from a child in my class once, which explained that she had been away because her dog, Toby, had been to the vet with depression.
                      'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                        Best just go for the jugular to begin with.
                        One of the problems in life is knowing when to go for the jugular. Being a conveyancer and not a litigator and of a Lockian disposition I prefer restraint and reasoned argument as a first step.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                          Don't worry, it was just a ploy to stop Jeffrey bombarding me with enough information about Herman's Hermits to fill about five million skips. I don't even have a hamster.

                          I did however receive an absence note from a child in my class once, which explained that she had been away because her dog, Toby, had been to the vet with depression.
                          You should get one - you might find it a calming influence when dealing with dodgy agents or tenants

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                            One of the problems in life is knowing when to go for the jugular. Being a conveyancer and not a litigator and of a Lockian disposition I prefer restraint and reasoned argument as a first step.
                            Pretty vital for an ENT surgeon I would guess!

                            Okay, I'm in a silly mood but will stop now out of respect for the OP

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I can though understand that a lifetime of teaching is probably not conducive to inculcating a Lockian disposition - except perhaps as a defence mechanism.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              • Referencing question
                                kangoo1
                                A couple wants to rent from me, she is on maternity leave and will not be returning to her previous employment, he is permanently employed and moving due to a job transfer. I have referenced him for the full rent and his guarantor has been successfully referenced.
                                I am going to prepare the ast...
                                22-07-2017, 17:19 PM
                              • Claiming for protected deposit
                                mandm
                                This is an interesting one, got me into a spin.
                                Tenants signed AST but decided to leave after 6 months and 3 days (problem with moving) using the break clause in the AST. I protected the deposit using DPS (Insured) and returned the deposit minus deductions when the moved out.
                                I served the...
                                21-07-2017, 08:00 AM
                              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                                JK0
                                I'll leave it at that. I'm not going to get into one of JPK's interminable arguments.
                                22-07-2017, 16:28 PM
                              • Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                                MrShed
                                I've just posted something on GDPR and then wondered whether it had been discussed on here before - a quick search implies its never been mentioned.

                                I thought I would raise a topic to discuss it and the implications on landlords.In effect this is a replacement of the Data Protection Act...
                                20-07-2017, 15:01 PM
                              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                                jpkeates
                                That's simply one of the Schedule 2 exemptions which, if met, allows a process using personal data at all - all the other principles still apply in parallel (where it can be stored, be not excessive, kept up to date etc).

                                So, while it might be OK because it relates to a contract, there...
                                22-07-2017, 15:22 PM
                              • Excessive estate agent fees
                                Cml241
                                I have a property which I started renting out via an agency. When the contract started, they found new tenants, did the relevant checks etc and charged an upfront fee which equates to approx one month's rent. As one year has almost passed, the agent has approached me asking if I want them to 'renegotiate'...
                                21-07-2017, 16:26 PM
                              • Reply to Excessive estate agent fees
                                mariner
                                A new 12 month fixed term does provide LL & T with extra security but can lead to complications for either if their resp circumstances/legislation change during the new AST.
                                Personally, I would prefer if a orig AST was for a fixed 6 month term, followed by an SPT that required both LL &...
                                22-07-2017, 14:09 PM
                              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                                jjlandlord
                                In this case there should be no problem because:...
                                22-07-2017, 12:30 PM
                              • Reply to Excessive estate agent fees
                                jpkeates
                                I'm not sure they're "lying", they're just making some assumptions.

                                The agent can't decide if something is "too" risky or not - there are upsides and downsides to having a new fixed term agreement, and they're right to point out, for example, that the income would be...
                                22-07-2017, 12:28 PM
                              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                                jpkeates
                                Unless the tenant has given consent for the data to be used in this way, probably.

                                There's a grey area with this kind of data, because it's obviously been obtained for a purpose (which is to facilitate the renting of a property) and that's what it's being used for.
                                There's usually...
                                22-07-2017, 12:23 PM
                              Working...
                              X