Landlord Inspections, My Rights?

valleyoftheunos

Quiet Enjoyment doesn't mean the Tenant should be free to do as they wish with the property, it means the landlord can't harass the tenant. An inspection every three months would be frequent enough but not excessive and not unwarranted. I've seen the damage a mere six weeks neglect can do, putting these things right is expensive and a tenant's negligence isn't "one of the risks of being a landlord".

Having said all that the Landlord must be beyond reproach in the way that they conduct their business. Inspections must be scheduled and carried out with respect of a tenant's privacy and the landlord must meet all of their obligations also. My experience is that frequently both tenants and landlords feel they don't really need to fulfill all of their obligations which can often blow up in both sides faces.

Solair

BostonB wrote: »

I can only agree. Tenants and LL need to agree this in advance, have it written down, then stick to it.

There's a problem with scheduling tradesmen though. They seem to have no notion of time or a calendar. I'd say 1 in 10 seem to be able to keep their appointments.

Tradesmen shouldn't be given a key to a property though. That's absolutely ridiculous stuff.

odds_on

Solair wrote: »

Tradesmen shouldn't be given a key to a property though. That's absolutely ridiculous stuff.

Then tenants should make themselves available during tradesmen's hours - just as a home owner has to do. But some tenants seem to think that because the are a tenant they have special rights and shouldn't have to have time off work to wait for a tradesman.

valleyoftheunos

odds_on wrote: »

Then tenants should make themselves available during tradesmen's hours - just as a home owner has to do. But some tenants seem to think that because the are a tenant they have special rights and shouldn't have to have time off work to wait for a tradesman.

The point is entirely arguable. It is the landlord's property and the landlord's repair. The landlord is responsible for it so they should see that it is done.

wolfpawnat

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I'm an overseas-based landlord. I pay a property management company to manage my property, and this includes 3-monthly inspections which include taking a set of photos that are placed onto a secure website for me to view. Prospective tenants have this explained to them during the viewing, and those who find it objectionable are free to live elswhere.

Frankly I wouldn't have it any other way. I want to be on top of gradual wear-and-tear, not to face a lot of work when a tenancy ends. that means I need to see what's happening to the property. Also, I don't want people thinking that they can run a p-lab (or whatever) for six months and then disappear just before the inspection.

OP, the only thing your landlord did wrong was to come in one hour early, and perhaps be too polite when they were talking to you on the day.

Be too polite? Are you well, if there was a problem it should have been said there and then and not become anal after. Just say they were not satisfied and would be putting it in writing. But they wouldn't because clearly any normal person would argue an untidy home is nothing wrong if it is a <2 hours to tidy. Unclean is one thing, but giving out about a few dishes in the sink, couple of clothes in the corner and an unmade bed is just being an a*hole for the sake of it.


I wish my LL would send the agent out to check the place every 3-6 months. He has cheap ass couches that I cover to protect, but they are still getting worn, I have been documenting them myself, photographing them and texting the land agent about it. The leak in the radiator that has been there since I moved in is getting worse, but thankfully, again, I took photo's the first day. And more recently. Same with mold in 2 areas.

Also personally if I was doing something the LL would be displeased about, I rather know in advance and attempt to rectify it rather than get some or all of my deposit gone for something easily sorted before it got worse. Which reminds me I need to get someone in to wash the living room carpet, though why a LL would ever get cream carpets is beyond me. But its my duty to clean it as my child spilled juice on it!

I depend on good references. I have at least another 3-5 years of renting. I have found though Dublin LLs are slightly more uptight that country ones, but I suppose you hear/see more horrible stuff in Dublin, in a small rural community, no one wants the shame of the LL being able to tell the locals your filthy so maybe people tend to keep places cleaner.

BostonB

Solair wrote: »

Tradesmen shouldn't be given a key to a property though. That's absolutely ridiculous stuff.

Oh I agree. My point was that trying to schedule a tradesman to suit someone else is nigh impossible. I'd leave that to a tenant to make those arrangements.

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

The point is entirely arguable. It is the landlord's property and the landlord's repair. The landlord is responsible for it so they should see that it is done.

Its not arguable. The LL doesn't have access without the tenants permission. Unless its an emergency. So let the tenant schedule the trademan and get more than one quote.

valleyoftheunos

BostonB wrote: »

Its not arguable. The LL doesn't have access without the tenants permission. Unless its an emergency. So let the tenant schedule the trademan and get more than one quote.

Of course it's arguable, the landlord simply gets the tenant's permission to access the property for the purpose of the repair.

odds_on

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

The point is entirely arguable. It is the landlord's property and the landlord's repair. The landlord is responsible for it so they should see that it is done.

I am not disputing that fact. I am saying that tenants must act like home owners when it comes to repairs - the tenant, like a home owner, may have to take time off work in order that the repairs can be carried out during the workman's hours.

The tenant cannot expect that the workman has to accommodate the tenants' hours. When I owned my own home, I had to take time off work so that any repairs could be done during the tradesman's working day.

odds_on

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

Of course it's arguable, the landlord simply gets the tenant's permission to access the property for the purpose of the repair.

On that point I don't agree - who, whether home owner or tenant would give a tradesman or any other stranger, the key to their home - unless that person was well known to the occupant?

valleyoftheunos

odds_on wrote: »

I am not disputing that fact. I am saying that tenants must act like home owners when it comes to repairs - the tenant, like a home owner, may have to take time off work in order that the repairs can be carried out during the workman's hours.

The tenant cannot expect that the workman has to accommodate the tenants' hours. When I owned my own home, I had to take time off work so that any repairs could be done during the tradesman's working day.

Why on earth does the tenant have to act as a home owner in relation to repairs? that is completely nonsensical. The landlord is the home owner and the landlord is the one who is responsible for repairs so why should a tenant have to take time off? The Landlord or his agent should be the one to grant access to the tradesman, not the tenant.

The reality of a situation is that a tenant may often grant access simply to expedite the process but its certainly not an obligation.

Pawwed Rig

I don't think landlords should be in the house when the tenant is not there. Therefore the tenant should arrange a time for the repairs.

Kosseegan

TR355 /DR230/2010
Quote:
6. The Tribunal rejects the claim by the Appellant Landlord in respect of an
additional weeks rent of €500 arising out of the extra time to prepare the dwelling
for re-letting.

Reason: In his evidence the Appellant Landlord accepted that there were no regular
inspections of the dwelling during the tenancy. An earlier inspection could have
prevented later problems.


Typical RTB.

The tenants causes damage to the property and because the landlord does not stop him, the landlord has to pay the consequences, despite the clauses in the lease containing the tenants obligations!

wolfpawnat

As a tenant, and the house being full of MY personal belongings, I rather be the one there when the repair/trades men arrive. I would be freaking out worrying about my stuff while I was not there, and the LL or LA could go snooping in my personal effects were I not there too. I am not saying they would, but you wouldn't like to think of allowing them the chance either.

BostonB

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

...The reality of a situation is that a tenant may often grant access simply to expedite the process but its certainly not an obligation.

Tenants’ rights and obligations

Inform the landlord if repairs are needed and give the landlord access to the property to carry out repairs

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/tenants_rights_and_obligations.html

valleyoftheunos

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I don't think landlords should be in the house when the tenant is not there. Therefore the tenant should arrange a time for the repairs.

thats fine, but that's your decision.

wolfpawnat wrote: »

As a tenant, and the house being full of MY personal belongings, I rather be the one there when the repair/trades men arrive. I would be freaking out worrying about my stuff while I was not there, and the LL or LA could go snooping in my personal effects were I not there too. I am not saying they would, but you wouldn't like to think of allowing them the chance either.

Agents actually feel the same way, there is nothing worse than going to do an inspection or repair (by arrangement with the tenant) to find various "intimate possessions" and the like left out. Nobody wants to see that stuff.

BostonB

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

Of course it's arguable, the landlord simply gets the tenant's permission to access the property for the purpose of the repair.

Thats not the same thing. You were inferring its got nothing to do with the tenant. Where in fact its the tenant that has to give access.

If the tenant wants to pick out side normal hours to get a trademan in for repairs its obviously going to delay the repair. When trademen work is out of a LL control. You've got to be practical about it. It makes no sense to have a third party (LL) arrange appointments between two other parties (Trademan/Tenant).

wolfpawnat

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

Agents actually feel the same way, there is nothing worse than going to do an inspection or repair (by arrangement with the tenant) to find various "intimate possessions" and the like left out. Nobody wants to see that stuff.

Well that's it, and you have shítty tenants that would accuse you of moving stuff or that they left money somewhere and it is gone, I refuse to believe some people wouldn't try that either. My home is tidy, but I have to dry clothes in my hallway (outdoor drying is forbidden) last thing I want is people seeing my underwear, and I very much doubt they don't want to see them either!

valleyoftheunos

BostonB wrote: »

Tenants’ rights and obligations



http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/tenants_rights_and_obligations.html

I think you've misinterpreted that, giving access here obliges the tenant to grant the landlord permission to enter the property, not sit around all day waiting for a tradesman.

valleyoftheunos

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Well that's it, and you have shítty tenants that would accuse you of moving stuff or that they left money somewhere and it is gone, I refuse to believe some people wouldn't try that either. My home is tidy, but I have to dry clothes in my hallway (outdoor drying is forbidden) last thing I want is people seeing my underwear, and I very much doubt they don't want to see them either!

I wish it was just underwear that some tenants leave lying around:eek::eek::eek:

BostonB wrote: »

Thats not the same thing. You were inferring its got nothing to do with the tenant. Where in fact its the tenant that has to give access.

If the tenant wants to pick out side normal hours to get a trademan in for repairs its obviously going to delay the repair. When trademen work is out of a LL control. You've got to be practical about it. It makes no sense to have a third party (LL) arrange appointments between two other parties (Trademan/Tenant).

Its actually the Tenant that is the third party in this arrangement as it is the landlord who is arranging and paying for the repair to what is the landlord's property. My own experience is that a landlord will ask the tenant to be present to let a tradesman in and tenants will often agree because either they will be home anyway or it is just easier than making other arrangements. My point is that the tenant isn't obliged to be present in the property to let tradesmen in.

odds_on

Originally Posted by odds_on
I am not disputing that fact. I am saying that tenants must act like home owners when it comes to repairs - the tenant, like a home owner, may have to take time off work in order that the repairs can be carried out during the workman's hours.

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

Why on earth does the tenant have to act as a home owner in relation to repairs? that is completely nonsensical. The landlord is the home owner and the landlord is the one who is responsible for repairs so why should a tenant have to take time off? The Landlord or his agent should be the one to grant access to the tradesman, not the tenant.

The reality of a situation is that a tenant may often grant access simply to expedite the process but its certainly not an obligation.

I must have expressed myself badly for you to understand that.

I am referring not to who gets the repairs done but access to the property in order to carry out those repairs.

A tenant cannot expect repairs to be carried out quickly if the tenant is unable to accommodate the workman during his (the workman's) normal working hours.

valleyoftheunos

odds_on wrote: »

I must have expressed myself badly for you to understand that.

I am referring not to who gets the repairs done but access to the property in order to carry out those repairs.

A tenant cannot expect repairs to be carried out quickly if the tenant is unable to accommodate the workman during his (the workman's) normal working hours.

I suspect we are in fact talking at cross purposes.

BostonB

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

I think you've misinterpreted that, giving access here obliges the tenant to grant the landlord permission to enter the property, not sit around all day waiting for a tradesman.

I think you missing the point (by Solair) that started all this discussion. LL and tradesmen entering without the Tenants permission.

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

...Its actually the Tenant that is the third party in this arrangement as it is the landlord who is arranging and paying for the repair to what is the landlord's property. My own experience is that a landlord will ask the tenant to be present to let a tradesman in and tenants will often agree because either they will be home anyway or it is just easier than making other arrangements. My point is that the tenant isn't obliged to be present in the property to let tradesmen in.

The issue was never about the tenant being obliged be present, but giving access (permission) to the landlord or his agent (the tradesman).

I mean by third party. Where the tenant does want people given access without their permission, and usually no access without the tenant being present. The only two people who need to be there at a specific time are the person doing the repair and the tenant.

A situation where the tenant gives the LL permission to enter when the tenant is not there is not what I thought was being discussed. I dunno why you ended up going down that path.

valleyoftheunos

BostonB wrote: »

I think you missing the point (by Solair) that started all this discussion. LL and tradesmen entering without the Tenants permission.

That is so obviously in breach of a tenant's rights that i wouldn't even consider it up for discussion.

BostonB wrote: »

The issue was never about the tenant being obliged be present, but giving access (permission) to the landlord or his agent (the tradesman).

That is exactly what I have been saying. Clearly there has been a miss communication. Hence the cross purposes.

BostonB

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

That is so obviously in breach of a tenant's rights that i wouldn't even consider it up for discussion....

Thats what started the topic of the access of tradesmen and scheduling repairs.

Brownhead

A lot of houses don't have a tradesmen's entrance these days.