Landlord entering without consent

ddartt

Hi everyone,

Have some problem with the landlord and would greatly appreciate the advise on this...

I have been renting the current apartment for just over 3 years. In February 2013 the landlady has informed me informally that the apartment is subject to be sold by the bank due to mortgage issues. Nothing has happened since then. I have advised her that if she needs to show property to the prospective buyers, she can do so, but only at agreed time, with my permission which can be refused at any time.

Last week I was on vacation for 7 days. Upon my return to Ireland I have discovered email from her that in the middle of past week someone will be calling to the property regarding the sale. I did not have an opportunity to reply to the email as I was away.
Upon returning to the apartment on Sunday night I have discovered that the door is locked with 2 locks rather than 1, and I do not have a key for the second lock (and I do not believe I ever had a key for this lock). I got locked out of the property and I called the landlady right away. She informed me that the keys are with the selling agent, she can't get through to her and that she will pay for the locksmith to open the door now. I had an early morning flight to catch so I must get into the apartment.
The locksmith were not able to open the lock unfortunately. When the locksmith person told the landlady he will be breaking the lock, she got angry with him on the phone, and then began shouting at me over phone, saying its all my fault as I had a key and she won't do anything more today. As I mentioned before, I do not recall having a key for this lock, ever. I pointed to her that she accessed the property without my consent and locked this with a lock which wasn't locked before. She said that its her flat and she will do with it whatever she wants. She then stopped replying to the calls and I had to spend the night at my friends place and to cancel my flight, loosing 380EUR for tickets + 50EUR for locksmith callout charge.

At the moment I managed to contact the selling agent and get inside the property. I intend to move out to find an alternative accommodation. However, I am not happy with either landlord or selling agent accessing the property in the meantime, as I have a fear for my personal security and security of my belongings.

So the questions are....
a) If I can refuse entry to the property (apart from emergency circumstances) and report any instances of illegal entry as a trespass to the Garda? What is the appropriate way to communicate this to both the landlord and the agent?
b) If I can recover the money lost due to this situation with the lock?
c) What is the appropriate notice period by landlord and tenant in case of lease lasting over 3, but under 4 years?
d) Anything else I should/could do?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Lantus

It may be that the bank have not authorised her to rent the property out. In that case you have no rights whatsoever if the bank repossess. I know of a couple recently that got 2 weeks to get out by the bank.

If she is doing it above board then the bank will know plus she will be registered with the PRTB (check.) Also you will have a signed lease and after 3 years you have some fairly well defined rights. Was the 2nd lock always there or was it added?

ddartt

Hi Lantus,

Thanks for reply!

I have a signed lease which was initially signed through the letting agency that managed the letting process, however the actual lease is managed by the landlord. Can this be an indication she is compliant with her mortgage terms and there is a valid lease?

2nd lock was always there, but I had no idea it was even working. When we were shown into the property the only lock that was used was the main lock, and I cannot recall even having any other keys.

MarkR

I think that you've been treated badly in this case, more in what happened after the door got locked. Did they know you where away for a week? Is email the only point of contact your landlady had for you?

This might help.

http://www.threshold.ie/advice/tenancy-issues/entry-without-permission/

Ring them up at threshold, I'm sure they can offer better advice than anyone here.

D3PO

id raise a dispute to the PRTB I were you OP for illegal entry. The landlady should be refunding you for the locksmith charge and Id imagine the PRTB would at minimum be awarding you Pro rata your rent back for the day you missed.

The flight costs however Im not so sure on. I mean it makes no logical sense to me that the locked door prevented you getting your flight as you said you just returned to Ireland so therefore had your passport on you and had at least 7 days worth of luggage in your possession also.

Personally Id look at the claim you were out of pocket for that flight very dubiously.

ddartt

Already wrote to them, but seeking additional opinions as well, maybe someone has had a similar case..

She did not know I'm away for a week, but she has my mobile number as well, which was always active. I also made it clear to her that I need to get in the flat today, as I had an early flight next morning (the one I've had to cancel in the end) and most of the stuff I need is inside.

djimi

The only option you really have is to take a case with the PRTB against the landlord, which by the sounds of it you would almost certainly win (not sure about the cost of the missed flights), but will take months to resolve.

syklops

I would have told the locksmith to break the lock and let me in, and send the bill to the landlady. Then I would have got on my flight and sent the landlady an email stating that I was vacating the flat and give her the reasons. Assuming there has been no damage done to the flat I would also be telling her that if I did not receive my deposit back I would be seeing her in court.

I doubt you will get the money you lost back.

You can't 'ban' anyone from entering your flat.

Appropriate notice period is in your case I think 90 days.

Presumably your landlady is under pressure from the bank, but that does not give someone an excuse to treat you the way she did. As a result she is losing a rent paying tenant. Her own fault.

If you know which bank she is with, you might CC them on the letter/email, because it sounds like she doesn't own the flat, they do.

Pawwed Rig

I am agreeing with others here in that I am confused about why you didn't take the flight?

the_syco

I'm thinking the tickets for said flight were in the apartment, and as the OP couldn't get into the apartment, they couldn't get the tickets.

Pawwed Rig

Even so and assuming that they could not be printed again from online, get the locksmith to bust the lock and sort out the expense later. It would surely be the lesser of the two expenses and would have more of a justification were the LL to claim damages later.

D3PO

the_syco wrote: »

I'm thinking the tickets for said flight were in the apartment, and as the OP couldn't get into the apartment, they couldn't get the tickets.

all flights these days are either E Tickets that can be reprinted from anywhere or can be reprinted from the airlines desk in the airport.

That would be no reason not to get the flight. It makes no sense at all not to get the flight and Im not buying the I couldn't fly I was locked out thing.

Throw away a 350 quid flight when it would cost a lot less to have the locksmith break in and change the lock at a lot less expense .....


or throw away a 350 quid flight because you didn't want to pay whatever 20 quid or whatnot admin charge to get a ticket reprinted by the airline.

If something doesn't sound right it usually isn't. I cant see any valid reason why them being locked out prevented them getting the flight if they really wanted to.

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

all flights these days are either E Tickets that can be reprinted from anywhere or can be reprinted from the airlines desk in the airport.

That would be no reason not to get the flight. It makes no sense at all not to get the flight and Im not buying the I couldn't fly I was locked out thing.

Throw away a 350 quid flight when it would cost a lot less to have the locksmith break in and change the lock at a lot less expense .....


or throw away a 350 quid flight because you didn't want to pay whatever 20 quid or whatnot admin charge to get a ticket reprinted by the airline.

If something doesn't sound right it usually isn't. I cant see any valid reason why them being locked out prevented them getting the flight if they really wanted to.

Are you in the habit of taking off on a flight without bringing any luggage whatsoever? Its fair to assume that several essential items (you know, things like clothes, passports etc...) were probably locked in the property...

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

Are you in the habit of taking off on a flight without bringing any luggage whatsoever? Its fair to assume that several essential items (you know, things like clothes, passports etc...) were probably locked in the property...

Did you not read the opening post.

OP was locked out after returning to Ireland. Therefore the had their passport and also a min of 7 days of clothes with them. So all the essentials.

Besides which like I said the cost of the locksmith to break in would be a lot less than having to rebook a 350 euro flight so why would you do the latter at more cost ...

doesn't make any sense and I think you would be hard pressed to claim compensation for the lost flight with the information presented thus far.

syklops

djimi wrote: »

Are you in the habit of taking off on a flight without bringing any luggage whatsoever? Its fair to assume that several essential items (you know, things like clothes, passports etc...) were probably locked in the property...

As has already been pointed out, the OP was out of the country and returned to this situation so would have things like their passport on them. Most other things one could get at their destination.

D3PO is right, it does sound weird.

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

Did you not read the opening post.

OP was locked out after returning to Ireland. Therefore the had their passport and also a min of 7 days of clothes with them. So all the essentials.

Besided which like I said the cost of the locksmith to break in would be a lot less than having to rebook a 350 euro flight so why would you do the latter at more cost ...

So they had a suitcase full of dirty luggage and might or might not have had their passport (its not necessarily a requirement depending on where they were travelling to/from). Hardly ideal way to be travelling off again, is it?

I agree that breaking the lock would have been the better option. But just heading back off and not dealing with it is not something that many people would do.

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

So they had a suitcase full of dirty luggage and might or might not have had their passport (its not necessarily a requirement depending on where they were travelling to/from). Hardly ideal way to be travelling off again, is it?

I agree that breaking the lock would have been the better option. But just heading back off and not dealing with it is not something that many people would do.

I never said either was an ideal scenario but if I'm a PRTB adjucator looking at weather the loss of the flight is a reasonable expense to incur then Id say no the OP's actions would have caused that.

A hotel for the night the OP was locked out now that would be a reasonable expense to expense the OP to be refunded for, as would the cost of any locksmith work.

The missed flight, Im not buying that this can reasonably be attributed to the situation as its described.

ddartt

I've had the stuff I need inside the appt - I was going on the bike trip and had all the gear inside - there was no point going without this.

Having said this, on a hindsight I should've told locksmith to force the entry as that'd be lesser expense - but I was afraid what would happen when I'm away with the landlord being that aggressive - so not very comfortable leaving the appt for a week like this.

With the flights I understand its not a clear argument - I am more concerned how to deal with them not accessing the property again, and how to make sure I get the deposit back considering the situation with the landlord and the bank?

D3PO

ddartt wrote: »

With the flights I understand its not a clear argument - I am more concerned how to deal with them not accessing the property again, and how to make sure I get the deposit back considering the situation with the landlord and the bank?

Obviously the first port of call is communication to see if this can be resolved amicable however it doesn't seem it will be given the LL's behavior thus far.

Which leaves you with one of two options I don't agree with this solution but it may be the only option given how your LL has behaved so far without a long drawn out protracted PRTB dispute.

Give your written notice, don't pay next months rent and move out when the deposit and cost of the locksmith has been eaten up by the non payment of rent.

two wrongs don't make a right but if its me I want to do whats right by me in that situation first and foremost

or you could abide by the laws pay your rent give notice, probably not get your deposit back and have to raise a dispute with the PRTB for your deposit and the locksmith expense and wait a year plus for a determination and then maybe then the LL will return you your money without you having to take legal action to enforce judgement of the determination order.

Murt10

OP was abroad on a holiday, possibly a sun holiday.

The second trip may have been business. They would look sweet turning up to a meeting in their dirty holiday clothes.

Go to the Gardai and report her for breaking and entering and theft.

handlemaster

do youknow the agent inform them. no entry without prior approval from you which is normal

Victor

syklops wrote: »

You can't 'ban' anyone from entering your flat.

So, can I come around to your place with all my mates with cans and spliffs (we're not giving you any)?

Your home is your castle, short of an emergency (no evidence of this), people are only allowed in with permission.

D3PO wrote: »

Did you not read the opening post.

OP was locked out after returning to Ireland. Therefore the had their passport and also a min of 7 days of clothes with them. So all the essentials.

Besides which like I said the cost of the locksmith to break in would be a lot less than having to rebook a 350 euro flight so why would you do the latter at more cost ...

doesn't make any sense and I think you would be hard pressed to claim compensation for the lost flight with the information presented thus far.

I think this is a largely irrelevant side issue and off-topic.

After spending a week on a beach, would you wear the same (used) clothes to a business meeting?

Moderator

D3PO

Victor wrote: »

So, can I come around to your place with all my mates with cans and spliffs (we're not giving you any)?

Your home is your castle, short of an emergency (no evidence of this), people are only allowed in with permission.

I think this is a largely irrelevant side issue and off-topic.

After spending a week on a beach, would you wear the same (used) clothes to a business meeting?

Moderator

Its not off topic. If it was off topic the OP wouldn't have mentioned it. Its perfectly legitimate to discuss if the OP would be entitled to the cost of their flights as part of any compensation from the LL regarding the matter.

You also have no idea that the OP was on a beach or that they were due to go to a business meeting (which they were not as outlined by the fact they replied advising otherwise)

I know your not supposed to respond to a Mod but you responded with a question which in my eyes invites a response to said question.

joeguevara

D3PO wrote: »

Its not off topic. If it was off topic the OP wouldn't have mentioned it. Its perfectly legitimate to discuss if the OP would be entitled to the cost of their flights as part of any compensation from the LL regarding the matter.

You also have no idea that the OP was on a beach or that they were due to go to a business meeting (which they were not as outlined by the fact they replied advising otherwise)

I know your not supposed to respond to a Mod but you responded with a question which in my eyes invites a response to said question.

I think the OP said that they were going on a bike trip and the bike and gear was inside.

ABajaninCork

Does it really matter? The OP was going away. Whatever he needed was inside his home. The home he pays rent for. The landlady locked him out. ILLEGALLY. He lost his holiday/business trip whatever it was.

IMO, he is fully entitled to take a case with the PRTB AND take out a Small Claims for the loss of his flight tickets. I bet he would win...

beauf

The LL should have broken the lock. Its effectively an illegal eviction otherwise.

The OP would probably win their case with the PRTB and I expect costs incurred due to the eviction. Which may cover the flights even if it doesn't specifically mention the flights.

The tenant should keep all their phone records. It would help with proving the LL was uncontactable.

djimi

ABajaninCork wrote: »

take out a Small Claims for the loss of his flight tickets

I dont think small claims will entertain matters in relation to tenancy disputes.

gaius c

D3PO wrote: »

Did you not read the opening post.

OP was locked out after returning to Ireland. Therefore the had their passport and also a min of 7 days of clothes with them. So all the essentials.

Besides which like I said the cost of the locksmith to break in would be a lot less than having to rebook a 350 euro flight so why would you do the latter at more cost ...

doesn't make any sense and I think you would be hard pressed to claim compensation for the lost flight with the information presented thus far.

So you get back from your week in the Canaries wearing your silly sombrero hat and the following day, you fly out to Hamburg for an intensive week of meeting with clients but the same set of clothes will do you for both?

You don't know the circumstances of either trip so suggesting that he/she brings a pile of dirty clothes with them on the second trip is beyond ludicrous.
Edit: I see that the OP has clarified the situation.

gaius c

ddartt wrote: »

I've had the stuff I need inside the appt - I was going on the bike trip and had all the gear inside - there was no point going without this.

Having said this, on a hindsight I should've told locksmith to force the entry as that'd be lesser expense - but I was afraid what would happen when I'm away with the landlord being that aggressive - so not very comfortable leaving the appt for a week like this.

With the flights I understand its not a clear argument - I am more concerned how to deal with them not accessing the property again, and how to make sure I get the deposit back considering the situation with the landlord and the bank?

Probably the wiser call in the circumstances.
Is there a reason the landlady was unavailable to come to the apartment and unlock it for you? Living too far away?

syklops

So, can I come around to your place with all my mates with cans and spliffs (we're not giving you any)?

Your home is your castle, short of an emergency (no evidence of this), people are only allowed in with permission.

I can not let you and your mates into my flat. I can keep it securely locked The OP was asking if he can stop the landlord who has keys, into the flat when he is not there, and I said you can't, which you can't without some major legal fidgy-widgyness.

Pawwed Rig

syklops wrote: »

and I said you can't, which you can't without some major legal fidgy-widgyness.

Not really though as it is breaking and entering. A call to the Guards is hardly major legal fidgy-widgyness.

the_syco

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Not really though as it is breaking and entering. A call to the Guards is hardly major legal fidgy-widgyness.

If the landlord entered using the keys, surely it's more "illegally entering" as opposed to "breaking and entering"?

djimi

The Gardai are unlikely to get involved either unless there is the threat of violence.

Pawwed Rig

the_syco wrote: »

If the landlord entered using the keys, surely it's more "illegally entering" as opposed to "breaking and entering"?

I am not sure what the difference is but won't argue with you about it:D

syklops

the_syco wrote: »

If the landlord entered using the keys, surely it's more "illegally entering" as opposed to "breaking and entering"?

Its not even illegally entering because the landlord owns the building

runawaybishop

syklops wrote: »

Its not even illegally entering because the landlord owns the building

A landlord cannot enter rented accommodation legally except in an emergency or with express permission. That was an illegal entry.

marwelie

My understanding is that as long as the landlord doesn't enter the premises without your permission they can do what they like, they own the house.

Landlord access is one of the most important rights you have as a landlord. You or the agent representing you have the legal right to enter your property at reasonable times of the day to carry out repairs or to inspect the property. You need to give 24 hours’ notice in writing in order to inspect the property, and it is also useful to make sure you have arrangements about access for getting repairs done set out in the tenancy agreement. Although tenants have the right to be left in peace, it is your right and duty as a landlord to keep the property in good condition and make any necessary repairs. It is also in your interests to inspect the property every few months to make sure everything is still in good condition. Although tenants might not always find this convenient, if you give them the correct notice there should be no complaints. If the tenant will not give you access then you should seek legal advice immediately.

runawaybishop

marwelie wrote: »

My understanding is that as long as the landlord doesn't enter your private space (i.e your bedroom) without your permission they can do what they like, they own the house.

http://www.threshold.ie/advice/tenancy-issues/entry-without-permission/

Unless there is an agreement to the contrary or it is an emergency, a landlord should not call to the property unannounced or enter the property without your permission.


Op: report to prtb.

djimi

marwelie wrote: »

My understanding is that as long as the landlord doesn't enter your private space (i.e your bedroom) without your permission they can do what they like, they own the house.

Only in shared accommodation. When you rent the entirety of the property the landlord has no legal right to enter without prior consent.

runawaybishop

marwelie wrote: »

Landlord access is one of the most important rights you have as a landlord. You or the agent representing you have the legal right to enter your property at reasonable times of the day to carry out repairs or to inspect the property. You need to give 24 hours’ notice in writing in order to inspect the property, and it is also useful to make sure you have arrangements about access for getting repairs done set out in the tenancy agreement. Although tenants have the right to be left in peace, it is your right and duty as a landlord to keep the property in good condition and make any necessary repairs. It is also in your interests to inspect the property every few months to make sure everything is still in good condition. Although tenants might not always find this convenient, if you give them the correct notice there should be no complaints. If the tenant will not give you access then you should seek legal advice immediately.

There is no legal minimum notice, it must be agreed by the landlord and the resident and must be reasonable. This doesn't mean you can wander in when you wish without permission.

Peanut2011

runawaybishop wrote: »

Unless there is an agreement to the contrary or it is an emergency, a landlord should not call to the property unannounced or enter the property without your permission.

They did not enter unannounced. As per OP e-mail was sent to him.

OP did you have "Out of Office" notification? Landlord informed you while ago they will possibly be selling the apartment and will need access to it from time to time.

They than sent you the e-mail. Could be viewed just as much your own fault for not reading e-mails or informing landlord you would be out of the country seeing how you know they might want access.

Before people jump up, not saying landlord has dealt with this case appropriately but just consider above as well.

runawaybishop

Peanut2011 wrote: »

They did not enter unannounced. As per OP e-mail was sent to him.

OP did you have "Out of Office" notification? Landlord informed you while ago they will possibly be selling the apartment and will need access to it from time to time.

They than sent you the e-mail. Could be viewed just as much your own fault for not reading e-mails or informing landlord you would be out of the country seeing how you know they might want access.

Before people jump up, not saying landlord has dealt with this case appropriately but just consider above as well.

There was no consent.

djimi

marwelie wrote: »

Landlord access is one of the most important rights you have as a landlord. You or the agent representing you have the legal right to enter your property at reasonable times of the day to carry out repairs or to inspect the property. You need to give 24 hours’ notice in writing in order to inspect the property, and it is also useful to make sure you have arrangements about access for getting repairs done set out in the tenancy agreement. Although tenants have the right to be left in peace, it is your right and duty as a landlord to keep the property in good condition and make any necessary repairs. It is also in your interests to inspect the property every few months to make sure everything is still in good condition. Although tenants might not always find this convenient, if you give them the correct notice there should be no complaints. If the tenant will not give you access then you should seek legal advice immediately.

Did you find this on Irish Landlord by any chance? They make a big deal about the landlords right to access but seem keen to brush over the required notice. To me, the tenants right to privacy is one of, if not the, most important elements of renting, and the landlord should only seek access to the property when it is absolutely essential.

djimi

Peanut2011 wrote: »

They did not enter unannounced. As per OP e-mail was sent to him.

OP did you have "Out of Office" notification? Landlord informed you while ago they will possibly be selling the apartment and will need access to it from time to time.

They than sent you the e-mail. Could be viewed just as much your own fault for not reading e-mails or informing landlord you would be out of the country seeing how you know they might want access.

Before people jump up, not saying landlord has dealt with this case appropriately but just consider above as well.

The landlord cannot just announce that they will be showing up at a certain time and expect access, not they can they assume that silence is a form of consent. Unless the landlord has the express permission of the tenant they have no legal right to enter the property.

foggy_lad

gaius c wrote: »

Probably the wiser call in the circumstances.
Is there a reason the landlady was unavailable to come to the apartment and unlock it for you? Living too far away?

According to the op the landlady didn't have a key but the letting agent had the key for the second lock. It was the landlady that asked for this second lock to be locked though even though it had been left open when they illegally entered the property.

ABajaninCork

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Does it really matter? The OP was going away. Whatever he needed was inside his home. The home he pays rent for. The landlady locked him out. ILLEGALLY. He lost his holiday/business trip whatever it was.

IMO, he is fully entitled to take a case with the PRTB AND take out a Small Claims for the loss of his flight tickets. I bet he would win...

djimi wrote: »

I dont think small claims will entertain matters in relation to tenancy disputes.

What I meant was this: Absolutely a PRTB case should be raised for the illegal entry. A separate case should then be raised as a result of the OP's losses for the holiday. AFAIK, the PRTB won't entertain the loss of the holiday. But I see no reason why the landlady should get away with what she did; neither should the OP lose money because of it.

djimi

ABajaninCork wrote: »

What I meant was this: Absolutely a PRTB case should be raised for the illegal entry. A separate case should then be raised as a result of the OP's losses for the holiday. AFAIK, the PRTB won't entertain the loss of the holiday. But I see no reason why the landlady should get away with what she did; neither should the OP lose money because of it.

I dont think the small claims court will have anything to do with a tenancy dispute at all, which in this case the loss of the holiday would fall under (its not an issue between the OP and the vendor of the holiday), but the OP should definitely check it out.

beauf

ABajaninCork wrote: »

What I meant was this: Absolutely a PRTB case should be raised for the illegal entry. A separate case should then be raised as a result of the OP's losses for the holiday. AFAIK, the PRTB won't entertain the loss of the holiday. But I see no reason why the landlady should get away with what she did; neither should the OP lose money because of it.

I would assume the cost of the holiday would be rolled up under any costs incurred due to locking the tenant out. These costs were avoidable if the LL just got the 2nd lock removed, and remained in contact with the tenant.