My Tenant Won’t Allow Me To Enter The Property For Viewings

It’s been a while, hasn’t it? Almost a month.

I’ve missed you.

Apparently this blogging malarkey isn’t all that easy when you have sweet F-all to blog about! But today is the day I break my silence. I have a little something-something to discuss! Hold onto your party hats…

Page contents:

The difficulty of viewings with tenants in situ

Difficult tenants & viewings

Difficult tenants & viewings

My tenant isn’t exactly refusing me access to take viewings, but she’s making it incredibly difficult for me and consequently forcing me to have terrible thoughts, which all usually conclude with her crying like a blubbering baby, while I’m holding her bloody heart up in the air like a prized trophy and laughing like a hyena blitzed on amphetamine.

I want to touch on the subject of arranging viewings with unwilling tenants, because there seems to be conflicting opinions about this incredibly common dilemma.

The situation from both sides

On one hand, the landlord wants to limit the void period between tenancies, so they’re eager to take viewings while the property is still tenanted. Totally understandable. But on the other hand, the tenant is still the occupant; the property is still their home, and they’re not terribly encouraged by the idea of random punters trampling in and out of their home. Equally as understanding.

In reality, most tenants won’t have an issue with viewings as long as they’re orchestrated with courtesy by the landlord. Granted, many landlords haven’t the foggiest what that entails. But for many reasons, viewings can often be problematic while there is a tenant in situ.

It can be one of the trickiest and most irritating situations for both landlord and tenant, because there’s a legitimate argument from both parties- it’s easy to be sympathetic for either side. But it’s probably more irritating for landlords, and I say that while trying to remain unequivocally unbiased. The landlord simply has something more tangible to lose. Money.

So, who’s in the right? Morally, it can go either way (but who cares about morals, right?). Here’s how I’ve always understood it from a legal standpoint…

Can the tenant refuse the landlord access for viewings?

I believe so, yes.

If the tenant doesn’t want to allow access, whether it be for viewings, inspections or general maintenance, that’s their given right. The tenant has the right to possession and to the lawful use and enjoyment of the premises. Whether that’s reasonable or not is another issue altogether.

In this situation, I’ve noticed a bizarre trend, whereby many landlords and agents are under the impression that tenants mysteriously lose their statutory rights towards the end of the tenancy when it’s time for viewings. They don’t.

So what does that mean? Under Common Law, all tenants are entitled to live in “quiet enjoyment” until the tenancy is legally terminated, so only until then can you or anyone else can’t just waltz in and out of the property without permission.

Citizen Advice says the following on the matter:

If your landlord wants to enter your home for any other reason, for example, to show round a new tenant, they can only do this with your agreement or in accordance with any reasonable term set out in your tenancy agreement.

Note, it says “with your (the tenants) agreement”

It’s also worth noting that tenants are legally entitled to change the door locks and do NOT have to give a copy to the landlord/agent, but is still expected to grant “reasonable” access. That’s pretty relevant because it strongly implies that landlords and/or agents don’t have the right to gain access at their will, despite what might be engraved in the tenancy agreement

‘Viewing’ clauses in tenancy agreements

This is where it gets particularly controversial, with opinions flying in several directions.

Many rely and believe in ‘viewing clauses’, which typically stipulates that in the last 28 days of a tenancy the landlord/agent is entitled to access the premises in order to take viewings. Many tenancy agreements have viewing clauses, but I think they’re often misinterpreted, and wrongly used as a license to breach the tenants rights. That’s when it can become dangerous.

While Citizen’s Advice does mention that landlords can rely on terms set in the tenancy agreement to gain reasonable access for viewings, it’s important to acknowledge that “forceful entry” into the property without legal consent (e.g. by a Judge) is not permitted, which is what I believe the situation would effectively be if a landlord or agent enters a property without permission to take a viewing. On that basis, viewing clauses become tragically weaker than many realise, because they still don’t actually give you any authority to enter the premises without permission.

Ultimately, the tenants right to refuse access will take presidency over any clause impeding the tenants right to “quiet enjoyment”, unless there is a genuine emergency. Section 11 clarifies that if there is an emergency the landlord can enter without permission, which I’m assuming is something like a heavily leaking/burst water pipe or fire. I suppose you could, in theory, strategically throw a rock through the window and dislodge an exposed pipe. Err… good luck with that one.

The biggest consequence ALL landlords should fear when contemplating the notion of entering a property without consent from the tenant is the prospect of harassment charges for “forcing entry” It’s very real. And scary. You definitely don’t want that allegation hanging over your sorry little peanut-head. I wouldn’t risk it. It’s also worth bearing in mind (in case you actually want to act on your mindless stupidity), Judges are generally in favour of the poor vulnerable tenants in these situations, so it’s practically financial suicide for landlords. Trespasser be warned.

I’d personally rather wait until the tenant vacates and subsequently risk having a longer void period, even if that means reluctantly swallowing the extra costs. It’s a total suck-fest, but that’s the reality of the situation as far as I’m concerned.

If the tenant does refuse access while there are ‘reasonable’ viewing clauses and the landlord has attempted to orchestrate them reasonably and with fair warning, yes, the tenant IS in breach of contract. Then you can serve a section 8, but what’s the bloody point? The tenant is due to vacate soon anyways.

The landlord may have a good case to seek compensation via the deposit scheme. But, even then that isn’t very reassuring, because BOTH the tenant and landlord have to agree for the matter to be arbitrated by the deposit scheme, otherwise the landlord will need to take the matter to Court (which will most likely be the outcome). A whole lot of hassle. Again, I’d still rather wait until the unreasonable douchebag tenant vacates.

Conclusion? Meh, in real terms, viewing clauses aren’t worth shit, in my opinion! However, purely on the grounds that most tenants aren’t aware of their right to quiet enjoyment, the clause is still worth having. So on the basis that you’ve managed to bag yourself a tenant that will blindly allow their fate to be determined by a clause that mostly, in my opinion, isn’t worth a damn, you may have hit the jackpot in this situation.

What about letting agents & viewings?

Yeah, what about them? They can go suck on a pulsating haemorrhoid.

Only joking.

I have two thoughts about letting agents and viewings.

Agents can be extremely useful during these turbulent times, because they’ll usually chase, pester and apply pressure until tenants reluctantly become accommodating. Agents usually aren’t shy of being relentless, greasy little assholes- and that can be an extremely persuasive weapon. Sometimes.

I’ve always said that one of the main benefits of using a high-street agent is having the viewings dealt with. Now, whether that alone is worth their sky high price-tag is debatable.

My second thought, is quite naturally, rather more disruptive. I often hear stories about letting agents freely walking in and out of properties without the tenants permission. This usually occurs because the agents are oblivious to the law or knowingly disregard it. They probably get away with it more often than not, because they know they’re preying on the ignorant. But it’s a risky game for them to play, because agents are governed by the same restrictions as landlords, which I appreciate is often difficult to tell when they’re whizzing round in their slick superhero costume, in the form of a power-suit from Burtons.

All i’d say is, if a agent is handling the viewings on your behalf, I wouldn’t pressure them to ‘force entry’ if you’re dealing with a difficult tenant. However, if they’re prepared to do it without your encouragement, on their greasy little head be it. But as the landlord, it’s wiser to keep your hands squeaky clean.

How to deal with viewings during tenanted properties

The key is communication and respect.

Don’t just assume or insist that taking viewings is perfectly acceptable in your tenants eyes- even if you have an an amazing relationship and your star-sign intertwines with theirs. Always ask permission and emphasise you’re prepared to work around their schedule. Remember, they don’t have to allow you access, they can easily make the entire process extremely difficult for you just for the sake of it. They hold all the chips. Of course, some tenants will naturally make it extra difficult regardless of how respectful you’re being about it. That’s just the fall of mankind.

My tenant was being extremely difficult when it came to the scheduling, and I genuinely didn’t understand why, especially since she’s the one that surrendered her freaking tenancy. I offered the miserable ol’ tart several days/times over a 3 week period, which she could choose from, but she point-blank refused without any hesitation.

She was allegedly busy during all the proposed days/times. Without a doubt, total bullshit. In any case, despite her shortfallings as a compassionate human, I completely appreciate and respect that she remains the tenant and therefore the property is her home until she officially vacates. But more notably, she’s generally been a very decent tenant. I have no complaints.

My way of dealing with it was to begrudgingly request access to the property for 4 hours during ONE lousy day of her choice, after 5pm, in which time I’ll arrange as many viewings as possible. A total pain to organise, because it was heavily reliant on the prospective tenants being available, but it’s all I had to work with. Fortunately, I managed to squeeze in 4 viewings during that time.

If I can’t find a suitable tenant out of that set, I’ll probably just wait until the property is vacant… or get on my knees and beg for her mercy. Failing that, I’ll probably just sacrifice a friend of mine by getting him to lower his inhibitions by caressing her lifeless carcass until the sun rises, hoping she’ll be in a more generous mood then. I’ll probably give him a fiver for his troubles. And when I say mate, I’m most likely talking about myself. Whatever I have to do, this is business.

From my experience, when you’re dealing with unreasonable tenants in these similar situations, the best solution is to allow them to take control and dance to their tune like a monkey, and take every ounze of mercy you can get your grubby little mitts on. I snatched those 4 hours out of her hand like I was gagging for my next high and she was cupping a mountain of cocaine.

What if the tenant completely refuses access?

If your tenant remains unreasonable, even after offering to bow down to their lousy terms and conditions, then there’s probably an underlying reason for it. Most commonly;

  • 1) They could legitimately be unreasonable tenants with a chip on their shoulder. That could genuinely be the only reason, especially if you’re the heartless schmuck that served them notice.

    In this case, I would just cut my losses and take viewings once the tenant vacates. Better that than the alternative(s) e.g. forcing entry and creating more problems.

  • 2) It’s highly possible that the tenant genuinely has a massive phobia with random people walking in and out of thier home, snooping around, eyeing up their junk. It’s not uncommon, especially during a stressful period when they are planning to move homes, which probably heightens their phobia. I believe this was my tenant’s issue. If it was my business, I’d be inclined to recommend therapy (and to anyone else that falls into this bracket) to help deal with anxiety.

    Again, I would just wait until the tenant vacates.

  • 3) The relationship between you and the tenant is total bullshit. Perhaps that’s the reason behind the tenant’s departure, and consequently they’re adamant on making your life a living hell. Everyone knows that the best way to cripple a landlord is by attacking the purse.

    Once again, I would wait until the tenant vacates.

  • 4) The tenant is hiding something sinister e.g. damaged property, a property that’s been reduced to a shithole, or a cannabis farm. In this case, if you haven’t already served notice, I’d be inclined to serve a Section 8 or 21, depending on the specifics, because the reality is, they may not have any intentions of vacating. But also, you probably wouldn’t want to expose prospective tenants around whatever it is the current tenants are preventing you from accessing.

If you’re currently in this situation and you’re having a very concerning experiencing, whether you’re a tenant or landlord, I would advise seeking legal advice from either Shelter, Citizens Advice or a professional tenant eviction company.

Do you actually want to take viewings with tenants in situ?

Think about it.

In my experience, very few tenants live in conditions that I would deem truly “presentable” But then again, I do have a mild case of OCD. But despite my irrational compulsiveness, there is still something very real lurking in my point for even the average sane person. I’ve seen tenants live in conditions that even a donkey would be mortified by. It’s truly baffling.

In many cases, I’ve been reluctant to take viewings while tenants are in situ because I don’t want the new prospective tenants to endure the hellhole conditions the current tenants are living in- that would probably do more harm than good to any “tenant finding” process. I’d rather allow the property to be void for a couple of days after the current tenants vacate so I can make it presentable before taking viewings. Generally speaking, shit properties attract shit tenants. You better believe!

I’m not saying the properties have all been reduced to utter gloom and death, but they’ve been sore on the eyes. It’s usually made clear that hygiene or general tidiness isn’t on the top of your tenants agenda during property inspections (which all landlords should regularly do). I personally wouldn’t even contemplate arranging viewings unless I knew I was going to be showing a property worth showing. I’ve had tenants make my property look like show homes in the past, and consequently the viewings have been a joy.

So before insisting on viewings, decide on whether it’s actually sensible taking viewings with tenants in situ. You don’t want to burn through your prospective tenants by showing them a stinking shit-pit; not only will that make you look bad as a landlord, but it will also increase the chances of attracting similarly messy tenants.

Final note…

I just want to emphasise how important it is to be respectful and build a good working relationship with your tenants. Being an asshole landlord is counter-intuitive, it will make your life much more difficult as this blog post demonstrates, and that can often reflect negatively on profit margins. Rightly or wrongly so, tenants can effortlessly eat through profit margins, so it’s better to keep them on your side, even if that means biting your lip on occasion (but not allowing them to completely take the piss). Always be rational and look at the bigger picture.

So, letting agents, tenants, landlords…anyone… have you got any personal experience on the matter? What’s your thoughts on the issue and the legislation? Perhaps I’ve got it all wrong! Speak to me!

Like this post? Then maybe you should sign up to my FREE newsletter so you receive more like it!

122 Comments- Join The Conversation...

Showing 72 - 122 comments (out of 122)
Guest Avatar
David 2nd November, 2015 @ 03:55

@Nige

What a sad cnut posting at 2am, hey I must be sadder still posting at nearly 4am!

You only way to beat them is to join them, I mean the tax evading bastards. That seems to be the Government message, after all they are screwing all the decent people and rewarding those who cheat this country. Hell they even paid the bloody Chinese an extra £2bn to build the nuclear power plant that was promised to be completed by 2018 and will now not even start until then.

So you form an offshore company with nominee directors, the company is in one country, the company bank account in a different country and it is all wrapped up in an offshore trust in a 3rd Country.

There are companies who will do this all for you for about £2k per annum or less.

Now you sell your properties for market value with sitting tenants or you empty them. Whatever works for you.

The offshore company is subject to different rules, the offshore company formation company will advise you on how you structure these investments and how to create losses. They are not subject to HMRC tax because they are not in the UK, just stamp duty when they sell it.

Stop thinking like a Goody two shoes tax paying Landlord and start thinking like an offshore property mogul.

To be honest it may be too late if you have lost your energy for the game.

The fact is that when laws become stupid people stop playing.

You could do a Tony Blair, i.e. move into each of your final properties and make them your primary residence for the allotted period thus avoiding CG tax or setup a blind trust.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4029601.stm

They are great landlords

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2816495/Cherie-s-spends-1m-flats-owns-31-homes.html

I remember the controversy when the trusts were setup by Martin Paisner, a tax lawyer, to buy flats for the Blairs and then Paisner's law firm, Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP), got over 100 government contracts including the sale of the Millennium Dome and Wembley stadium. If memory serves they got about £600m in Govt business.

Here is the sort of trust I was suggesting and how it is used.

wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/news/13495163.Trust_which_owns_land_for_2_350_home_development_in_Cirencester_is_registered_abroad_to_avoid_paying_major_tax/

Of course selling a flat with sitting tenants may devalue the property causing you to sell it well under market value (Sorry HMRC).

As I said, if you can't beat them, Join them!

72
Guest Avatar
Mike 2nd November, 2015 @ 07:09

Hi Nige & Co

Re: Offshore companies and UK TAX

If you generate an income from UK property, or rental income from UK properties you are FIRST subject to UK TAX, even if you, or your company is based offshore, "Double Taxation Treaties" rules will always apply.

Double Taxation Treaties are conventions between two countries that aim to eliminate the double taxation of income or gains arising in one territory and paid to residents of another territory. They work by dividing the tax rights each country claims by its domestic laws over the same income and gains.

Offshore companies that own property in the UK are now subject to Capital Gains TAX in the UK, at a rate of 20%.

There are other implications to add, remember the saying " TAX should not be TAXING", but in this world no one gets something for nothing.

Lastly, offshore companies are not cheap to operate, annual registration and local corporate service costs are NOT cheap.

73
Guest Avatar
Emily 28th February, 2016 @ 13:47

I appreciate this thread is several months out of date but could really do with some advice...

I'm currently 8 months into my 12 month tenancy agreement. My landlady was aware I was looking for a long-term home but she has decided to sell the property and has notified me that there will be no option to renew when my 12 month tenancy comes to an end (mid-June). This I appreciate - its her property and she can do as she wishes with it. I was asked to let an agent in to value the property which I duly did. I have now been informed that she wants to put the property on the market now with viewings to take place in mid to late March, although she is happy for me to remain in the property until my tenancy ends.

Our issue is that my partner has had a very difficult time lately and has been suffering with extreme anxiety and is genuinely not coping well with the thought of having random strangers/agents coming in and out the house. We are looking for somewhere else already - I did ask my landlady if we found somewhere sooner could we pay her up the rent due for the rest of tenancy and vacate early and she was agreeable to this. Not that we can really afford to pay double rent for several months but if it makes the transition easier on my partner (and thus my life far less stressful!) then I am prepared to do this.

I hope to be out of the property in about 6 weeks - still two months before my tenancy actually ends. This will mean the property is empty, the landlady can spruce it up, put it on the market and have viewings at her leisure. However, she is keen to proceed with viewings in several weeks times and I am nervous about approaching her again to ask for a little more flexibility on this. Is my landlady's insistence on undertaking viewings 3 months before our tenancy ends actually reasonable? Is my request to delay this whilst we make alternative arrangements reasonable? The agents are obviously being pushy.

Any advice on the best way to approach this would be very much appreciated. I don't wish to make things difficult for my landlady but I'm also trying to balance this with trying to make things less stressful for my partner and I.

74
Guest Avatar
henry 29th February, 2016 @ 19:59

Hi Emily,
You may find The Landlord's original blog (above at the top) about quiet enjoyment etc useful to read if you haven't already.
Other ideas, to be helpful to your landlady but given your situation might be as follows:
- say you'll accept viewings only when you can be in the place with your partner (I just jope you don't work the long hours I used to with a commute on top);
- where I live selling agents often arrange "open house" viewings, e.g. for a few hours on a Saturday when many prospective buyers show up and look around. You'd get the downside of potentially lots of people showing up and looking around (you should know how many have expressed and interest from the selling agent), but you could make it so that you'd be there with your partner and then all viewings would be concentrated into one slot in the week so you are both left alone for the rest of it.
Perhaps try suggesting to your landlady that this is the sort of arrangement that you'd be happy with, but not fitting you life around lots of different viewing times. Depending on our partner's condition, you may also suggest that an anxious partner is not something that will help sell your landlady's property.
You sound like you are being very reasonable, and you have the right to stay until your tenancy ends (with the landlady only being able to get in and redecorate afterwards) - so I wouldn't have offered to pay for the rest of the period if you left early with her agreement as it would give her time to redec. and let loads of people view an empty place whenever they wanted.
Hope this helps.

75
Guest Avatar
Riptide 1st March, 2016 @ 07:32

Tell them thanks but no thanks and that they can do the viewings once you've left, that they don't have permission to access the house and that you'll be there until the end of the tenancy. They can do nothing to force viewings on them. Tell them once, tell them twice, the third time tell them that this is now harassment and you'll be taking it further. Stand your ground. Enjoy YOUR HOME for as long as you are entitled to. Stop being so nice, stop getting anxious about being nice. Enjoy your home. Not your issue.

76
Guest Avatar
EMMA THE LANDLORD 1st March, 2016 @ 09:48

I think you'd better check your contract on allowing your landlord to access the property for viewings. Standard is 24 hours written notice and you have to have reasonable grounds for refusal.
I do not understand why tenants become arses when a landlord wants to do viewings. It sounds as if she has been reasonable in allowing you to pay only until you find somewhere and not until the end of your tenancy. Work with her and you can move on - as anxious free as possible. Work against her and you will have many weeks of stress.

77
Guest Avatar
Simon Pambin 1st March, 2016 @ 13:40

Quiet Enjoyment is an inalienable right that can't actually be overridden by your contract. The property is your home for the term of your tenancy and the landlord has no right to enter at any point, except in the case of an emergency. You can even change the locks if you want (provided you don't cause damage and you change them back when you leave). I'd say it would be unreasonable to refuse access for essential maintenance and periodic inspections but, as for viewings, no. Be firm: that's what your landlord signed up for when she started taking your rent and that's the way it's going to be. What's the worst she can do - refuse to renew your tenancy?!

78
Guest Avatar
Mia 1st March, 2016 @ 14:43

Jeeze. Just reading some of these comments from tenants makes me remember what sucked so much about the time I was a landlord. I find that whole hostile, 'screw the lease thing' obnoxious, and the self interpretations of the law and tenant's rights idiotic. Who needs it.

79
Guest Avatar
Mia 1st March, 2016 @ 14:46

And,no,Simon Pambin,you can't change the locks.

80
Guest Avatar
Nige 1st March, 2016 @ 15:21

Lol One year to go. Then my portfolio is all sold. And not one of the properties Ive sold has gone back to the rental sector.

You are right Mia. Tenant can change locks but must give landlord one for access in an emergency.

I do agree with the quiet enjoyment of the property as that is a right but its swings and roundabouts. If tenants want help with getting a new property ie references etc then a degree of cooperation is needed.

Can you imagine if I was selling my own property and told the estate agents that no viewings would be allowed until I had moved out. They would do it but then I would be liable for council tax at a higher rate.

81
Guest Avatar
Simon Pambin 1st March, 2016 @ 17:44

Yes, you would hope that both sides can come to a reasonable agreement, but when you're obliging your tenants to leave their home at a few months' notice, - as is perfectly legal, then it's surely reasonable for those tenants to expect you to wait until after they've vacated before you start showing buyers round their home - as is perfectly legal. Especially when, as in Emily's case, one of your tenants is ill.

82
Guest Avatar
Riptide 1st March, 2016 @ 17:46

Of course you can change the locks Mia.

83
Guest Avatar
Thunderballs 1st March, 2016 @ 18:49

Mia I don't believe you can change the locks without this being a potential issue IF your landlord took you to court. Giving the landlord a key for emergencies would arguably be seen as a reasonable mitigation too.

Emily, depending where you live and the availability of rental property, you may or may not want to keep your Landlord sweet. either way Landlords can be c**ts when it comes to giving a reference after you leave (or if they are pissed you are leaving) but you can get this dealt with whilst they want you out and you are still living in their property.

As far as viewings go - you have had the advice - the landlord cannot enter save for emergencies and would have to defend reasonable claims you might make against them for loss of enjoyment etc. You could certainly defend anything re changing the locks with any infringements the landlord made on this matter as mitigation. Never mind your partners condition.

I would be inclined to make some reasonable conditions as outlined above that compromise your rights and help the landlord. I might want to negotiate a reduction in rent though.....i might want my deposit back before hand ...

84
Guest Avatar
Max 1st March, 2016 @ 20:03

In 20 years of being a landlord I have never experienced such a problem but then I say
"please, ask when it will be convenient," make my visitors take off their shoes, give tenants some flowers for the inconvenience, keep tenants informed afterwards, phone to say thank you and ask if there is anything I can do to help with references or their move, return deposits for long term tenants early etc etc

In my experience good landlords and good tenants go together and polite and helpful landlords get polite and helpful tenants. Keep communicating In a civilised not an assertive way. It is much less stressful for both parties
M

85
Guest Avatar
Stephie 11th March, 2016 @ 16:50

We were put in a very poor situation when months into our 1 year the landlord decided to sell and gave us 2 months notice to quit. The letting agent then became their estate agent and would phone at an hours notice to bring 'a viewer for a quick look' which would turn into 4 sets of viewers and lasting over 2 hours all while we are trying to eat dinner/do homeworks/generally live. He then decided it would be better if we were out when he was showing viewers round and had written in our lease that 'reasonable' viewing times were Monday to Friday 8.30am to 8pm and threatened to withhold our deposit when we told him to fuck off basically. He called the police on us who pointed out that we were well within our rights to refuse entry, after consulting a solicitor we were advised that the tenancy agreement was unlawful in several instances and wasn't worth the paper it was written on. Several times our landlord has let himself into the property to lift post despite me telling him he couldn't and just said 'awk I was only in and out'. A bit of courtesy, respect and privacy is all we expect and have not got it so far.

86
Guest Avatar
David 4th April, 2016 @ 14:39

Stephie

You raise an important point that ALL LANDLORD should heed, just because there is a term in a tenancy agreement, it does not make it legal.

Many landlords "download" tenancy agreements, some even pay for them. I would advise any landlord to go through their tenancy agreement and compare each clause with OFT356 which is 2006 guidance for tenancy agreements

bit.ly/356terms

It includes what they object to and suggested alternative wording.

The key issue with your Landlord and Agent is "reasonable" and "convenient".

If you hate your landlord you can change the locks (putting them back when you leave) and say every proposed viewing time is not convenient. There are people who go on viewings and steal, kids leave an iPad around and wham it is gone.

I would NEVER let anyone in my property when I was not there.

What you agent did was illegal under 2007 Harassment law, it is also an empty threat, under housing legislation the deposit is taken as a security and may only be used for such purposes.

Even if there were provisions in the tenancy agreement they are not legally binding, common law applies, namely the housing act, furthermore it may get their whole contract invalidated.

You should at least leave the agent bad reviews on Google and other sites, especially All Agents. If it was within last 3 years I would go further, report it to professional bodies the agent is a member of (Arla, RICS etc) then approach the MD and say you are now considering legal action for harrassment and would like to hear his firm proposals for settlement to avoid unnecessary Court Action. If the MD was the person concerned ring and ask for the name of their Lawyer as you need to legally serve them and would like to use the DX system. Of course you do not use the DX system as it is only used by Lawyers but recorded delivery is useful (you may need to call the firm to ask which partner handles XYZ Agent company ltd, then ask "does that partner handle matters of litigation or should papers be sent to another partner?)

Then you write to him via his Lawyer, at the very least his Lawyer will charge him for reading your letter and probably for writing a response.

You say to the Lawyer that the reason you are writing to them is that you are a victim of their client and do not feel able to converse with them directly because of their previous abuse.

Landlords or their agents are NOT allowed to enter a property without MUTUAL CONSENT, you can withold that consent at any time. Changing the locks is entirely allowed and the very minimum you should do if someone enters the property.

My cousin had a scary situation where a landlord entered a property when they were out at work, she did not know how often he had done this but he was some kind of perv. She came home early in morning after not feeling well and found him leaving the communal hall of the flats as if he owned a flat upstairs (he did not).

She then found things had been moved, her drawers had been searched and she felt as if she had been violated.

Needless to say the locks were changed and she left as soon as she could.

Sadly she did not call the Police which is what you should do in case the guy is "known" to them. Even if not it makes it a matter of record.

87
Guest Avatar
Bob 14th November, 2016 @ 19:29

The issue of photos is an interesting one.
I'm a very long term tennant and the flat is being sold for the second time, with me in residence. I'll allow agencies to take marketing pictures, but I'm not at all keen on viewers taking snaps as the wander through my home (if they want to do that, they probably want to move in, and they can save the marketing photos easily enough). This may not make sense, but it's my home, and that's that.

The point someome made earlier to the effect of "what if you were selling your own home" is, frankly, ridiculous; it isn't the landlord's home, and tennants have no interest in it being sold.

88
Guest Avatar
Nige 14th November, 2016 @ 19:52

@Bob.
Interesting comments. I would be none to pleased either.
The point hinges on whether your landlord intends to sell it as a home or an investment property.
If its being sold as a home its goodbye Bob and the empty property marketed.
If not and its being sold as an investment property the selling agents should say that to cut down the numbers of tyre kickers.

89
Guest Avatar
Bob 14th November, 2016 @ 20:40

Indeed; they are selling it as an investment opportunity, and they have even mentioned in the blurb on a couple of sites that there is a tenant who wants to remain, and I'm grateful to them. It sold once before without such a blurb, though I don't know what was said between LL and LA during the first sale.
Tangentially, an agent once told me that if the managing agent changes, your contract is void. But on the basis that the contract is always(?) with the LL, that isn't true, is it?

90
Guest Avatar
David 14th November, 2016 @ 21:48

@Bob

Strictly speaking it depends on the parties names on the contract, although the buck stops with the landlord.

If there was no contract one would be created statute called a statutory period tenancy. The same applies if a tenancy is not renewed but you stay in the property except in that situation the terms of the previous AST apply.

As always, agents are not worth the oxygen they breathe and everything they say should be ignored.

Chances are your tenancy will have a clause saying it can be assigned in the event of a sale.

Now if a new lease if offered your deposit will need to be refunded and re-protected.

You might want to check it was protected in the first place, if not sure you can check each of the three approved deposit holding companies, TDS, DPS and MyDeposits.

This is a time when unprotected deposits go missing, they may be on an insurance backed scheme with one of the above (rather than custodian) and the agent may actually have the deposit. In which case if it is not protected throughout a sanction of up to 3x the deposit may become payable plus the return of your deposit.

I do take slight issue with @nige in that most investment landlords who find a tenant in place at lowish rent will seek to get rid of them anyway. So always expect that S21!

I totally agree with Bob about viewings, no photos and limited viewing to one hour at a mutually convenient time, say Sunday at 3pm. I suggest that the person(s) viewing must be accompanied by at least as many adults as those viewing. Many an iPad has gone missing on viewings, often more! You sometimes get a couple, one has one more look at bedroom and steals jewels or whatever they can find.

You also hit the nail on the head about it being a "home" for the tenant, this is the key reason Landlords and Tenants get into disputes. The Landlord sees it as their investment while the good Tenant sees it as a home, the bad Tenant sees it as something they can trash.

It is worth mentioning that viewing clauses are invalid for the simple reason that you can't create terms that override common law (a law in place).

Also anybody entering without agreement can not only be creating offences under the Housing Act but also the Harassment Act. In fact even shouting personal info through the door can get a Landlord in hot water.

Use of ANY force whatsoever means the tenant can and should call the Police who will promptly evict the Landlord and may press charges against them just because they time has been wasted.

My home is my castle, if someone came in who I was not expecting I would hurt them and ask questions later. I am smart enough to create evidence that they attacked me first and of course I felt in danger of my life!!

I have known landlords that have gained entry and rummaged through the tenants papers, looking at bank statements. None of the fine agents that frequent this site are like that, but they exist.

The worst landlord I know is actually a landlady, super morbidly obese with a husband who is totally c u c k o l d, she breaks every rule. Very violent woman and she used to draft the most ridiculous tenancy agreements and cite them as law.

I remember the Judge explaining that she can't just add whatever she fancied in there, she said why not!

91
Guest Avatar
Bob 14th November, 2016 @ 22:08

Assigned in the event of a sale?

92
Guest Avatar
David 14th November, 2016 @ 23:32

Depends if your Landlord is big or small, big ones include clause that in the event of a sale all obligations pass to new owner etc.

Some smaller ones have no provisions for such things.

93
Guest Avatar
Bob 15th November, 2016 @ 00:16

I think it necessarily passes on, at least until they evict you.

94
Guest Avatar
Mike 15th November, 2016 @ 08:24

What a great read from both Bob and David. (14th November, 2016)

At last factual and true comments from two people who know what they are doing, and who totally understand the industry.

Thank you

95
Guest Avatar
Bob 15th November, 2016 @ 09:04

It's true what they say about sarcasm and the hierarchy of wit.

96
Guest Avatar
Bob 17th November, 2016 @ 10:25

Can a landlord who is selling a property make the tenant's continued occupancy a condition of sale?

97
Guest Avatar
Nige 17th November, 2016 @ 17:04

They might as in our area properties are advertised with sitting tenant. Not really advisable though as it places the eviction process onto the new owner.
A more common scenario would be for a current landlord to issue a section 21 notice and if the property is bought by an investor to suggest to the buyer that the current tenant would take up a new tenancy.
I will give a warning on this though that in the current market a new tenancy is unlikely to be offered on the same rent.

98
Guest Avatar
Bob 17th November, 2016 @ 18:24

Thanks Nige

Am I right in thinking that a new landlord would have to honour any fixed term contract? There isn't one in place, currently, mind.

My LL pulled out of a sale lately because the buyer didn't intend to keep me. That's kind of them, and I kind of feel for them, but I don't think there's much I can do.

99
Guest Avatar
Nige 17th November, 2016 @ 18:51

Contrary to a lot of thinking landlords do like to keep a long term tenant but you must remember that being a landlord is a business.
So if your landlord pulled out of the sale there may have been an ulterior motive. Examples of this may be that property values are going up the landlord may have used up his yearly CGT allowance , there were reasons you don't know of regarding problems with the sale.
Or as you say they might just be kind people. I manage 2 properties at well below market rate for a landlord. One reason is that they would have to pay 40% tax on the additional rent if it was put up. Another reason is that a few quid might have to be spent to tart them up for sale.

One reason landlords might not sell is that house prices are rising very quickly but a sale would just put money in the bank at pitifull interest rates.

Tenants have to realise that they don't own a property and the landlord has no obligation to them. Unfortunately this is open to abuse ie the tenant refuses to leave resulting in all sorts of problems for a landlord including the fact that the property market might collapse at a time they actually need the money.(like 2007)

Im not saying that your landlord doesn't want to treat you nicely but I am saying they are taking a risk and at the moment this is acceptable to them.

100
Guest Avatar
Bob 17th November, 2016 @ 19:04

They have kept the place on the market so I believe them. I also had a couple of exchanges with the buyer which lead me to believe the LL.
I take your point - I may have to move on at some point. But I won't be doing anything until I have to.

101
Guest Avatar
dean smith 30th November, 2016 @ 16:51

hey guys question .....i have a landlord who has threatened to have me removed for knocking a issue is nother tennant on his behind cause he tried to threaten me at my door but thats not the issue...
the issue is he informed us of a epc check which he told us the time and date to be in or he would allow himself in ...
so made sure we was in and it was the e.p.c. guy and someone being shown around our flats ...potential buyer ..well epc took about 20 mins and this guy still dont know who is he was in every room checking it out ...any how 3 days later the landlord called in and said e.p.c. needed doing again no written notice just verbal and told us when to be in again same time as last week and the same day ....well the day came i had to be in again ....well this time no e.p.c. guy just a man and a woman being shown around bye someone who held all the keys for the flats ..they came in had a good look around then they left .....we are not being informed what these are for and to be honist i feel like my privacy is being thrown out of the window i have p.c.s in my house large tvs etc i dont know who these people are and having to stay in waiting for people cause the land lord says so isnt right is it ??please help

102
Guest Avatar
Bob 30th November, 2016 @ 17:46

It certainly isn't right, but can you you elaborate on that first paragraph?

103
Guest Avatar
David 1st December, 2016 @ 14:49

@deansmith

Change the cylinder on the lock first off, he has no right of entry without mutually convenient consent, if he attempts to force entry or is aggressive CALL THE POLICE do not say it is the landlord, say there are two men trying to break into my house.

Email him telling him that you reject his proposed appointment, in future you require 14 days notice and will only accept an appointment at a time that is convenient. You are entitled to "quiet enjoyment of the property under common law" say that you reject any appointments that are not emergency and you can see that these so called EPC are not only not emergency they are potential buyers.

Inform him that due to his harrassment which may be actionable under harrassment act 2007 and has been logged with the authorities, you must put conditions of entry.

Suggest that you are not prepared to entertain viewings of more than one person at a time due to risk of theft when one goes into a different room. Offer him a window at 2pm on Sunday for no more than one hour, say due to his threat to enter the property he is no longer trusted to enter the property, you may entertain a contractor or agent by themselves

Make a complaint to the Local Housing Officer of harrassment so that there is a record which you may rely on later.

He probably thinks he can't evict without an EPC but that is for new tenancies

He will be seeking a Section 21, you do not have to make that easy for him to serve.

Of course one assumes he gave you details of deposit protection within 30 days and the seperate prescribed information also within 30 days.

You would do well to make up with the neighbour, antisocial behaviour may affect your ability to get another tenancy.

104
Guest Avatar
Nige 1st December, 2016 @ 16:27

I will not comment on your proposals but I will say that serving a section 21 notice is a piece of cake.
Its sent by first class post with a certificate of posting which a court will deem as having been served 2 days later.If you then try and say you did not receive it that proof will be read out in court.

A word of warning to tenants who stay put. I have just had a case like that and all costs were awarded against the tenant. That started at £355. My case was a straight forward one with the judge following the law and as all criteria had been satisfied awarded the house back to the landlord. It was the tenants choice to stay put. (advice from the council).

As we have seen on ''cant pay we will take it away'' landlords can bypass the normal court process and go to the high court and the tenant is out within hours, packed or not.

My tenant was cooperative and I extended her stay of execution to the max..that is 42 days plus the judge agreed with me to allow another 7 days as her kid started school that day. It pays to be cooperative (both ways) as it enabled her to get a house within 2 days.

Yes tenants have rights and so do landlords and a hard stance will always be met with resistance. And in the current housing market landlords talk. Most of my properties have been let through recommendation and word of mouth with some tenants even wanting to return to me because their next landlord was not as nice or as lenient.

Play hard and fast and be obstinate. Just plan on living in a cardboard box, with friends or relatives in future.
Also councils may be obliged to rehouse people who are made homeless but that does not have to fit in with your lifestyle. It can be miles away.

105
Guest Avatar
David 1st December, 2016 @ 20:56

@Nige

We both know it can go both ways.

My advice was based on the behaviour of this Landlord who is already being unreasonable.

For the Landlord this is just an investment and boy you know how much your investment cost you with that woman.

However, for a tenant it is their home, the way for him to have handled this would have been to come around, have a chat, tell Dean he was selling the flat without vacant possesion and he will see that the new landlord is decent to him.

All this fucking about with EPC's and couples is complete crap.

He has NO right of entry, end of. Except to repair say a gas safety issue or a water issue fixing another flat, even then Dean can limit that to the contractor.

The poor notice, threats to gain entry are all completely unacceptable. Now when I was a kid my Dad always taught me to hit back hard and fast so they would remember next time.

@Nige you are one of the more decent Landlords in fact on many occasions you have suffered for being too decent.

However, some think they are lords, some think they can come and go.

Costs in housing depends on how it gets there, sounds like you did a S8.

High Court Bailiffs are futile if the person you are going after has no assets. Then they just disappear and go off the radar for 6 years and it gets beyond statute.

Section 21 usually has no costs as it is an accelorated procedure on small claims track. The risk to tenant and landlord if it goes to appeal, then either side could be looking at £10k. One barrister I know usually charges £750 just for the travel.

At the moment the EPC suggests that Dean's landlord is preparing an S21 anyway. As he has done it in an underhand way there is no reason to make it easy.

You can put an S21 in the post and some Judges may accept it but not all. Same as the Deposit protection and PI, they really need to be signed to avoid issues.

It does not have to be nasty but Landlord drew first blood.

106
Guest Avatar
Bob 1st December, 2016 @ 21:03

I'm with David; yot may be surprized at the effect an assertive reaction could have
However, that surprise may be an unpleasant one, so think about whether you can afford - literally and figuratively - to move on if it comes to it.

107
Guest Avatar
Nige 1st December, 2016 @ 22:57

@David
A section 21 notice costs time to write and a stamp.
BUT if they are still in when they should have left then the cost is currently £355 to get a just to give you the order of possession. This can be appealed giving the tenant the right to reply (if they can be bothered to turn up). So more time in court and thus the 14 days before bailiffs are instructed (or as I said up to 42 days in my post. Then another load of cash forked out for bailiffs !!

108
Guest Avatar
dean 3rd December, 2016 @ 01:18

well the deposit was paid as advanced rent and this i cannot get back due to me being on benfits and the tenancy stating has to be payed direct or void so no way i can ever retreive it as the council explained to me...advanaced rent but when its payed direct or void how do you retreave it ?
also today ive had a sommons from the local council for a name unknown to me ...but
i opened it thinking what the @@@@ well its a council tax summons of another rented property of theres the one in fact thats marked down as there head office .
ive had information off painters that the house is back off the market now .
and the first part of my other message was i had hassle with the neighbour down stairs allowing himself access to my hallway when ever i went out ..knocking on inviting women or my guest down to his for drinks and time i nipped out which they found creepy had to ring the police on him 3 times for being drunk and aggressive ..but one day decided to come threatening me that he controls this area id be knocked out etc so bye this time had enough and floored him ...the landlords threatened me with eviction for violence ..but this was after mths of this oh yh i suffer from p.t.s.d. and classed as vounerable adult sorry if spelling is pants

109
Guest Avatar
dean 3rd December, 2016 @ 01:20

and why does epc sujjest that they trying for a section 21?

110
Guest Avatar
Nige 3rd December, 2016 @ 08:55

@ David
I was told by my tenant that I didn't show enough empathy when she didn;t show up with the removal men To collect her goods I would not describe them as good !!)
So after a friend and myself shifting crap into a removal van with the guys I am accused of not showing any empathy as some distant relative has gone into hospital and she is worried.
This happens 55 days AFTER she should have vacated under a section 21.
And nearly 6 weeks after she left I still have not retrieved my deposit because she obviously has another problem to worry about.

111
Guest Avatar
TenantLord 10th December, 2016 @ 14:25

Been on both sides of this issue. This taught me that the essential thing for a Landlord is to demonstrate that they respect the needs of tenant (assuming the tenant has generally been OK).

There's a sense among some (esp BTL?) landlords that a tenancy is second-rate compared to their ownership. The property is the landlords, and the tenant is just a sort of paying guest. That's not what a tenancy is, it's not how to think of someone's home, and it's not a good way to get co-operation, which you will eventually want.

So yes, it's reasonable to want access for viewings, but it's also reasonable not to want to give strangers access to your property. Especially if you're moving house, or your relationship is ending, or you've had to end the tenancy because you need to move to look after your family.

So if you ask, be understanding of objection. Offer some token of thanks and appreciation. Apologise if you need access more than once or twice. Don't push and push for more and more access if you're not getting new tenants quickly enough.

After all, even if you do get access by applying more and more pressure, if you treat people with disrespect, expect to have it repaid. The Wifi name at a place I viewed to buy a couple of years back was "TheNewPaintIsToHideTheRisingDamp". No idea if it was true, or if tenant was just a dick, but I wonder how much it ended up costing the landlord.

112
Guest Avatar
TenantLord 10th December, 2016 @ 14:30

oh, and Nige - HCEO will end up costing some Landlords a lot, since it's often entirely misused, which could end up invalidating the whole eviction process.

113
Guest Avatar
Bob 10th December, 2016 @ 16:28

TenantLord, what's your view on selling with a tenant in place?

114
Guest Avatar
TenantLord 11th December, 2016 @ 23:31

Bob, I wouldn't try it if I didn't have a good relationship with the sitting tenants, they were happy to leave on the rough timetable I had for sale, and even then I would probably offer some monthly incentives for co-operation.

Only exception is if I was advertising to sell to an investor. Forget the morals of ownership, On contractual/legal basis, there's just too many spanners tenants can easily throw in the works. Risk of wasting time and money isn't worth it. Of course, a distressed sale might make it necc, but in that case, I'd be thinking of what financial cost I'm willing to take to get them to co-operate with losing their home.

115
Guest Avatar
Anon 14th January, 2017 @ 13:04

Just wanted some advice please. I am a tenant whose landlord wants to sell. Initially we were told we would be given 2 months notice once an offer was accepted. Now the landlord has revoked that and issued a section 21 in, what I believe, to be revenge for 'unreasonable' access. Me and my partner are both very busy and whilst we have allowed inspections and repairs to take place without us being there (at our risk mind as this voids our home insurance) we wanted to be there for viewings and offerred two days in the week, including a Saturday with a 4 hour window for each. I feel as though this notice has been issued by a disgruntled lanlord and denys us the possibility that someone may want to buy as an investment, it is a town centre flat which would be prefect for that. We have been tenants for 2.5 years always paid on time and kept the flat very nice. I know there is a chance that someone will buy not as an investment but I think it is quite disrespectful to deny us this option completely.

116
Guest Avatar
David 14th January, 2017 @ 13:19

The Landlord may have a buyer or he may just be aware that he will always improve options for sale by having VACANT POSSESSION, otherwise he cuts out anyone buying for themself.

If the S21 is legally compliant you have been given the legal notice and should leave unless you are eligible for Council Housing (vulnerable or have kids) in which case you take the S21 to them and see what they say.

The only reverse revenge you have is to make sure that your deposit was protected within 30 days and that you were given the "prescribed information" within 30 days. If your landlord failed on either of those you may get a sanction of up to 3x the rent.

If they have never protected the deposit or you have never been told via the "Prescribed Information" where the deposit is protected then you can reject the S21 anytime in the 2 month period and inform the Landlord why you are rejecting it as not being legally compliant.

If you your deposit was protected and you were given PI then all you can do is find a new place to live ASAP or perhaps put in an offer to buy it (avoiding the agent which saves the Landlord a fee). I imagine a landlord would leave the S21 in place and say "get a mortgage and make the offer via your solicitor who confirms you have the funds and we can talk".

117
Guest Avatar
Nige 14th January, 2017 @ 15:13

A section 21 is actually your 2 months notice. If you sat tight and refused to move/couldn't find a place to move to then the seller could find a buyer (who might also be in a position to have to move) who withdraws from the sale.

As I read your post you are hoping that your landlord sells to an investor who will ''relet'' to you and you can remain in the property. The dangers here are many.
There are companies who will buy property and leave tenants in situ for a couple of months before starting to evict.
There is no guarantee that an investor would leave your property as one unit ie start letting it as rooms. They might want to gut it and update it and resell at a profit.

Yes the new owner may let you stay. There are a few properties on the market here with tenant in situ. However as above the buyer may rent for 6 months and then turf you out or when they buy they change the rent to a level unacceptable to you under a new tenancy. Even then you will find that most tenancies are 6 months assured shorthold so you don't have security for longer.

Not sounding pompous but are you in a position to buy ? With some of the current schemes available you can buy for a low deposit and mortgage payments will be substantially lower than you pay rent. I have just helped a young kid through this process. With a deposit and using a scheme he pays between 450 and 500 mortgage. The next door property (cluster home) went on the market at 715 pcm rental .

118
Guest Avatar
David 14th January, 2017 @ 16:06

Good advice @Nige

One should never get too attached to things, property, a name, anything.

Maybe this is the wake up call you need to find a way to get on the ladder with another property, shared ownership or equity loans, maybe become a Landlord

https://www.helptobuy.gov.uk/equity-loan/equity-loans

Of course the ConGov does not do this for nothing, they know you will pay 2% or 5% Stamp Duty!

119
Guest Avatar
Scummy landlord 19th February, 2017 @ 19:39

Well I read recently that a deposit scheme awarded compensation to a landlord for being refused access to do viewings as per the contract. I think this post is a little bit too keen to write off the validity of said contract clauses. I would say that if the landlord shows themselves to be flexible and respectful of the tenant's right to quiet enjoyment, e.g. offering alternatives, suggesting block viewings one evening when best suits the tenant, and the tenant STILL refuses despite a contract clause backing the landlord up, is a judge really going to simply side with the tenant? I think it depends on how reasonable BOTH parties are being as to how a court would likely preside over the issue.

120
The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 19th February, 2017 @ 20:22

@Scummy landlord
I agree with everything you said, it is about being reasonable. I haven't read about that particular case, but it doesn't surprise me, and I don't think I was totally writing viewing clauses off. Do you have a link to that case, by any chance? It would be useful to link to it in the main post as a point of reference.

My primary point in the blog post was that some agents/landlords use the clause to force entry, or enter the premises without permission, because of the 'viewing' clause.

121
Guest Avatar
David 21st February, 2017 @ 05:31

@Scummy

When there is a dispute about a deposit, the tenant amd landlord are asked if they wish the DPS, TDS or MyDesposits to arbitrate.

BOTH have to agree, otherwise the matter goes to Court, any tenant would be wise to choose the Court option or another mediation service. The deposit will continue to be held pending the outcome.

This decision which I have not read about has no legal standing as far as case law is concerned, nor would it in county court, it has to go to High Court, Court of Appeal and/or Supreme Court but as there are already decisions.

There IS case law in this matter, unfair contract terms, OFT guidance and more. where people make mistakes is where the precedents have applied to commercial or residential tenancies. The former tends to lean toward the landlord the latter toward the tenant.

Common Law says all landlords are under an implied obligation to allow their tenants “quiet enjoyment” of the property.

A landlord must make sure that no one, be it the landlord himself or his agent shall interfere with the tenant’s right to possession of and to the lawful use and enjoyment of the premises.

In legal terms, enjoyment, means to have the use and full benefit of the right, mess with that and the tenant can claim damages.

Consider that viewing may interfere with a couple holding a dinner party, or having the grandparents over on a sunday. Full Benefit is the issue.

In the event that a tenant feels they really have a claim, they could withhold rent by lien give it to a solicitor to hold, as well as refuse to let the DPS et al arbitrate. If they feel they do not have enough leverage they could refuse to leave, make a tenancy go SPT and force the Landlord to issue proceedings to which they issue counter claim.

As with everything legal, just because there is a law, does not mean you are sensible to fight, always better to be amicable and settle but we know that is not always possible.

One Landlady I know is the very worst Landlord, she has a huge chip on her shoulder, lords it over tenants, is aggressive and quotes the law as if she has her own private police force to enforce it. It has cost her tens of thousands.

Anyway, it is widely known that the deposit holding companies tend to lean toward the landlords because it is they that choose where the next deposit will be protected and that is where their income comes from.

If I were that tenant I would be writing to my MP, have them speak to Sajid Javid and put in a complaint to the Department for Communities and Local Government, but that is just me, I never let go! You can't really have an arbitration service going against common law.

Most downloaded tenancy agreements are not worth the hard disk they are stored on. Or they may start out OK but the Landlord stupidly adds clauses that can invalidate the whole contract in some circumstances.

It is all about common sense, the Landlord and Tenant have to BOTH be reasonable, BUT if the Landlord has harassed, shown bad faith, entered while a tenant is out, said he wants to do a gas inspection while really showing tenants around, then the tenant can reasonably say, you have lost my faith, risked my assets, breached the tenancy agreement and common law.

If a Landlord LORDS it over a tenant, implies they have rights they do not have, puts in clauses that contradict common law or the spirit of it, makes threats, has a history of harassment, failed to meet his own obligations, then the tenant can reasonably say, I am preserving my right to quiet enjoyment. Save a flood or genuine gas leak.

They would be wise to APPEAR reasonable, to either set aside two slots for viewings, demand one at a time in the flat, only allow them when the are present. Even then, they can demand 24 hours notice and say "sorry that is not convenient".

I suspect that in this case the Landlord put a better case and the tenant did not.

122

Please leave a comment...

Nobody

Nobody

Landlord

Landlord

Tenant

Tenant

Agent

Agent

Legal

Legal

Buyer

Buyer

Developer

Developer

Enthusiast

Enthusiast