L's right of access for inspection or viewing?

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

  • jpkeates
    replied
    The rights created by legislation are in addition to whatever has been agreed to in the tenancy agreement, which could easily create the rights that the agent is claiming exist.

    Other than that, as the law only implies a right to repair (if they are not inspecting or dealing with an emergency), the landlord would have to advise what work was to be done, otherwise, they can't assert their right to enter.

    The tenant in a residential tenancy has a right to exclude anyone, including their landlord, which is an equal right to the landlord's right to enter.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lawcruncher
    replied
    Section 11(6) of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 only allows access for viewing:

    In a lease in which the lessor’s repairing covenant is implied there is also implied a covenant by the lessee that the lessor, or any person authorised by him in writing, may at reasonable times of the day and on giving 24 hours’ notice in writing to the occupier, enter the premises comprised in the lease for the purpose of viewing their condition and state of repair.

    However, section 16 of the Housing Act 1988 says:

    It shall be an implied term of every assured tenancy that the tenant shall afford to the landlord access to the dwelling-house let on the tenancy and all reasonable facilities for executing therein any repairs which the landlord is entitled to execute.

    Apart from that, it is settled law that if a landlord has an obligation to repair he has a right to enter to carry out the work (Mint v Good).

    I am not aware of any express obligation imposed on a landlord to tell the tenant what works he intends to carry out, but a reluctance to do so seems odd.

    Note that the rights only extend to repairs and not improvements.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jon66
    replied
    You should probably start a new thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • thesleepingdog
    replied
    Hello,

    I have an ongoing battle with my Managing Agent with regards to the 24 hour access notice. It has been going on for years now and I am really losing the will to live.

    They have informed me that all the LL has to do is give me '24 hours notice prior to works' and that the LL is 'under no obligation to inform us of the proposed work he intends to carry out'. Surely this is not correct?

    Please can someone confirm:

    1. Is the 24 hr notice to carry out works (non emergency) or is this just to visit/inspect the works?

    2. Does my LL have an obligation to tell me what works he intends to carry out ?

    Sorry,I was convinced it was '24 hours access' to visit. But then I read the following copied from NARLA's website which states:

    Section 11 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985

    'This allows access to carry out repairs with at least 24 hours notice'

    I am super confused. Any advice would be great


    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    A landlord must give 24 hours notice in writing to inspect the condition of the property, but the tenant doesn't have to give consent.
    They can decline access, but if they say nothing, you have a right to enter.

    But you can't say you want to inspect the condition, if you really intend to discuss arrears.

    Leave a comment:


  • Green Tulip
    replied
    This topic has had a lot of comments. Understand that LL must give T at least 24hrs notice to enter the P and that the T must give consent. OurT hasn't been paying his rent we can't get hold of him and we have written to him well ahead that we would like to inspect the P but he has not replied. Where do we stand, can we or can't we enter the premises?

    Leave a comment:


  • Lawcruncher
    replied
    You need to give the required notice whether the tenants are in breach or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Merlin23
    replied
    My tenants haven’t paid rent in months due to being “impacted” by Covid (I know they are still working). I am planning on regular visits this month to get some outstanding maintenance done. Do I need to give 24 hours notice since they are already in breach of contract?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sheena McQ
    replied
    Landlords in Scotland are governed by the Property & Housing Chamber First Tier Tribunal, and not the Court. Whilst the tenancy agreement can stipulate the landlord has a right to enter to inspect, or for any other reasonable purpose, they can do so as long as they give 48 hours notice and the tenant consents to the request. The problem is if the tenant either does not consent, or indeed respond to the request. In Scotland a landlord can apply for a Right to Enter, on grant of that the Landlord can/should only exercise that right in the presence of Sheriff Officers. I appreciate the legislation may be different in England.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jon66
    replied
    Hmm 'asked' vs 'instruct'. I've been asked to take on cases by judges via referrals from them for tribunals. It happens.

    "I tell him/her to bog-off, and I tell them clearly in writing, that I have or will be reporting them"
    No confidentiality there then, and breach of solicitor conduct rules as well. I might pass on the 'representation' thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • BobsToaster
    replied
    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
    What would you do if a judge asked you to represent "a Rachman style landlord"?
    Are you from the US? Or just not from the UK? Judges can't instruct anyone to represent In fact, the opposite is quite true, I can and have dropped cases with the full blessing of the judge!

    If I ever come across Rachman style landlords (and I do), I tell him/her to bog-off, and I tell them clearly in writing, that I have or will be reporting them to the local authority for breaching whatever it is thats led them to become a 'Rachman style landlord'. That includes but isn't limited to local authority depts in; Landlord registrations and HMOs, Environmental health, Council Tax, Business Rates (NNDR), and Housing Benefit. In extremis, I even been known to contact Housing Benefit dept. to get the HB suspended pending repairs that are needed (withholding of rent), which is totally lawful if done correctly!

    A judge telling me (or anyone, whether legally qualified or not) to represent someone. LOL!

    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    Originally posted by BobsToaster View Post
    I only want to weed out Rachman style landlords, but you reckon you can't think of any way to do that?
    No I don't think there's any sensible way of doing that.

    Rogue landlords don't look any different to great landlords, and, at the point you are considering offering support, you're unlikely to be able to take their tenant's word on their conduct.

    What were you planning to do, check their charity giving and social media posts?

    What do you do when someone you decline to help says you're doing so because you're prejudiced?
    What reasonable selection process are you going to be able to demonstrate to show that your evaluation was fair and your decisions consistent?

    What would you do if a judge asked you to represent "a Rachman style landlord"?

    Leave a comment:


  • BobsToaster
    replied
    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
    Report away
    Will do.

    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
    But I'm not sure how you would filter out landlords who didn't meet your criteria.
    I only want to weed out Rachman style landlords, but you reckon you can't think of any way to do that? Not surprised really!

    [QUOTE=jpkeates;n1112117]I have passively/aggressively corrected your use of "whom" in the quote, sorry/QUOTE]

    Shame you missed my suggestion that showing some humility and pleasantness would improve how people perceive you...


    Still, as ever, you've been the same informative and helpful self you always are. Thanks for trying!

    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    Originally posted by BobsToaster View Post
    Passive aggressive trolling will be reported. I'm not having a pop, but really! Maybe you're a nice guy underneath it all, I don't know but some humility and pleasantness would go a long way!
    Report away.
    I'm quite proud of my humility.

    My question is: Are there many landlords who actually respect their tenants, charge a reasonable rent and do repairs timeously on this forum who are in need of representation at courts, where the advice/representation is provided by a charity?
    It would help some landlords who find themselves in situations out of their depth.

    But I'm not sure how you would filter out landlords who didn't meet your criteria.

    I have passively/aggressively corrected your use of "whom" in the quote, sorry.

    Leave a comment:


  • BobsToaster
    replied
    [QUOTE=jpkeates;n1112101]
    Originally posted by BobsToaster View Post
    That has nothing to do with a landlord entering without notice
    You post in absolutes like how many times, then accuse others of:

    [QUOTE=jpkeates;n1112101]
    Originally posted by BobsToaster View Post
    insulting and constitutes trolling.
    LOL! How many incorrect pots of yours have I needed to correct? You're being passive/aggressive stating things like:

    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
    [that's a good point - which has been made fairly often
    Really? Where in this entire thread has someone referred to a court case like the one I posted about?

    Passive aggressive trolling will be reported. I'm not having a pop, but really! Maybe you're a nice guy underneath it all, I don't know but some humility and pleasantness would go a long way!

    I'm only on here to see what kind of representation/advice/posts landlords receive, and whether I should branch my charity out and recruit a new member of staff, representing landlords in possession cases and before tribunals (in benefit overpayment recovery and or to have direct payments of rent)?

    t seems given the lack of any detailed law (statute or caselaw) indicates some level of representation is needed, but representing people lacking in common manners (not referring to you directly here, but the conduct/content of many forum members/posts) leaves something to be desired. Is it worth the effort of representing what might be defined as people whom only rent to make every last penny, Rachman style?

    My question is: Are there many landlords who actually respect their tenants, charge a reasonable rent and do repairs timeously on this forum whom are in need of representation at courts, where the advice/representation is provided by a charity?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X