L's right of access for inspection or viewing?

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    What is practical for the landlord may not be practical to the tenant.

    Comment


      Originally posted by Pobinr View Post
      vi·a·ble   [vahy-uh-buhl] Show IPA
      adjective
      1.
      capable of living.
      2.
      Physiology .
      a.
      physically fitted to live.
      b.
      (of a fetus) having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.
      3.
      Botany . able to live and grow.
      4.
      vivid; real; stimulating, as to the intellect, imagination, or senses: a period of history that few teachers can make viable for students.
      5.practicable; workable: a viable alternative.


      Isn't it obvious!

      Not Viable as in not workable or practical. If a T won't let LL inspect then must have something to hide & would ring alarm bells. Why would any LL not serve S21 in such a circumstance.
      Given that the meaning of 'viable' is - as your exhaustive etymological research suggests - to do with organic life rather than social structures such as tenancies, it was probably the wrong word in the first place.

      I do not disagree with you that in practice a T's refusal to allow reasonable access will probably mean the tenancy ends sooner rather than later. But it does not mean that it can be (to continue your metaphor) aborted at will.
      '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


        I do not think it necessarily follows that a tenant who denies access has something to hide. He could just have had his brain addled by the nonsense spewed up on the internet by barrack room lawyers.

        Comment


          How about this for an 'interesting' clause which I gather my 18-year-old student son's just signed up to:

          "The Tenant shall:
          ...Permit the Landlord or the Landlord’s agents at reasonable hours in the daytime to enter and view the property with prospective tenants, without prior notice"


          I did flag it up to my son in advance of him meeting the landlord, but the bloke apparently said to him and his flatmate 'oh don't worry about that it's just to make it easier for one day in the year when all the students are viewing'; Yeah, right. He didn't alter anything, they went ahead and signed up. Cue LL Dad here bashing his head against the wall... I suppose we'll see how it pans out, won't we?

          (Oh, and don't get me started on

          "The Tenant shall:
          ...Pay for a regular window cleaning service during the tenancy. Regular constitutes monthly"


          And this is in a standard two-up/two-down student terrace - WHAT?!?)

          Comment


            Pay for a regular window cleaning service during the tenancy. Regular constitutes monthly
            Only needs to pay for it; does not matter if the windows get cleaned.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
              Only needs to pay for it; does not matter if the windows get cleaned.
              And doesn't state which windows need to be 'serviced' anyway. Cue deal with local window cleaner to wipe a specific bullion window in the front door.

              Comment


                As the student T, I would be tempted to advise the LL that if he turns up unannounced to conduct viewings, he may find himself in a house full of naturists.
                '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


                  Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                  As the student T, I would be tempted to advise the LL that if he turns up unannounced to conduct viewings, he may find himself in a house full of naturists.
                  Ah so extra incentive to call unannounced!

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                    Ah so extra incentive to call unannounced!
                    Ha! I suppose that would depend on the gender of the tenants and the orientation of the LL.

                    Personally, I'd find it very off putting - I have never been able to get my head round the idea of going round starkers in company.
                    '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


                      Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                      I do not think it necessarily follows that a tenant who denies access has something to hide. He could just have had his brain addled by the nonsense spewed up on the internet by barrack room lawyers.
                      I agree.
                      Either way a T that won't let me inspect my property is a T I most certainly do not want, so I'd serve a S21 on them.
                      BTW I can't believe some of the drivel & gratuitous pedantry on these forums!

                      Comment


                        I have just found this thread: http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/201...your-landlord/

                        Here is what a barrister says:

                        The third example is of an (assumed) decent landlord. He asks what his position is and the answer is (i) read your tenancy agreement; (ii) tenants don’t have a freestanding right to exclude you from the property; (iii) you have a limited right to enter (and may have more if your agreement says so) but you can’t go in if the tenant is trying to stop you, and its wisest to be aware of that.

                        It is something of a relief to read point (ii) as it confirms what I have been trying to get across. Point (iii) also confirms what I have said.

                        The whole thread is worth reading as it covers not only a landlord's right of access but also sets out when a tenant may change the locks.

                        Comment


                          Surprised you only just found that page March 2011....

                          it's just One Barrister

                          There are still a Large amount of tenancies in the UK with no TA what then !
                          Thunderbirds are go

                          Comment


                            Surprised you only just found that page March 2011....
                            It is not a site I frequent. I came across the thread looking for something else.

                            it's just One Barrister
                            But apparently one specialising in landlord and tenant law. Anyway, the point is that there is at least one barrister who agrees with me.

                            There are still a Large amount of tenancies in the UK with no TA what then !
                            Where there is no written agreement only the statutory rights of entry will apply*; there will be no question of the tenant being required to allow applicants to inspect.

                            *Though in theory there is no reason rights of access cannot be agreed orally as part of the agreement for the tenancy.

                            Comment


                              Just remembered two other barristers (one Professor of English law in the University of Oxford) also agree with me - see post 202.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                                Just remembered two other barristers (one Professor of English law in the University of Oxford) also agree with me - see post 202.
                                I am not a Prof of Law and I see it is as simple.

                                The landlord (may) have a contractual right of entry and does have a statutory right of entry , while a tenant has their contractual rights,a right to quiet enjoyment and statutory protection from harassment.

                                They are competing rights.

                                Should either assert those rights over the insistence of the other and then go onto exert them- tenant changes locks- landlord enters anyway- then, based on the facts and circumstances of each case, it can be resolved in discussion mediation and arbitration, or in court, where penalties can also be sought.

                                Therefore as I see it the landlord has the right to insist and the tenant has the right to refuse, but given the consequences, should be resolved before any action is taken.
                                Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X