How long is my landlord entitled to stay?

The_Conductor

30-40 minutes is entirely normal for an inspection- unless there is an underlying reason for a more in depth inspection. For example- a house which its transpired was let to students (without the landlord's knowledge) would definitely warrant a more detailed inspection- involving checks for damage and a contents report. I'd be inclined to do this every 8-12 weeks- as students can be transitory in nature. Alternatively- if a tenant has introduced pets into a property without a significant pet deposit- or without the knowledge of the landlord- it would warrant a far more frequent and more detailed inspection- than would otherwise be normal.

Edit- I see from re-reading the thread that pets are in the equation.
Accordingly- if I were the landlord- notwithstanding the PRTB finding against an unfair calculation of the costs involved- as obviously significant damage has been done- even by the OP's admission- I don't see how it would be unreasonable to try to curtail an inspection to a specific time frame. The fact that the OP works from home- is immaterial- if the property is being rented as a private residence. If it were being let as a commercial premises- then it would be different- however, there is no indication that this is the case- and indeed- if there are dedicated work functions being ascribed to the property- in all probability- it may be liable to appropriate council commercial rates- in addition to the regular property tax etc. Of course these rates (but not the property tax) would be payable by the tenant.

If you are arguing that its not fair for the landlord to take his time inspecting the property- after you have damaged it with pets (irrespective of the other transgressions- such as the lack of repairs etc)- I think you'll find that its very difficult to try to curtail inspections. If you're backing this up with by how its affecting your ability to work- then you're opening a whole new can of worms- you really don't want to go there.............

In addition- whatever about the water immersion not working- if the doors fell off kitchen cabinets, and the light went in the bathroom- most reasonable tenants would change a bathroom lightbulb or repair a kitchen cabinet that failed during their tenancy- the water immersion- would definitely be the remit of the landlord. Personally, I'd be quite surprised that a tenant wouldn't change a lightbulb- I'm actually scratching my head at why you wouldn't. Even if it meant spending 15-20 quid on the bulb- I'd discuss with the landlord, and give him the receipt afterwards (and I'd agree with the tenant to deduct it from the next rent due).

Given the history here- including the pet issues previously detailed- I don't think you can honestly expect anything other than detailed regular inspections. The landlord is protecting his property. You haven't.

WychWillow

With regards to fixing the press and changing the light bulb, we have tried to fix the press I don't know how many times, even my father has tried to fix the press when he came to stay with us in October, it just won't stay on. When we first moved into the property the landlords handyman came to do some jobs and he told us that the previous tenant wrecked the kitchen and pulled all the kitchen press doors off, which is probably why we are now struggling to keep this press door on.

As for the bathroom light, the first thing we did is replace the light bulb, that isn't the issue, it is something wrong with the electrics or connection in there as it works for a minute or two and then goes off again.

We have always fixed minor things like light bulbs, kitchen press ect out of our own pocket and never invoiced the landlord for this.

As I have previously stated I have no problem with regular inspections it puts his mind at rest that no further damage has been caused, what I do have a problem with is him and his mother coming around for hours on end expecting a chat and cup of tea when an inspection shouldn't involve that.

uck51js9zml2yt

WychWillow wrote: »

With regards to fixing the press and changing the light bulb, we have tried to fix the press I don't know how many times, even my father has tried to fix the press when he came to stay with us in October, it just won't stay on. When we first moved into the property the landlords handyman came to do some jobs and he told us that the previous tenant wrecked the kitchen and pulled all the kitchen press doors off, which is probably why we are now struggling to keep this press door on.

As for the bathroom light, the first thing we did is replace the light bulb, that isn't the issue, it is something wrong with the electrics or connection in there as it works for a minute or two and then goes off again.

We have always fixed minor things like light bulbs, kitchen press ect out of our own pocket and never invoiced the landlord for this.

As I have previously stated I have no problem with regular inspections it puts his mind at rest that no further damage has been caused, what I do have a problem with is him and his mother coming around for hours on end expecting a chat and cup of tea when an inspection shouldn't involve that.

Don't offer a cup of tea and as has been said ,once it's over tell him you have things to be getting on with and thanks for calling.
I assume you're a grown up and are able to end a conversation.

The_Conductor

Unfortunately- you're looking at this every 8-10 weeks going forward- after your pet 'incident'. Regardless of the lack of any repairs or remedial work by the landlord- which is a separate issue- bringing pets into the house really was a game changer.

A full inspection- as opposed to a cursory inspection which would normally take place periodically during a tenancy- can indeed take a couple of hours.

The waters here have been so badly muddied- I can't see how staying in the residence is tenable in the medium to long term. A landlord must trust a tenant with his property- you've broken that trust. A tenant must trust that their landlord will fix any issues that arise in a reasonable and prompt manner- that trust has been broken.

At best- you're looking at staying there until a break clause- under the 2004 Act- comes up. Its not a good basis on which to future plan.

WychWillow

The_Conductor wrote: »

Unfortunately- you're looking at this every 8-10 weeks going forward- after your pet 'incident'. Regardless of the lack of any repairs or remedial work by the landlord- which is a separate issue- bringing pets into the house really was a game changer.

A full inspection- as opposed to a cursory inspection which would normally take place periodically during a tenancy- can indeed take a couple of hours.

The waters here have been so badly muddied- I can't see how staying in the residence is tenable in the medium to long term. A landlord must trust a tenant with his property- you've broken that trust. A tenant must trust that their landlord will fix any issues that arise in a reasonable and prompt manner- that trust has been broken.

At best- you're looking at staying there until a break clause- under the 2004 Act- comes up. Its not a good basis on which to future plan.

I'm aware of all this, that's why I am looking every day for new properties in this area, because he can and will terminate the tenancy when he is able too.

As for bringing pets into the house, we asked permission from the agents before bringing any new pet into the house, they checked with the landlord and he said it was okay. A fact that the landlord has since denied but I have all of the emails sent/received from the agents regarding this, the same thing with damage already done to the property before we moved in, he is saying we have done it but I have an email I sent a few days after we moved in saying that all the doors, window sills and front room floor were scratched, the agent came to the property and took an inventory of all damage, the landlord has since told the agents not to give us that list of damages.

So I appreciate how you think we have broken his trust and damaged his house, but we have tried to come to a reasonable solution with the landlord regarding this and all we are facing back are lies from the landlord which we have proved aren't true, which is why we had no other choice in the end but to go to the PRTB sadly.

The_Conductor

Its not necessarily all lies though.
Doubtless the agent is getting a set percentage of the rental income- typically 10%- and its far from unusual for an agent to say what they feel they should say- to keep you in the property. Yes- you have e-mails to the agent saying the pets were allowed, and probably detailing the pet deposit- but you don't have a commensurate paper trail to the landlord himself. You may have kept up your side of the bargain- but there is nothing to say that the landlord hasn't (in this instance- obviously there are a string of other issues).

The pet deposit obviously doesn't cover the damage- which is how this blew up? The landlord inflamed the situation- seeking to have an unfair repair burden taken from the pet deposit- which has since been batted down by the PRTB.

I'm not saying the breach in trust is solely yours- the landlord has also breached your trust- its a two way street. I am saying the current situation is untenable- and you are simply marking time- till a break clause under the 2004 Act. Its a mess- however, it was created by both sides. Your e-mails to the agent about a pet- are fine- however, it sounds like you were given an inch by the agent- and ran a mile with it (if I remember your last thread you started taking in rescue dogs etc).

The whole situation is nuts. Can the landlord stay a couple of hours during an inspection- given the history and breach of trust here- I'd argue, yes, he can. Are you obliged to offer him tea and spend hours chit-chatting to him and/or his mother- no, you're not. Are you allowed to make a point about it being your place of work- and him impinging on this- no-you're not.

Arguing whether or not you're more sinned against than sinning- is simply going to go round and round in circles.

You have young children- they deserve stability- you're not going to get it in that house- surely that much is patently clear.

If/when this goes back to the PRTB- as doubtless it will- if you brought him to the PRTB over the cost of the damage- you can be sure you'll get reciprochal treatment in return when the tenancy finally ends- its going to end up in a mud slinging contest- and neither you nor the landlord are going to come out of this well.

At this stage- for the sake of a quiet life- I'd try to see whether a peace can be mediated between you- personally, I don't like conflict- and I'd be stressed as hell if I were either you or the landlord. Life is too short for this sort of crap.

WychWillow

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its not necessarily all lies though.
Doubtless the agent is getting a set percentage of the rental income- typically 10%- and its far from unusual for an agent to say what they feel they should say- to keep you in the property. Yes- you have e-mails to the agent saying the pets were allowed, and probably detailing the pet deposit- but you don't have a commensurate paper trail to the landlord himself. You may have kept up your side of the bargain- but there is nothing to say that the landlord hasn't (in this instance- obviously there are a string of other issues).

The pet deposit obviously doesn't cover the damage- which is how this blew up? The landlord inflamed the situation- seeking to have an unfair repair burden taken from the pet deposit- which has since been batted down by the PRTB.

I'm not saying the breach in trust is solely yours- the landlord has also breached your trust- its a two way street. I am saying the current situation is untenable- and you are simply marking time- till a break clause under the 2004 Act. Its a mess- however, it was created by both sides. Your e-mails to the agent about a pet- are fine- however, it sounds like you were given an inch by the agent- and ran a mile with it (if I remember your last thread you started taking in rescue dogs etc).

The whole situation is nuts. Can the landlord stay a couple of hours during an inspection- given the history and breach of trust here- I'd argue, yes, he can. Are you obliged to offer him tea and spend hours chit-chatting to him and/or his mother- no, you're not. Are you allowed to make a point about it being your place of work- and him impinging on this- no-you're not.

Arguing whether or not you're more sinned against than sinning- is simply going to go round and round in circles.

You have young children- they deserve stability- you're not going to get it in that house- surely that much is patently clear.

If/when this goes back to the PRTB- as doubtless it will- if you brought him to the PRTB over the cost of the damage- you can be sure you'll get reciprochal treatment in return when the tenancy finally ends- its going to end up in a mud slinging contest- and neither you nor the landlord are going to come out of this well.

At this stage- for the sake of a quiet life- I'd try to see whether a peace can be mediated between you- personally, I don't like conflict- and I'd be stressed as hell if I were either you or the landlord. Life is too short for this sort of crap.

The emails that I have from the agents are forwarded replies from the landlord stating that it was fine, this was for each of the extra 3 pets we took. We always asked for permission first. The deposit that the landlord has covers the damages going off our quotes but obviously not his, what we were offering to do was pay for the cost of repairs ourselves and keep the deposit untouched so he had further peace of mind.

As for offering his and his mother tea, neither myself nor my partner did that, we were showing the landlord around and his mother went into the kitchen and made herself a cup of tea in the meantime.

Yes the whole situation is nuts, yes my children and my whole family deserve stability, and yes the stress levels are beyond believable, I have a brain disease and I have been getting progressively sicker for the last two months, I have lost around 20% of my vision and I pass out around 3-4 times a day. Everything we have done so far has been to try to avoid conflict and get a peaceful and reasonable resolution.

runawaybishop

The_Conductor wrote: »

Unfortunately- you're looking at this every 8-10 weeks going forward- after your pet 'incident'. Regardless of the lack of any repairs or remedial work by the landlord- which is a separate issue- bringing pets into the house really was a game changer.

A full inspection- as opposed to a cursory inspection which would normally take place periodically during a tenancy- can indeed take a couple of hours.

The waters here have been so badly muddied- I can't see how staying in the residence is tenable in the medium to long term. A landlord must trust a tenant with his property- you've broken that trust. A tenant must trust that their landlord will fix any issues that arise in a reasonable and prompt manner- that trust has been broken.

At best- you're looking at staying there until a break clause- under the 2004 Act- comes up. Its not a good basis on which to future plan.

The inspection isnt taking a couple of hours though. As per the ops post it is taking 30 minutes or thereabouts with 2.5 hours being taken up with small talk in the hallway. This doesn't look like a tenancy issue, op just needs to learn how to end a chat.

uck51js9zml2yt

:cool:

WychWillow wrote: »

As for offering his and his mother tea, neither myself nor my partner did that, we were showing the landlord around and his mother went into the kitchen and made herself a cup of tea in the meantime.

its your kitchen and your supplies. If you dont want her doing this, tell her so. You dont have to accept her behaviour

WychWillow

So after many emails back and forth, my landlord is now telling me that I HAVE to allow his brother access to the property to do the inspection alongside the landlord, is this correct? I have told the landlord 3 times I am not very well at the moment and don't really want strange people in the house but he is telling me I have no choice.

runawaybishop

WychWillow wrote: »

So after many emails back and forth, my landlord is now telling me that I HAVE to allow his brother access to the property to do the inspection alongside the landlord, is this correct? I have told the landlord 3 times I am not very well at the moment and don't really want strange people in the house but he is telling me I have no choice.

Unless his brother is a professional/expert and is required to inspect something in particular then you are well within your rights to refuse access

MarkAnthony

WychWillow wrote: »

So after many emails back and forth, my landlord is now telling me that I HAVE to allow his brother access to the property to do the inspection alongside the landlord, is this correct? I have told the landlord 3 times I am not very well at the moment and don't really want strange people in the house but he is telling me I have no choice.

Given the info that has come to light in this thread I'd just be going with the flow. Let them know you'll be going out an hour after they arrive and they need to be done by then, then get someone to ring you after an hour.

Personally I get the impression that you're just throwing up issues for the sake of it. Granted 3 hours is way too long but it can be easily handled.

I'd be dubious about visiting you on my own given previous issues. Perhaps it would be wise for you to have a witness present also?

WychWillow

runawaybishop wrote: »

Unless his brother is a professional/expert and is required to inspect something in particular then you are well within your rights to refuse access

Thank you.

Penny Tration

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Given the info that has come to light in this thread I'd just be going with the flow. Let them know you'll be going out an hour after they arrive and they need to be done by then, then get someone to ring you after an hour.

Personally I get the impression that you're just throwing up issues for the sake of it. Granted 3 hours is way too long but it can be easily handled.

I'd be dubious about visiting you on my own given previous issues. Perhaps it would be wise for you to have a witness present also?

This, 100%. Tell them a set time in which they can do the inspection (be reasonable, give a 90 minute window, not a 30 minute one) and just let them at it.

The fact is that your pets have done a hell of a lot of damage, so you need to expect regular inspections. It seems that you're just being petty and trying to find a way to limit the landlord to a set few minutes instead of letting him do a full inspection.

As for his brother being there - it protects the landlord from potential claims of bad behaviour, if a tenant were inclined to make false accusations. Get your own witness too and you're sorted.

And for the love of god, think of your children and find somewhere stable and suitable to live.

The_Conductor

runawaybishop wrote: »

Unless his brother is a professional/expert and is required to inspect something in particular then you are well within your rights to refuse access

On what basis are you suggesting that the OP has the right to dictate who should be involved in a periodic inspection of a property.
It is not stated, or inferred, anywhere- that an inspection may only be conducted by a person with any type of qualification.

I agree wholeheartedly with some of the other sentiments- given the history here- it is both reasonable and indeed, advisable, for the landlord to bring someone with him (whoever that may be). They've already been to the PRTB with the tenant- over damage caused by inappropriate pets (plr). If the OP wants someone with them too- that is entirely their prerogative. If the OP refuses access to the landlord to conduct an inspection- on the basis of the landlord bringing their brother (or their grandmother- or anyone else for that matter)- the writing is on the wall......... Not that its not on the wall anyway.

El_Duderino 09

The_Conductor wrote:

On what basis are you suggesting that the OP has the right to dictate who should be involved in a periodic inspection of a property. It is not stated, or inferred, anywhere- that an inspection may only be conducted by a person with any type of qualification.

I think you've lost perspective here. How could it possibly be appropriate for the landlord to bring people around for the inspection, willy nilly? Fair enough if they are serving a particular role for instance giving a professional opinion or serving as a witness. That's not what he asked the OP for though. They told the OP they are bringing their brother who serves no stated purpose and adds no stated value and of course the OP is right to refuse strangers access to their home.

The_Conductor wrote:

I agree wholeheartedly with some of the other sentiments- given the history here- it is both reasonable and indeed, advisable, for the landlord to bring someone with him (whoever that may be). They've already been to the PRTB with the tenant- over damage caused by inappropriate pets (plr). If the OP wants someone with them too- that is entirely their prerogative. If the OP refuses access to the landlord to conduct an inspection- on the basis of the landlord bringing their brother (or their grandmother- or anyone else for that matter)- the writing is on the wall......... Not that its not on the wall anyway.

If any professional person in the LL's position brought a witness, they would have been briefed about their job. Observe and witness. That's not what happened as the last tag-along felt at liberty to rummage through the OP's presses and consume their goods. This shows a complete misunderstanding of the rights and responsibilities of the situation and I wouldn't let the LL bring any other people into my home, without a stated purpose.

I think you'd be mortified if you brought a mate for a spin to inspected a tenant and your mate made himself a sambo from the tenants food. It's silly to expect the OP to allow anyone who doesn't have a stated purpose for being there and you would see that if you hadn't lost perspective.

WychWillow

Well the landlord and his brother both arrived at 1.15pm. Both for the record we huge well built men. We requested that the brother remain outside the property as we already felt threatened by the landlord. They told us it was 'his house and he can do what he wants in it' The brother was constantly opening windows and telling the landlord to do whatever he wanted and making 'cut across his throat' gestures at us. The landlord was videoing us the whole time, we asked him repeatedly to stop videoing us as I had my 16 year old daughter present.

At that point I was getting more and more upset and had a panic attack in the hallway, the whole of which he recorded, he was asked to leave and refused. He pushed and shoved me around 20 metres down the hallway to try and get to my partner and then hit me in my stomach, the whole time with my partner screaming at him not to touch me again and to leave, after I got up off the floor I called the guards. When we got near the front door he opened it, his brother came in and they started hitting my partner and dragged him outside the house, they were throwing him around the front of the house and into the side of the house, I called the guards again. As a result my partner now has a black eye, bruising to his head and neck, cuts on his back, arms, elbows and hands and two footprints on the skin of his upper back.

We're currently waiting for the guards to come back to formal statements.

Arrow in the Knee

WychWillow wrote: »

Well the landlord and his brother both arrived at 1.15pm. Both for the record we huge well built men. We requested that the brother remain outside the property as we already felt threatened by the landlord. They told us it was 'his house and he can do what he wants in it' The brother was constantly opening windows and telling the landlord to do whatever he wanted and making 'cut across his throat' gestures at us. The landlord was videoing us the whole time, we asked him repeatedly to stop videoing us as I had my 16 year old daughter present.

At that point I was getting more and more upset and had a panic attack in the hallway, the whole of which he recorded, he was asked to leave and refused. He pushed and shoved me around 20 metres down the hallway to try and get to my partner and then hit me in my stomach, the whole time with my partner screaming at him not to touch me again and to leave, after I got up off the floor I called the guards. When we got near the front door he opened it, his brother came in and they started hitting my partner and dragged him outside the house, they were throwing him around the front of the house and into the side of the house, I called the guards again. As a result my partner now has a black eye, bruising to his head and neck, cuts on his back, arms, elbows and hands and two footprints on the skin of his upper back.

We're currently waiting for the guards to come back to formal statements.

He must of read the thread or this is a wind up.

Penny Tration

The landlord filmed himself attacking you? I find that incredibly difficult to believe.

If it's true, get off the internet and get your partner to a hospital to be checked out.

liquoriceall

WychWillow wrote: »

Well the landlord and his brother both arrived at 1.15pm. Both for the record we huge well built men. We requested that the brother remain outside the property as we already felt threatened by the landlord. They told us it was 'his house and he can do what he wants in it' The brother was constantly opening windows and telling the landlord to do whatever he wanted and making 'cut across his throat' gestures at us. The landlord was videoing us the whole time, we asked him repeatedly to stop videoing us as I had my 16 year old daughter present.

At that point I was getting more and more upset and had a panic attack in the hallway, the whole of which he recorded, he was asked to leave and refused. He pushed and shoved me around 20 metres down the hallway to try and get to my partner and then hit me in my stomach, the whole time with my partner screaming at him not to touch me again and to leave, after I got up off the floor I called the guards. When we got near the front door he opened it, his brother came in and they started hitting my partner and dragged him outside the house, they were throwing him around the front of the house and into the side of the house, I called the guards again. As a result my partner now has a black eye, bruising to his head and neck, cuts on his back, arms, elbows and hands and two footprints on the skin of his upper back.

We're currently waiting for the guards to come back to formal statements.

Thank the lord he videoed it and hope the Guards get it before he deletes it he sounds bonkers!

Stheno

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

The landlord filmed himself attacking you? I find that incredibly difficult to believe.

If it's true, get off the internet and get your partner to a hospital to be checked out.

And start looking for a new home, op can't excuse staying there and having her children experience such things if she has any concern for them

At this stage it's ridiculous

The_Conductor

OP- as this is now clearly a matter of multiple alleged assaults- it really wouldn't be appropriate for us to allow your thread continue- as it might prejudice any action you may be taking against the perpetrator elsewhere.

I would be grateful if you kept the public nature of this forum in mind- if you post here again- given all that has transpired.

I hope it gets sorted- and as quickly as possible, for you.

Thread closed.