My Tenant Won’t Let Me Into The Property

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?

my and lord turned the gas meter off when I forgot the boiler man was coming for the 2nd time can he do this I do not think so

landlord, you are incorrect. what you cited has to do with a landlord seeking access to the premises without prior permission.
In most states within the landlord/tenant agreement it is stated that the landlord does/will have access to the property once the specified time has been given that is usually stated within the rental agreement.
A tenant is not the owner of the home and they do not have a right to prevent access to the home once the notice has been given, they are leasing the property and their lease is subject to the agreements made within.
I really do not see how a tenant could prevent access to the property unless they became physically violent which would most likely end them up in jail for assault.
I do not suggest any landlord getting into a violent conflict with their tenants.
If the police show up and they say it is a civil matter then it goes both ways, both with the landlord entering and the tenant refusing access, either that, or they are both criminal matters.

Ok so I’m getting a little tired of reading misinformed nonsense. “It’s the landlords house, if he gives notice he can enter the property when he likes” “it’s in the tenancy agreement that the tenant has to allow entry when the landlord requests it” ....and so on and so on.

So let’s look at what the LAW says a tenant has the right to.

live in a property that’s safe and in a good state of repair

have your deposit returned when the tenancy ends - and in some circumstances have it protected

challenge excessively high charges
know who your landlord is

live in the property undisturbed

see an Energy Performance Certificate for the property

be protected from unfair eviction and unfair rent

have a written agreement if you have a fixed-term tenancy of more than 3 years

You can put whatever you want in a tenancy agreement, it doesn’t trump the law. So if I give my tenant 2 weeks notice that I want to enter my property to inspect it, I turn up on the day and my tenant refuses access, can I let myself in? Can I barge past my tenant and look around? ABSOLUTELY NOT. A landlord has NO right of access and furthermore if a tenant changed the locks due to a landlord letting themself in without the tenants consent the law would most certainly favour the tenant. Now, most tenants allow inspections and welcome repairs, so usually there is no issue. However if a tenant says no you cannot enter the property no matter how many weeks, days notice you have given. The tenant under law has the right to live undisturbed, that is the LAW. Would you feel disturbed if someone entered your home without your consent? I certainly would and the courts would view this in the same way. Now under the tenancy agreement you have some remit to for example to make a deduction from the deposit for refused access if it incurs damage or costs. But you do not have the right to enter without permission or a court order. Now if you don’t believe me? Google it, ask the citizens advice. Don't ask a letting agent or an estate agent they have ZERO legal knowledge, at best maybe a few GCSE’s if your lucky an A Level. They are literally clueless and think a tenancy agreement is akin to the holy bible.

@Miss_26

"A landlord has NO right of access"

The tenant has (normally) already given permission for access when signing the tenancy agreement.

(I don't dispute they can revoke that permission.)

@Benji

Thank you for confirming that what I say is correct ...the landlord has no right to access without express permission from the tenant or a court order

The tenancy agreement may contain things such as “the tenant agrees to allow the landlord access with reasonable notice”

Yet again the tenancy is basically stating “the tenant must give the landlord access”

This is not enforceable with anything other than a court order and no court will give a landlord access for anything other than emergency repairs or an eviction which is then possession.

So we need to end this discussion here because it’s evident the tenant MUST allow access and the landlord cannot enter without express permission. Just because the tenancy says the tenant agrees to allow the landlord access for repairs, this doesn’t give the landlord power of entry if the tenant is on the door step saying no you can’t come in.

Long story short, the landlord has no power of entry without a court order unless the tenant allows it.

Why is this discussion still ongoing?

The landlord has a right of access for specific purposes, in specific circumstances. The "express permission" of the tenant is contained in the tenancy agreement, including through clauses inserted by law.

A party has no right to unilaterally change the terms of the tenancy, thus the tenant has no right to revoke permission.

Forcing entry (as suggested if the tenant physically prevents access) is not the same thing at all.

@NotAgain

No one mentioned forcing entry?

The tenancy agreement may contain clauses stating the tenant agrees to allow access for inspection or with notice.

This is totally irrelevant, because if the landlord turns up and the tenant refuses entry the landlord has no power at all to enter the property.

So regardless of what a landlord or agent puts in the tenancy agreement, it becomes irrelevant because the landlord can legally only enter the property with a court order.

So all of the nit picking and mention of tenancy agreements is totally irrelevant. The landlord has no guaranteed right of entry. A tenancy agreement does not over ride the law and the law does not give the landlord any implied or right to access without a court order.

Case closed.

@Miss_26

...the landlord has no right to access without express permission from the tenant

They already have express permission.

This is not enforceable with anything other than a court order

Yes it is.

Why is this discussion still ongoing?

Because you're wrong?

@Benji

Can you quote me the law that states the landlord has the right to enter a tenants home without gaining permission from the tenant?

You can’t because a landlord had NO power of entry unless the tenant allows it,

Let’s all wait for his reply qutoing the tenancy agreement...the agreement that he seems to think trumps the law allowing the tenant the legal right to live “undisturbed”

I’ll tell you what, go let yourself into your tenants home, in fact walk right past them after they refuse you entry and see where it gets you.

Trespassing and harassment come to mind. The tenancy agreement only gives the landlord an implied right to access under a certain set of circumstances..i.e. repairs, inspections ..within reason. It’s an implied right based on the tenant agreeing to it, so in theory you’re asking their permission to enter by way of the agreement because ummm you can’t go in without their permission,

Should your tenant refuse access even after signing the tenancy you have no legal right what so ever to go into the home. You’d need a court order.

Case closed. Why are you here still repeating the same nonsense about the tenancy agreement, don’t you have google? Are you incapable of understanding basic laws such as the right to live undisturbed? Do you really think you can just walk into a rental property, someone’s home without their permission?

Really? OMG you do lol

@Benji

Here is a little bit of “law” for you

According to Section 11 from The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 your landlord must give you 24 hours' notice before entering the property for any reason. ... Just like any other person, if your landlord is accessing your property without permission, they can be found guilty of harassment.

Kindly refer to the line “if the landlord is accessing the property without your permission”

Landlord needs the express permission of the tenant.

Now can you quote me the law the gives the landlord free access without permission?

I’m guessing you can’t since it’s been proven beyond any doubt a landlord only has permission to enter if it is given by the tenant. Furthermore the tenant can refuse entry and the landlord would have no power to force entry.

Why are you still here? Because you’re wrong .

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/70

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

@Benji

Sorry I’m not sure you understand do you?

I asked you can you quote me the “law” that allows the landlord access without “express” permission from the tenant?

I’m still waiting.....and yet again you quote a “lease” I think you mean “tenancy” I’m not sure.

The tenancy agreement does not override the law as quoted.

I’m getting fed up of repeating myself with regard to the tenancy. You can put what you want in a tenancy but if you turn up on the day and tenant refused entry, you cannot enter.

So the answer is no the landlord cannot enter without the tenants permission ...END OF.

I’m not replying anymore because you keep repeating the same nonsense about the tenancy agreement and I’ve literally explained it to you a thousand times and you are completely incapable of understanding.

Yeah I’m well aware that a tenancy agreement will contain a clause implying access for inspections or repairs.

But the question is can the landlord enter without the tenants permission and the simple answer is no.

Some people seem to think a tenancy agreement gives them the right to enter whenever it suits them.

We have laws and quite rightly so to protect tenants from such rogue landlords and allow them the privacy to live in peace undisturbed.

@The Landlord.

The tenant has no right to refuse because the landlord is exercising a right of entry. Both parties must be reasonable, though, so the tenant may refuse entry if the landlord tries to use his right of access unreasonably
(e.g. by inspecting weekly...) but that's not quite the same.

In an emergency the landlord is dispensed from giving notice for obvious reasons, again not quite the same.

It's not just an issue of quiet enjoyment but also, and perhaps especially, of exclusive possession.

The aim of all this is to allow access without trespassing, which the landlord would do if he entered without permission since the tenant has exclusive possession of the property.

I am not sure that Miss_26 reads the replies or that she understands the topic very well.

The tenant has no right to refuse because the tenant has no right to unilaterally change the terms of the tenancy.

If a party could decide the change the terms as they please then there would be no tenancies or contracts!

The landlord may be accommodating but on the face of it the tenant's refusal has no legal significance: E.g. the landlord would not be trespassing as long as he followed the requirements of his right of access (allowed purpose and correct notice).

Of course a landlord should always be careful because a number of allegations could be made against him...

The tenant does indeed always gives permission for the specific case quoted by Benji from the LTA 1985.

This does also mean that the tenant has no right to refuse entry in such case, as per my previous comment. Otherwise there would effectively be no right of access...

I’m not confused at all, I understand perfectly well that I cannot enter my property unless my tenant gives me permission to do so.

I understand that regular inspections are intrusive, and I allow my tenant the peace to live undisturbed.

In return we have a great rapport, my property is well looked after and should I ever require access she allows it.

If you want to dance around the wording that’s fine. The tenancy gives an implied or assumed permission, but again it all boils down to the tenant having to give permission.If the tenant is standing in the door saying no ....then you can’t enter. So the top and bottom of everything is the landlord needs permission from the tenant and I have no idea why this discussion is ongoing honestly.

The right to keep every out of the property is exclusive possession, already mentioned. That is why the landlord, or anybody else, must get permission before entering the property.

Quiet enjoyment is not absolute but a covenant of the lease. If there is a right of access in the lease it out to be implied that exercising it is not a breach of quiet enjoyment. If in doubt you could make it explicit in the tenancy, as is common in leases.

Claiming that "right of access" cannot override "quiet enjoyment" does not make sense.

It is also plainly incorrect to claim that a landlord would be trespassing simply by gaining access pursuant to a right of access.

I also note that the quoted blog post claims that the tenant must give explicit permission every time that the landlord seeks access...

The comments section is interesting. I especially note the incoherency of claiming that the tenant has a right to refuse by that this would put them in breach of the tenancy, which is a total contradiction.

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 your landlord must give you 24 hours' notice before entering the property for any reason. ... Just like any other person, if your landlord is accessing your property without permission, they can be found guilty of harassment.

This is the law....THE LAW. The tenant CAN refuse entry at any point. The Landlord can NOT enter if the tenant says no.

Why are people simply too stupid to understand this basic simple law? I mean do you really think you can barge past a tenant and let yourself into their home just because the tenancy states an implied agreement to access for repairs?

Like really on a human level you truly believe you can just enter your tenants home whenever it pleases you even if they say no?

I’m so bored of hearing this nonsense about the tenancy agreement. It’s an implied agreement to access, but the tenant can still refuse access and if they do only a court order would allow you to enter.

I’m bored of repeating the same thing and people are just too dumb to understand ...I mean you can google the law on this and it’s right there in plain English.

Closing my response. Literally can’t be bothered to reply anymore I’m dealing with the most basic idiots.

Hmm, indeed it is common law, not statutory.

What it means is that it is not absolute and that the exact terms may be specified in the tenancy agreement. Hence my previous point that it ought to be implied that the covenant of quiet enjoyment is not breached when the landlord accesses the property pursuant to a term of the tenancy, and that it can be made exiplicit in the tenancy.

I don't ask you to take my word for it, but equally the blog post you quoted puts forward a rather surprising claim without backing it up. Any textbook on land law would provide good pointers.

The way I read it is, if the landlord makes a reasonable request for access and the tenant unreasonably refuses it, then that would indeed be a breach of the tenancy agreement. However, that is not to say the landlord could then effect entry. He would have to pursue a Section 8 eviction order on the grounds of the breach and obtain possession that way, plus damages if appropriate. I should think nine times out of ten it's easier just to wait until the end of the tenancy and wave goodbye to Mr(s) Awkward at that point.

Having said that, is anyone aware of a case where a landlord was brought to book for just sneaking in and getting the gas ticket done while the tenant is at work?

So, I had tenants that refused entry multiple times, and they complained about damage they themselves caused to the city.
the city socked me with fines, and tried to make it so I would not get the word of this, which would have resulted in a warrant for my arrest.
Proper notice was given, and police called for stand by.
The police sent me and/or my landlord (daughter-in-law) every time.
The city inspector has refused to budge, and knows full well what the circumstances are, and was likely coaching them on what to do to cause the greatest harm to me.
This is not the first time the city has done this to landowners, I found out from a prior suit against the city.
When I finally was able to evict them, they turned the heat off and a water pipe burst and caused a teriffic amount of damage, including taking out the furnace and water heater.

Oh, they didn't pay rent for seven months, either, that's what led to the eviction.

your advice on evicting a tenant was very helpful

thanks

The tenant has asked the landlord that he wants to be present at the property while the repairs are taking place(in the house) but only at the tenants time but the landlord just gives a 48hours notice & comes at their own time, ignoring the tenants request, is that legal?

Hi,I'm a tenant and a have been renting my house for 7 years now and one day my landlord just sends me a "just cause" termination to move.but anyways there's a whole lot to the situation but my question or statement is simply this ok.my landlord gave me the 90 day termination and I havnt been able to move havnt found a place and I signed the lease which was a 6 month then after would be a month to month and it also stated that the landlord can come in any time he needs to do repairs.well I've told them years ago over and over about the repairs needed and all of a sudden he wants to come in and see what needs to be repaired so he can re rent the property.well what about fixing it when I was asking that it be looked at in 7years.now I gotta go and you wanna fix shit.we havnt even been to court yet for the eviction on believe it's next week.so anyways he was here today and me and my friend put our phones on record and I refused to let him in because he's not gonna do repairs while I'm here for the next tenant when nothing was done for me.and so he threatened me and told me he will knock the door down or drill in the key whole because the locks were changed and he told me there's nothing I can do so far called the cops and the cops said he can go in because it states it on the lease.ive been here 7 years and never signed another contract or anything since 2012 except with section 8.he has been coming over everyday for the past couple of days threating me saying the sherrifs are gonna throw me out and telling me there's something wrong with my head.yes yes there is my dad recently past and he was my best friend and about 7 or 8 months later my father in law died then 6 months after my mother in law passed and you guys wanna throw me out for no reason just cause expecislly they've known I'm in bad depression and stressed at this point and my head just ain't quit rite at the moment and more stress to add to it and embarrasment and slander and at the neighbors talking to them about what's going to happen and what's going on.making me feel worse than what I already do humiliating me infront of my friend saying bad things about me and critisizing my integrity my intelegence my worthyness my everything.just dropped my self esteem even lower.what opinion does anyone have for me please