Landlord Inspections, My Rights?

Doff

Just wondering what are my rights in regard to landlord inspections?

Basically Myself and my partner are living in a house together. The landlord makes an inspection once every 3 months which is fine with us. We are both very busy and when we both get home its usually 7 or after where we just want to have dinner, relax and go to bed for our early starts in the morning. Our house is never a mess, it may be unorganized at times but we set aside each Friday to clean it and it has honestly never been in a state (Rubbish goes in bin, plates etc in sink, clothes in basket). Our Landlord was coming for an inspection one day for 4 o clock on a day we had said we would be home early on. We had planned on getting home at 3 o clock to do some tidying up before inspection. As we got there the landlord was parked outside and came in for inspection. We apologized for the untidiness (even though it really wasn't that bad, would have taken far less than an hour to clean) and the landlord said they didn't mind they were just checking that nothing was broken. After the inspection they said it everything was fine, asked if we had any problems and then left.

The following week we received an angry letter from the landlord complaining about the mess and giving us a warning that it is to be cleaned and to schedule a new inspection date. This was a bit of a shock considering the conversation we had with them on the inspection date.

So can anyone tell me what my rights are regarding this? Are they allowed to turn up an hour early? Can they do anything legally?

BostonB

I'd ring them and ask why the letter is completely at odds with the conversation you had with them. Then put it in writing to the LL you you have a paper record of events. LL sounds like an ass. Or they are trying to fabricate complaints for some reasons. In future if they are early I would make them wait till the agreed time.

Joe Hart

Absolutely ridiculous. It is not a cleaning check and you should not be leaving work early to accomodate him. I'd be realy pissed off at checks every 3 months but legally he has a right to. It should be about keeping the tenants happy once he knows you are looking after a place. I'd be on my way after that.

jd83

"(c) allow, at reasonable intervals, the landlord, or any person or persons acting on the landlord's behalf, access to the dwelling (on a date and time agreed in advance with the tenant) for the purposes of inspecting the dwelling,"

That what the law says. If your crazy ass landlord wants to view the property every 3 months let them, but at a time of your choosing and suits you. If I was renting your property Id be gone as soon as the lease is up.

djimi

I would consider an inspection every 3 months to be pushing the limits of what would be acceptable; you ate entitled to quiet enjoyment of the property, you shouldn't be made feel like the landlord is watching over your shoulder the whole time. I don't see any reason for more than 1-2 inspections a year at most, especially if they aren't finding any problems when they do inspect.

As for keeping the property clean, so long as you are not causing any damage to the property it is absolutely none of the landlords business how you live your life. It would be only if say you never hoovered/cleaned to the point of doing lasting damage to the property, or where you were leaving rubbish around to cause a health hazard or nuisance to the neighbours that they would have a right to get involved.

Basically your landlord needs to back off.

hfallada

Why is the landlord checking your house regularly for damages? If there is some take them out of the deposit at the end of the lease. He just seems like he has nothing better to do with his life. Like the only reason to inspect the place would to check its not being used as a brothel (most landlords worst nightmares) or a crack den

I would tell him I want the inspects to stop. We care for the property. In the unlikely event of us breaking stuff deduct from our deposit when we move out

the_syco

Would Saturday at 15:00 not suit you better? If it doesn't suit the Landlord, tough tittie, as that's the only time it suits you. Don't allow him to enter your house without you.

BostonB

Because if someone is not looking after a property they can do less damage in 3 or 6 months than in 12 months. So if action needs to be taken it needs to happen sooner rather than later. A LL would be an idiot to rely on the deposit as protection, especially as so many just use it last months rent leaving the LL out of pocket for beyond normal wear and tear damages.

Mrs OBumble

djimi wrote: »

I would consider an inspection every 3 months to be pushing the limits of what would be acceptable; you ate entitled to quiet enjoyment of the property, you shouldn't be made feel like the landlord is watching over your shoulder the whole time. I don't see any reason for more than 1-2 inspections a year at most, especially if they aren't finding any problems when they do inspect.

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.

Pawwed Rig

There is a difference between untidy and dirty. Untidy is none of the landlords business. Dirty is an issue that should be addressed. I would think once every three months is excessive. It is not something I would do unless I had concerns about something or needed to be there for another reason.
Quiet enjoyment is something that is taken very seriously.

Pippy1976

I don't even think this post is about the OP disagreeing to the 3-monthly visits. Both him and his partner seem fine about this.

I think the way the landlord wrote the letter takes things to a whole other level. It is polar opposite to the reaction he gave the OP and their partner on the day of the inspection. If he / she had problems with the condition of the property then they should have been brought to their attention on the day. Writing a strongly worded letter after the fact contradicts the original conversation.

I would do what one of the first replies said, ring the landlord and ask why the letter is at odds with the conversation on the day of the inspection. That's what this is about.

djimi

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.

If you are renting a property then you have to learn to let go and trust your tenant. I have no issues with periodic inspections, but an inspection every three months is an invasion of your tenants privacy as far as Im concerned.

Id love to know what the PRTB/Threshold would have to say about such frequent inspections.

Pawwed Rig

The legislation is silent as to what a reasonable period for inspections is. I would see 3 months as excessive but the PRTB might think that it is reasonable. I suppose it would depend on whether the tenant thought it reasonable or not or was getting stressed about it. By the sounds of it they haven't had an issue until now.
They use the word reasonable alot in the legislation. It is usually the man on the street test. What would a normal unconnected party consider reasonable.

Clive

OP, I wouldn't ring the landlord at all - I'd be starting the papertrail now for a potential dispute. Write back to him expressing how distressing it was to receive a letter completely at odds with his comments on the day of the inspection. Mention that he arrived an hour early. Then ask him to specify in writing what damage he observed that he would like rectified.

Would I be right in guessing that the property was once his home?

djimi

Yeah the law is a bit too ambiguous on the matter. Personally I dont think an inspection every 12 weeks is reasonable; they are the tenants landlord, not their mother. The tenancy act states that a tenant is entitled to quiet enjoyment of a property, and to me inspections of that frequency are denying tenants of that right.

I would have no issue with an inspection after say the first 3 months, but if everything is in order at that inspection then the inspections after that should be no more frequent than every 6 months. The tenancy is supposed to be the tenants home; if they wanted to have someone watching over their shoulder all the time they could stay living at home with mammy and daddy!

MagicMarker

How clean or untidy you keep the house is your business. As long as there's no damage to the property then there's no problem. I'd tell the LL to get stuffed.

odds_on

TR355 /DR230/2010

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.

By writing to the OP the landlord is setting out his concerns about the condition of the property (in spite of what he may have said at the time of the inspection), the landlord is covering himself in that should there be issues at the final inspection, the landlord has proof that he has advised the tenants of his concerns.

A very wise decision by the landlord.

If the tenants feel aggrieved, they in turn should also write to the landlord (keeping a copy) setting out the state of the house, the fact that there was no time to do some cleaning because the landlord was early for the appointment. This would be a wise decision by the tenant as a counter remedy.

odds_on

MagicMarker wrote: »

How clean or untidy you keep the house is your business. As long as there's no damage to the property then there's no problem. I'd tell the LL to get stuffed.

How clean a tenant keeps a house may well be relevant. Dirty carpets should be cleaned regularly or else the dirt may get ingrained into them which is not normal wear and tear, it would be damage in excess of what is normal. Thus at the end of a tenancy, there may well be a dispute over cleaning costs and damage.

Untidiness is another matter.

valleyoftheunos

OP was the person who conducted the inspection an agent or the actual Landlord? if it was an agent their will have reported to the landlord who may not have been as happy with things as the agent was.

Having had experience of exactly this situation I would suggest you write back to the landlord explaining the circumstances as they happened and assure them that in future the house will be sparkling upon inspection. its in your interest to remain on good terms with your landlord and moving out or seeking legal redress is over reacting at this point.

Joe Hart

I would suggest you write back to the landlord explaining the circumstances as they happened and assure them that in future the house will be sparkling upon inspection.

Maybe offer to clean up the landlords house as well while you're at it.

Mrs OBumble

djimi wrote: »

If you are renting a property then you have to learn to let go and trust your tenant.

Ahh, no, I don't. :rolleyes:

I have to compy with the law in the country that the property is located in.

If I want to use a property management company (and the law in my home country now requires me to appoint an in-country property manager), then I have to follow the non-optional procedures that the property manage operates. (And I generally choose to follow their recommended procedures, as well as their compulsory ones)

Because I chose a professional company, not a bunch of chancers who do a half-arsed job of it, the required procedures include three-monthly photographic inspections.

In return, my tenants get a landlord who gets stuff fixed ASAP, and takes an active interest in making sure that the property continues to be fit-for-purpose.


Trust is earned.

djimi

All I can say is that if my landlord insisted on photographing my home every few weeks they would be politely asked to stop, once, then I would be letting the PRTB decide if that sort of behaviour is acceptable. Absolute nonsense. Why not just go the whole hog and install live webcams so you can watch the place 24/7?

quietsailor

I would have thought that regular photographing of the house would be welcomed by most tenants - if there is excess wear and tear and the LL doesn't flag it every 3 months the LL can't turn around at the end of the tenancy and keep a deposit for cleaning, the photos/inspections are a benefit to the tenant

djimi

quietsailor wrote: »

I would have thought that regular photographing of the house would be welcomed by most tenants - if there is excess wear and tear and the LL doesn't flag it every 3 months the LL can't turn around at the end of the tenancy and keep a deposit for cleaning, the photos/inspections are a benefit to the tenant

Because my privacy is worth more than the potential couple of hundred quid in cleaning costs.

If I feel I need proof of the state of the property Ill take photos myself!

BostonB

You've got the choice not to rent somewhere with that policy.

Personally I think the inspection should extend to bigger period as the tenancy goes on with no reported problems. If a tenant has been trouble free for 6 months I'd switch to 6 months then 12 etc.

And its not a few weeks its a few months. Not helping your point with such exaggeration.

Solair

I've had two extremely bad experiences with this kind of thing.

1) In Cork - a property management company that kept sending texts 24 hours before an almost unannounced inspection. Then we found they'd actually been in the property without permission or agreement. I walked in one afternoon to find that they were in the house looking at a pump in the hot press.

Even after we moved out, I continued to get texts about 'inspections' for 2 years afterwards despite having told them we were no longer the tenant and perhaps they should be contacting the person who actually lives there!

2) In Dublin, and this was actually really bad, our landlord never inspected the place but had this 'handyman' who carried out maintenance. We phoned the landlord about a couple of faults and they sent out the handyman who would never give any kind of idea when he would arrive. It could be anytime from sort of Monday to Friday.

Where the problem arose was that he let himself in on one occasion while my partner was in the house. She came out of the bathroom (in a towel) saw a guy in the house, locked herself in the bedroom, started screaming and called 999
Gardai arrived etc

The guy then rang me and started ranting and raving about how my g/f was 'an insane (rude word goes here)'.

Then, on a second occasion (maybe 6 months+ after the first incident) he arrived up (again without pressing the intercom or having any prior arrangement) and started pounding on the door to the point he actually damaged the paint on the outside. He'd a really gruff, unintelligible accent and she couldn't understand him. She locked the door from the inside and again called the Gardai thinking some guy was trying to break in.

At this point we actually told the landlord we'd be terminating the lease if it happened again and we were incredibly annoyed with the angry voicemails / references to my g/f being a **** and insane for reacting to a strange man letting himself into the house.
----

I really think there need to be more regulation and just common sense by landlords and agents about how they access properties when people are living in them.

I have no issue with inspections (at reasonable intervals) but, I do expect them to be with proper notice (maybe 7-days) and at an agreed time (which I have always facilitated).

Also, I think agents need to be given clear (legal) rules about what an inspection is i.e. you're looking for property damage.

I've heard stuff like agents lecturing people about having an untidy bedroom where a house was most definitely not being 'abused', rather it was just untidy or they'd gone out to work / college in a big rush and left some clothes lying around.

There's a lot of overstepping the mark goes on and perhaps an assumption that they're taking some kind of role as your rent-a-mammy sometimes.

I'm sure they'd be pretty horrified if AIB, Bank of Ireland, PTSB or whoever their mortgage issuer is decided to send someone around to their house to check if their underpants were in the correct drawer

djimi

BostonB wrote: »

You've got the choice not to rent somewhere with that policy.

Personally I think the inspection should extend to bigger period as the tenancy goes on with no reported problems. If a tenant has been trouble free for 6 months I'd switch to 6 months then 12 etc.

And its not a few weeks its a few months. Not helping your point with such exaggeration.

Its 12 weeks; whichever way you want to say it its too frequent!

And I agree with you; I have no issue with an inspection after the first three months, but if everything is in order with that inspection then there shouldnt be another one until nearer the end of the first year.

Its all well and good saying that you have the choice to rent somewhere else, but that is assuming that the landlord is up front at the beginning about their intentions.

BostonB

What ever way you say it, exaggeration is counter productive in making your point.

Likewise, your assuming the tenant is up front with their intentions. In my experience if a tenancy is going to go bad it doesn't happen in the first 3 months. You need a good 6~ 12 months of good experience before trust is earned. 3 months is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

You seem to look at this from the point that only the LL can act the muppets in these situation. Whereas it can happen on either side of the fence. The cost to the LL if it goes pear shaped could be tens of thousands out of pocket. Would you trust someone with ten's of thousands of your money after 3 months? I doubt it.

djimi

BostonB wrote: »

What ever way you say it, exaggeration is counter productive in making your point.

Likewise, your assuming the tenant is up front with their intentions. In my experience if a tenancy is going to go bad it doesn't happen in the first 3 months. You need a good 6~ 12 months of good experience before trust is earned. 3 months is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

You seem to look at this from the point that only the LL can act the muppets in these situation. Whereas it can happen on either side of the fence. The cost to the LL if it goes pear shaped could be tens of thousands out of pocket. Would you trust someone with ten's of thousands of your money after 3 months? I doubt it.

But you are trusting someone with tens of thousands of your money; thats a risk that is involved in renting any property. Once you decide to rent out a property you are allowing the tenant to make it their home, and as such you do not have the right to be constantly watching over their shoulder. Im not against inspections; I just feel that one every three months is too intrusive. The law allows for a tenant to have quiet enjoyment of a rental property; to me some stranger coming into your home every few weeks/month and taking photographs is not my definition of quiet enjoyment.

There has to be some level of trust on the landlords part, otherwise there is no point in becoming a landlord in the first place. You can not play big brother over the property that you are renting, no matter what the risk involved is. I accept that there are some bad tenants out there, but that is the risk that you take when becoming a landlord. Tenants have the right to feel like they can live in privacy and peace in their home without feeling like their landlord is watching over them the whole time.

BostonB

Its not every few weeks/month. Its 3 months. Its like the whole winter, the whole summer. 3 Months. Jeez :rolleyes:

Unfortunately bad tenants mean inspections are a fact of life in the rental business. As are photos. We didn't arrive at this point for no reason. Something caused this to be needed. Because take a risk approach isn't financially viable.

BostonB

Solair wrote: »

...I have no issue with inspections (at reasonable intervals) but, I do expect them to be with proper notice (maybe 7-days) and at an agreed time (which I have always facilitated).

Also, I think agents need to be given clear (legal) rules about what an inspection is i.e. you're looking for property damage.

I've heard stuff like agents lecturing people about having an untidy bedroom where a house was most definitely not being 'abused', rather it was just untidy or they'd gone out to work / college in a big rush and left some clothes lying around.

There's a lot of overstepping the mark goes on and perhaps an assumption that they're taking some kind of role as your rent-a-mammy sometimes....

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.

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.