Access for viewing to my rental property

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

    Access for viewing to my rental property

    Hi,

    Please can someone give me some advise here!
    I have my previous home let out as I wanted to sell and couldn't. When the tenants moved in I warned them I would be trying to sell again in around 1 years time. It's now back on the market and the tenant is being very difficult regarding allowing viewings to take place. The estate agency gave them 10 days notice for a group viewing, 2 days before this is to take place he (the tenant) has decided its inconvenient. Can he do this? The viewings have now been re-arranged ( a week later) but i am concerned he will do this again. The estate agency has a key can they simply go round and let themselves, and the viewers in? Considering the amount of notice given?
    I am getting the letting agency to send a section 21 on monday. As its crucial my property sells.
    Thanks for any help!?!

    #2
    This might be useful - a tenant in your tenants situation checking his rights.

    http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...935#post186935

    Comment


      #3
      Yes, the tenant can do this. The property is the tenant's home whilst they are in occupation and they are entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of that home. They can choose not to permit you, your agents, or anyone else access to the property, regardless of what the AST says (and even if they are behind in the rent!).

      The agent should most certainly not enter the property when tenant is not there or without tenant's express permission - this could be construed as harrassment and could get YOU as landlord into a lot of trouble. The tenant would be perfectly entitled then to change the locks - as long as the originals were replaced when they leave.

      Make sure that the s.21 notice is correctly dated and served - this is really your best option under the circumstances - but it is possible they will force you to take them to court to evict and may also stop paying the rent. This could take a few months.

      It might well be worth taking a more softly softly approach and negotiate with them - unfortunate for you as it is, they DO have the upper hand in this situation.
      Mrs Jones
      I am not an expert - my posts are my opinion and should not be taken as fact!!

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by jayneypo View Post
        Hi,

        Please can someone give me some advise here!
        I have my previous home let out as I wanted to sell and couldn't. When the tenants moved in I warned them I would be trying to sell again in around 1 years time. It's now back on the market and the tenant is being very difficult regarding allowing viewings to take place. The estate agency gave them 10 days notice for a group viewing, 2 days before this is to take place he (the tenant) has decided its inconvenient. Can he do this? The viewings have now been re-arranged ( a week later) but i am concerned he will do this again. The estate agency has a key can they simply go round and let themselves, and the viewers in? Considering the amount of notice given?
        I am getting the letting agency to send a section 21 on monday. As its crucial my property sells.
        Thanks for any help!?!
        Did you have a viewings clause in the contract? not that it really matters because the tenant is entitled to "quiet enjoyment"

        The only time you are allow to enter a tenanted property without notice and agree is in an emergency to prevent further damage to the property such as a water leak or to meet your repair obligations. Doing it for any other reason is illegal and regarded as harrasment.

        The best action is 1) offer a discount on the rent in return for better access or 2) give the tenants notice and sell when they have left.

        As you cannot really expect the tenant to keep the property tidy for your benefit so the later is the best course of action. If it is urgent consider the size of your discount but as a quide I gave my tenants a 25% discount and they still left their dirty underwear lying around, gave up in the end and have S21'ed them

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by matthew_henson View Post
          The only time you are allow to enter a tenanted property is in an emergency to prevent further damage to the property such as a water leak. Doing it for any other reason is illegal and regarded as harrasment.
          No, this is not strictly true.

          It would only be deemed 'harassment' if the LL could be shown to be doing it inappropriately in order to put pressure on T/make the T leave. Nor is it properly 'harassment' unless it is repeated. (You cannot have a single instance of harassment).

          There are a number of situations in which a LL can quite legitimately enter a tenanted property. With T's prior consent, for a start!
          '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


            #6
            We're in exactly the same situation. Could sell the house before we left the country, had to rent it out, and now am looking to sell again.

            I suggest you check your contract because ours stipulates that viewings are to be allowed and not obstructed in the last 2 months of the tenancy. I guess though it may be difficult to enforce as T can claim that they are genuinly unavaiable at the times of scheduled viewings, or make it difficult without appearing to be outwardly obstructive.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
              No, this is not strictly true.

              It would only be deemed 'harassment' if the LL could be shown to be doing it inappropriately in order to put pressure on T/make the T leave. Nor is it properly 'harassment' unless it is repeated. (You cannot have a single instance of harassment).

              There are a number of situations in which a LL can quite legitimately enter a tenanted property. With T's prior consent, for a start!
              True but in principle entry without the consent of the tenant = bad unless they need to meet their repair obligation/emergency. And whilst what I said was not strictly true is is probably the best advice in a situation where the relationship has potentially become confrontational. The definition of what an individual considers harrassment varies from one person to the next... I swallow my words after Jeffreys interjections

              Lets go with the discount theory
              Last edited by matthew_henson; 16-04-2010, 13:21 PM. Reason: Eat humble pie

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                No, this is not strictly true.

                It would only be deemed 'harassment' if the LL could be shown to be doing it inappropriately in order to put pressure on T/make the T leave. Nor is it properly 'harassment' unless it is repeated. (You cannot have a single instance of harassment).

                There are a number of situations in which a LL can quite legitimately enter a tenanted property. With T's prior consent, for a start!
                For the general type of conduct which exemplifies 'harassment', refer to Part I of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977:
                http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content...filesize=55722
                JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by sulksy View Post
                  We're in exactly the same situation. Could sell the house before we left the country, had to rent it out, and now am looking to sell again.

                  I suggest you check your contract because ours stipulates that viewings are to be allowed and not obstructed in the last 2 months of the tenancy. I guess though it may be difficult to enforce as T can claim that they are genuinely unavaiable at the times of scheduled viewings, or make it difficult without appearing to be outwardly obstructive.
                  All this is immaterial, really. If T chooses to be 'obstructive', whatever you have written into the contract about viewings is only enforceable with a court order.

                  It is perhaps wise to think about these things before rushing to put one's house on the rental market just because it won't sell.
                  '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


                    #10
                    Originally posted by matthew_henson View Post
                    The definition of what an individual considers harrassment varies from one person to the next... I swallow my words after Jeffreys interjections
                    No, neither the spelling, nor the definition of 'harassment' in this context, is subjective! It is a legally definable concept, as Jeffrey has indicated.
                    '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


                      #11
                      Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                      No, neither the spelling, nor the definition of 'harassment' in this context, is subjective! It is a legally definable concept, as Jeffrey has indicated.
                      Did you know dylexia is covered by the disability discrimination act? are you discriminating against me? do you like harassing dylexic people?

                      OK so yes I am dylexic and only get a tad annoyed with people who think they are clever correcting my spelling (although I had a nightmare at work recently) but it does rather prove a point that many situations are not what you think they are.

                      The 1977 eviction act decribes the actions a LL can take that are deemed harassment, but as I found to my peril things like entry without permission, flurries of unpleasant notes, calls and visits at antisocial times, verbal threats really don't bother the police and without police help using those actions as reason to breach contract is not easy. We had a huge book of evidence, recorded calls and video clips and they didn't want to know. CAB say it is police matter, the police will tell you it is civil matter (even though they are wrong).

                      In my mind that is the subjective piece. We felt 100% harassed, the establishment didn't, we could not go anyway with it.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by matthew_henson View Post
                        Did you know dylexia is covered by the disability discrimination act? are you discriminating against me? do you like harassing dylexic people?

                        OK so yes I am dylexic and only get a tad annoyed with people who think they are clever correcting my spelling (although I had a nightmare at work recently) but it does rather prove a point that many situations are not what you think they are.
                        Please calm down and don't take offence where none was intended. There was no intention to discriminate against you personally; the discrimination was simply between the standard and non-standard spellings (and between the legal and lay definitions) of the word 'harassment'. If you are giving 'legal' advice/information it helps to get it right. I too have problems at work where spelling is concerned (perhaps 'nightmare', like the phrase 'landlord/tenant from hell' is an overstatement!) trying to convince my students that in formal situations, these things matter!

                        Besides which, I suspect you may have been worrying unnecessarily. 'Harassment' is one of those words which most of the population misspells. I do not know whether you have had a formal diagnosis made of your dyslexia, but as an English teacher I can reassure you that if you can produce (as clearly you can), standard spellings for all the words I have highlighted below in your post, then any slight degree of dyslexia you believe yourself to have probably equates only to the normal difficulties most British adults have with the spelling of irregular lexis:
                        Originally posted by matthew_henson View Post
                        True but in principle entry without the consent of the tenant = bad unless they need to meet their repair obligation/emergency. And whilst what I said was not strictly true is is probably the best advice in a situation where the relationship has potentially become confrontational. The definition of what an individual considers harrassment varies from one person to the next... I swallow my words after Jeffreys interjections.

                        Lets go with the discount theory
                        I would say that you are, in fact, a better than average speller.
                        '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


                          #13
                          Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                          Please calm down and don't take offence where none was intended. There was no intention to discriminate against you personally;.
                          No offence taken at all, it simply indicates an interesting point that there are multiple view points to the same issue depending on the direct you are looking from. Perhaps not the forum for a dylexia conversation but spelling is often not the issue (as in my case), sentence construction and inappropriate use verbs and adjectives and mixed tense in the same sentence often make what I write virtually impossible to understand to other despite being as clear as day to me.

                          Now back to tenancy issues

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by matthew_henson View Post
                            No offence taken at all, it simply indicates an interesting point that there are multiple view points to the same issue depending on the direct you are looking from. Perhaps not the forum for a dylexia conversation but spelling is often not the issue (as in my case), sentence construction and inappropriate use verbs and adjectives and mixed tense in the same sentence often make what I write virtually impossible to understand to other despite being as clear as day to me.
                            I repeat : on the evidence of what you have written here and in other threads, I would venture the professional opinion that you do not suffer from dyslexia; in fact, you appear to be more than averagely articulate and literate compared with the adult population as a whole. You simply misspelled 'harassment' every time you used it until it was pointed out to you.

                            Stop worrying!
                            '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


                              #15
                              Thanks for all the advise. I have double checked my tenancy agreement and it states that the landlond or the agent are allowed full access to the property provided written notice is given at least 24 hours in advance. Not that I would just turn up after 24 hours, as I would, if I was the tenant be very annoyed about this. But does it not give some leeway for viewings that are booked 10 days in advance, at a time which originally suited the tenant, and 2 days before the viewing to take place he changes his mind?

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X