My Tenant Won’t Let Me Into The Property

What if the landlord uses maintenance repairs as a way to just enter the unit and look around. Can the landlord be refused entry as long as maintenance can enter for repairs?

It should be noted that the landlord has a right of entry for inspecting the state of repair.

This means that he does not need further explicit permission from the tenant. It also means that the tenant is not entitled to 'revoke' permission to enter.

The landlord only has to provide 'notice', which is not the same as asking.

@The Landlord

I am not advising landlords to force entry. And indeed they should be very cautious.

However, entering pursuant to their right to do so after 24 hour written notice in order to inspect the state of repair of the property cannot be trespass since, well, there is a right of entry and thus entry is not without permission.

A genuine emergency does not require notice. Again, giving notice is not the same as seeking permission.

It is established that gaining access using a right of entry is not a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment.

In any case, of course a landlord cannot enter if the tenant stands in the door and blocks the way.

Does the Tennant need to be present when they given permission?

Seeking advise on neighbouring trees
Many years ago, I asked a neighbour(Presumed to be the owner) to trim back some of his trees that that overhung onto my property, he refused, last year they moved and that's when it become apparent that he only rented the property, the new tenant gave us the Landlords information and said he had no problem with the trees being trimmed down, this tenant has also moved out. the landlord is now saying that he cant enter the property because the tenant is still paying rent. is this correct?, the trees are taller than the house and cause many problems

Many TAs will have a clause that says the Tenant agrees to let the landlord inspect property on giving 24 hours notice. In and of itself that doesn't mean it is enforceable, but it is unlikely a judge would view it unfavourably if a landlord entered periodically to inspect for disrepair and had not had not had specific permission to enter withdrawn by the tenant.

A judge isnt going to view a Tenant as reasonable if they are refusing reasonable attempts to inspect for disrepair or repair, thgey are likely to view frequent visits for whatever reason as problematic for the Landlord.

ROMAIN - You are 100% wrong the landlord has NO right of entry to the property unless they have a court order or in the case of emergency.

If you give a tenant 24 hours notice that you intend to enter the property then you are refused access upon arrival, you still have NO right to enter without their permission and doing so would be considered harassment.

As frustrating as it can be when you want access and a tenant won't allow it, that is the law. You just can't go snooping around the property after it is let out, the tenant has right of peaceful enjoyment and I've seen cases go against landlords even when they have been trying to enter for inspection purposes. Depending on the judge you get some might consider looking around a tenant's home and telling them it's not clean enough or that bit of wallpaper is ripped as infringing upon their right to "peaceful enjoyment" Just because it says in the tenancy you must allow inspections.....a tenacy agreement cannot over write law and law allows peaceful enjoyment...which of course is subjective.

It's very frustrating and in my opinion heavily weighted against the landlord but I also try to see it from a tenants point of view.

Miss26,

If I am "100% wrong" then there must be a clear legal reference you can disclose. I have asked that question for years and so far no-one has ever disclosed any, while all the references I have found suggest that I am not wrong.

In addition your scenario is different: If the tenant is at the property and does not let you in then of course you cannot force your way in. But that says nothing about a right of entry in general.

@The Landlord

If you research rights of access, quiet enjoyment, and exclusive possession you will find that it is established that accessing pursuant a right of access is neither trespassing nor a breach of quiet enjoyment.
In addition, I cannot see that a tenant can decide to "withdraw permission" when it is a term of the lease.

On Landlord Law, Tessa has expressed her opinion but did not provide a reference to support it (and yes I asked: There another post on her blog where the debate went on for some time and no reference were provided).

For the purpose of inspections and repairs the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (and the Housing Act) provides that the landlord has a right of access upon 24 hours notice (giving notice is not the same as asking permission).
Nowhere it is suggested that the tenant must give his "express permission" beyond the permission that he gave through the term of the lease.

In case of emergencies, the landlord is dispensed from giving notice.

I am not saying that I am correct or incorrect, just that the claim that the landlord must obtain express permission, or that the tenant can "withdraw" from a term of the lease, is not stated anywhere and contradicts legal references.

So, I am still waiting for an actual explanation and reference... (Many experts were surprised at the decision in the Superstrike case although it was crystal clear from the Housing Act... So I am not taking an opinion at face value unless supported by references)

You'll note that in my previous posts I made clear that I wasn't suggesting that it was a good idea to enter in such circumstances, but just that it did not seem to be a breach of the law or the lease.

I think that you do not quite understand.

"You initially stated that "he [landlord] does not need further explicit permission from the tenant." - but now you're saying you're not correct/incorrect, and it's just not explicitly written in the Housing Act."

I never said that it wasn't explicitly written in the Act. I said that it is not there at all: The landlord does not need further explicit permission based on the Act.

"I think it's obvious, based on the definition of a "tenancy", that permission must be given before a landlord can enter."

Absolutely correct, and that's why there must be a clause in the lease to that effect!

Clearly no-one here seems able to back up their claims with references... Too bad.

For some reason you do not seem to be in good faith here the way you put words into my mouth, or you do not grasp what I am getting at. Apologies if I am unclear.

A landlord cannot enter the property without the tenant's permission. Indeed, that's the basis of a tenancy.

However, you seem to have overlooked or ignored that this is exactly what a clause giving the landlord a right of access does: The tenant gives permission to the landlord, as long as the landlord complies with the conditions.
For the purpose of viewing the property's condition, or for repairs, the condition is to give 24 hour notice.

Hence, "the landlord does not need FURTHER explicit permission from the tenant". The key word being of course 'further', since he already has permission.

Now, since this is in black and white that the landlord has a right of access on 24 hour notice, I think it is for those who, in effect, claim that this is not actually the case to provide references.

Still:

http://www.foxwilliams.com/news/704
"a landlord will not be in breach of the quiet enjoyment covenant if it enters onto a tenant’s premises pursuant to a right set out in the lease, examples include access in order to carry out an inspection or to carry out repairs."

This also makes sense if you consider that the covenant of quiet enjoyment is not statutory: It is a implied covenant of the lease, i.e. a contractual term, which can be varied.

Now, even if we assume that access is an interference, a breach requires a substantial interference and:

http://www.stjohnschambers.co.uk/dashboard/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Covenants-for-quiet-enjoyment.pdf
"There is authority that makes plain that for interference to be substantial it must be sustained and not temporary in character."

Is a short visit 'sustained' or 'temporary'?

Now, of course access without permission is also trespass. But how can it be so if the landlord has permission through a clause of the tenancy?
Indeed, "there is a risk of a claim for trespass if the conditions of entry have not been complied with" (http://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/userfiles/documents/resources/Exercising_rights_of_entry.pdf ), hence the importance of giving correct notice.

In addition, note that harassment in the sense of the Protection from Eviction Act requires the intention to make the tenant leave. Checking that the property is in repair and safe hardly seems to match this definition.

However, I do not claim to be the gospel so I refrain from claiming that I am '100% correct'. I just argue that there must be a reference to back the opinion that the landlord must obtain further permission where he already has it, or that a tenant can 'withdraw' from the terms of the tenancy.

Hey, I replied earlier today. I hope it's not been lost on the way.

"The examples I provided specifically say that the landlord cannot enter if the tenant doesn't give permission."

I think I replied on this point.
Some people do claim that the tenant must specifically give FURTHER permission every time the landlord wishes to exercise his right of access. However this is not what the Acts say and I still await a reference to back such claim.

Now "if the tenant specifically denies entry". What does that mean? Of course the landlord may not enter if the tenant is there and refuse to let him in.
However, the right of access is a term of the lease so if the tenant just tells the landlord that he does not want him to access then this has no legal value (as pointed).

"Secondly, "Quiet Enjoyment" is a "Statutory right","

Again, it is not. It is a covenant of the lease. Please look it up, it is not difficult to find.

"in the tenancy agreement regarding unauthorised entry"

How can it be unauthorised entry if the lease authorises it?

"2+ months notice" may be enforceable depending on the lease, but that is another issue!

"In any case, my point still stands, your sentiments in your initial comment (comment #2) is not true at all."

It's fine to disagree but, with respect, I don't think that you are qualified to make such a categorical statement. Certainly, you haven't provided any evidence.

My quest continues...

@ Romain,

"Quiet Enjoyment" is a "Statutory right",

Again, it is not. It is a covenant of the lease."

It is common law and even if not specifically mentioned (which it nearly always is), would be an implied covenant.
-Reference: Woodfall, copyright protected.

@Benji

Yes, exactly. Thanks for providing a reference (of which there are many).

@Romain sorry but you are wrong, you cannot go into the property unless it's an emergency or you have a court order.

You need consent from the tenant otherwise. If you give them 24 hours notice that you want to come and inspect and they say no, if you enter you are trespassing.

My source is the law, you are wrong.

What happens if my tenant won't let me in to empty the electric meter,and it jams up so they have no electric

i want to enter the Garden area only to prune a tree thats over grown .. now can a tenant refuse me access .. i carnt seem to find any ruling on the garden area

hi

i am a landlord of a single property and i recnelty have ended up with a nightmare tenant.
The lady was reffered to me by the local councils housing options rental scheme.
She was supposed to have been eligable for a two bedroom house as she had joint custody of her daughter.
she showed signs of trouble within the first 3 weeks.anti socail behaviour, late night parties and noise. all my front windows were smashed by a male party nutter. i repaired these at my costs. the second problem was her benefits were suspended which had the knock on effect of the housing benefit being suspended. I didnt realize until 3 months into the tenancy. It was a constant nightmare treying to persuade the tenant to go to the jsa?housing office and reinstate her benefits. eventually she did but didnt provide all the information the housing benefit needed. so they refused to back date a four week period. whilts trying to get the tenant to call again our relationship was becoming mnore and more difficult. she was totaly nreliable and just constantly lied. she failed to keep any appointment made and refused to ring the housing office either.
then 4 months into her tenancy she recieved another suspension. this time she refused point blank to call at the housing office.
by now we were at rock bottom. she bacame abusive and hostile at me asking her to sort the housing benefit out or pay the rent herslef.
i have not had any rent payments for two months and the tenant is over £1400 in arrears. and to rub salt on the wound the housing office are saying they made an overpayment of £300 which i have to pay back.

I have only seen the tenant once in around 6 weeks. there has been zeroe response to my letters and never opens the door when i call. she has become abusive and told me to take her to court.

i am retired and and the rent is a large part of my income with 2 under 6 boys we home school and 3 teenagers to support.

i have serverd sec 8 and 21 notices but am totally overwhelemd. i took pity on her thinking she was trying to make a home for her and her daughter. but the daughter has only ever been seen once at the house. the tenant has no furniture except a bed., a few pots and pans in the kitchen. i googled her two months into the tenancy and was shocked to see she was plastered all over the local news papaer. violant past, aggresive and served 6 months in prison for beaten her daughters father. she did a runner from the courts and then on being apprehended and ready for sentancing threw a glass water jug at the judge.
i know i have been stupid. i didnt do any checks i didnt ask for any garantaur,because she came through this scheme i didnt ask for anything.
i have asked her to leave .. i have told her i did not intend to continue with the contract when the fixed term ended. she clearly knows the game .. told me to F Off and take her to court.
i have served sec 8 and 21 but not sure if i should go for sec 8. ive read such nightmare stories of tenants inventing disrepair defense.
there has never been any issues with disrepair. the house was approved by the councils rental scheme but i dont know what she might have done in the past few months.. she has never complained , verbally, in writing or text messgaes. i keep asking the eviction solicitor what would happen if the tenant was to turn up at court (if i used section 8).. can they simple make an accusation on the day. (would a tenant £1500 in arrears, more by the date of any hearing turn up in the first place). would the judge allow it .. especailly if theres no evidance to support a defense. but i dont really get a clear answer other then tenants mostly dont turn up, deal with it on the day etc.
what experiences do people have on this forum of using section 8.
the other choice i have is section 21.
but i cannt not believe this whole process will take several months in total. the tenant knows exactly what she is doing and pissing on my head ..
how could a law allow anyone to take advatage of another person like this.
for 3 months ive been going round in circles thinking i could do a thousand and one things but in real terms i can sod all. i am now having to borrow money to pay the mortgage on my house. i am definatly going to have to borrow money to pay for cost of getting this B. out of my house.
I read through the eviction process that the courts may allow extra time to the tenant on grounds of hardship. This is the biggest joke i have heard ever.
A B's who is living in my house.. not paid rent for several months, making my life hell, putting me in herrendous debt, taken full advatge of the law and pissing on me daily and they might be able to stay a little longer because of hardship. what a sick system.
Ive spent the past 3 months reading online. there is not a single comment by any offical site where they talk about the hardship a landlord is going through. the nightmare he having to deal with. the horrendous costs he is incurring just to get his OWN house back and the loss of thousands of in lost rent.
I honestly wish judge judy was here. she would sort these theiving B'S out.
dont we all make choices in life.
if you cannt pay for some thing, dont go for it. if you dont like the house then get out. if you dont want to pay the rent then P off some where were you do want to pay the rent. or find a sucker in your blood famiy whos got a spare house were you can P's as much as you want and trash it and they wont mind becuase they will tolarate your hardship.

why go to a complete stranger and turn his life upside down. i have learnt a hard lesson. never, never will i give my house to any one who comes with a sob sob story and never with out checks. what an expensive lesson i have learnt.
i am sorry for going on to long and if i have said anything out of turn.
i really started writng to ask for advice.

sec 8 sec 21. i want this she devil out ASAP ... is sec 8 worth taking the risk

My tenant stopped paying his rent and changed the locks and has refused to allow a gas engineer to do a gas safety check. His attitude to us changed over night when his benefits were stopped. We cannot issue a s21 as the gas safety certificate is overdue
Can he simply change the locks and not give us a key? What if there was a fire? What if the roof gets damaged in a storm when he goes away? We will have to sell the house because we cannot keep up the payments but we can't even do that because the estate agent needs a key. We are desperate. Meanwhile I am being treated for breast cancer !!

Angela, the tenant has the right to change the locks.

You can get free legal advice from here: https://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/landlord-legal-advice-tenant-problems/

i am a landlord of a car sales pitch which ive shared between 2 of us.i have put a fence up charged the tennant rent and hes always paying late.not just that hes a nightmare to my business car sales.hes selling vans and customers are always coming back threatening to kick his arse and its really effecting my business,i toldhim he has to leave he responded by sending 2 lads into my office to threaten me with lump hammers.then i got threatned outside of office by one of his lad to get all my cars burnt and me dragged of pitch and kidnapped and done in.all reported to police.i wrote my own tenancy out for him with did not even give him like a long time here and apperantly its no good of a tenancy.so hes working trading on my land with no tenancy no comany name not even legal and is doing nothing but sending me threats.my mrs is worried for my life.i also had a freind walk into my office say he has put word out to have me done in and the lads went back told my freinds.so where do i stand can i get rid of him or not please anyone

I am reading all these horror stories and my heart goes out to you all. I have a very similar situation to Javed and Angela. Past 9 months my tenant has lied and abused my nature as if I am some fool. The Law is an Ass and that is putting it mildly. The tenant is now nearly 3 months behind as late paying, lost his job, sob, story ..Twisting his stories trying to make out it is my fault. I ask him when it is convenient to discuss the arrears " I will contact you tomorrow and let you know". A few days later, still no word. Try again ignoring my messages.
I have told them they must pay on time and the correct amount due - also all arrears must be cleared. Now they want me to evict them. No way I leaving and making myself homeless so issue me section 21.
They said about the heating not working and said they told me months ago. UGH? when was that I asked. Way back September (it was the first time for them to mention it). I contacted the gas plumber he came out and it needed a part but managed to get it working until the part was through.
I arranged then for the gas man to call on Monday.The tenant is saying sorry make other arrangement as we both cannot make it. I asked when they can be there as need a new gas certificate too. He said I will get back to you in an hour , nearly two days past and no word. I messaged them and hours later still no word. I am at my wits end and my heart is pulsing quickly - I feel like I am on the big dipper. I am worried that the heating temp repair won't last and then be stuck over the Christmas holidays ... I have had enough of bad tenants, never had a good one. They promise to look after the property and pay rent on time. , but it never happens in my case. I always make sure the house is spotless all freshly painted. Always get repairs done ASAP.

I called the letting agency over the annual gas safety check, which was outdated. They sent me a copy via email which states it was done. I was never contacted nor made aware of a visit to my flat, so how did they gain entry? And how can anyone simply enter my flat without notice or permission? I actually called the gas safety company which reportedly did the check and he said he has not done one! He stated that an error on the paperwork in which he wrote down the wrong flat number. My landlord has not contacted me with regard gaining entry to my flat if indeed the safety check was done. So its either an outdated gas safety check or illegal entry?

I am in the unusual position of having tenants refuse to let me in with a locksmith to repair the broken back door lock. They actually prefer to live without security, than let me see to it! When I proposed a time they said their dog would be home alone and being a rescue dog would likely bite! They have said a few times recently that during the year I've visited more than 'in a normal tenancy'. I have done 2 inspections and responded to their requests for boiler repair twice and washing machine repair once, and had scheduled check and repair of a flat roof. The only other visits were 3 pre-arranged prospective tenants viewings, covered in the lease. These were like pulling hens teeth as they didn't want to grant them, but reading the lease knew they should, so made it lengthy negotiations, each time telling me something different. I simply don't understand how good landlording can get me such a bad write-up. So now I have an email letter from them stating their refusal of entry for repair and accepting full liability should there be a break-in. Does this seem unusual behaviour?