To have to let them in?

[knittedbreast]

I move house soon, its a rented property and they want to come round and take photos of the house to market it.

They already have pics of the house, i reminded them. They have "updated their systems" and the old pics wont fit due to pixel resolution.

I said, its my home and im not comfortable having you take pics with my things in , they said we can enter your house anyway we only have to give 24hrs notice.

I dont want them taking pics of my things.

Basically do I actually have to let them in?

Thanks

[NadiaWadia]

There is a lot of ignorance on this thread. As Goodadvice says, no you don't have to let them in, unless its an emergency which is obviously not the case.

Write back and say you refuse permission. If they let themselves in without your permission, that's illegal.

[Lucyinthepie]

The other bit of ignorance is advising Op to be careful in case the landlord or agent decides to withhold the deposit. As long as your deposit is registered with the TDS that is not going to happen.
Sadly, even nice landlords who look after tenants really well sometimes can't do anything to show their property until after their tenant moves out.

[TheHumancatapult]

Im going for doing the legal minimum allowed for my LL

while not saying all LL are the same .Mine is a complete and utter bastard wont fix my boiler till back from his holiday in just under 3 weeks as he is a *qualifed plumber amongst other thinsg ) so thats no hotwater or heating again!!!.

I am running on 3 plug in heaters for me and 4dc and i use wheelchair to so can not get warm and clean well boil a kettle anyone .

And have pictures of teh day i moved in of the stuf fnot done ( stained carpets missing ceiling ) also emails where i asked him nicely to come fix the shower tahst never worked !!!

so if he thinks im going to give him more than the legal amount of notice and benc over backwards he can dam well whistle .

so ty for who ever said i do not have to let them in

*disclaimer i recognise not all LL are like this

[hairylights]

Nope. I refused to have my personal home displayed on the Internet. They advertised it without photos.

[Julesnobrain]

Are you aware that you can legally withhold a portion of the rent for non working items? For no hot water I would consider withholding 25%. document your first request to get it fixed.

[TheHumancatapult]

Jules

I was told I could not the first time it went think were on the 6th or 7th time in 18 months and not talking odd days more weeks last tine I got environmental health involved


I don't subscribe to every LL is a bastard but mine is but I'm biding my time he shall get his come uppance when I Leave as enviromenral health will be on him as if he ever wants to let it be new tenancy and they will hit him for some major works before he can let it

Oil tank needs bunding bit to go that he has to move it and them new installation so it then can not be resitted in same place

And he tried to let this place for 2 years till j came along and was desperate

Things go to plan 30 th Jan I will give him 4 weeks
Notice that I shall be leaving

[OddBoots]

Could you find out what format they need the pictures in then take the pictures yourself? You would need to take them in a way that would sell the house - not highlighting faults, but you could move your furniture around to keep things out of shot if you wanted.

[WelliesinJune]

You do have to let them in - 24 hours is standard notice in most contracts, and this will override any common law.

[tyler80]

That's incorrect WelliesinJune, the right to quiet enjoyment overrides whatever is written in the contract.

The tenant is allowed to refuse access where there is not an emergency if they so desire.

When the house we were living in was being sold, I said I would prefer if they didn't come to take photos and provided photos of the main living spaces myself. I was also really accommodating with letting the Estate Agent (not the letting agent) have a key so they could conduct viewings whilst we were on holiday. Bearing in mind that we didn't particularly want to move I thought we were really reasonable, didn't stop the sods trying to claim all sorts from the deposit though. (Contested through the TDS and deposit returned but it was a whole load of hassle I could have done without) Really wish I'd told them they weren't getting any access until we'd left now.

[WelliesinJune]

No it doesn't. The right to quiet enjoyment is a very generalised clause and difficult to prove. It applies more in cases of harassment (which would have to be documented and proven in court). It is a standard clause in most legal contracts but tbh it doesn't really mean anything. A tenant would have a near impossible job to refuse a landlord access based on the right of quiet enjoyment (and it really wouldn't be worth the legal fees). Remember, it is the landlord's property. Legally they have a right to carry out repairs or attend an emergency with 24 hours' notice. There is also more than likely something written into the tenancy agreement about marketing the property/other reasonable access, with 24 hours notice. This overrides common law. But, if there isn't anything in the contract like this (highly unlikely), access can be refused.

OP am happy to have a look at your tenancy agreement if this helps.

[tyler80]

You cannot contract out a statutory entitlement which is what the right to quiet enjoyment is.

Landlord requests access for photos (i.e. not for repairs/emergency), tenant refuses. Not a whole lot the landlord can do, they cannot demand access.

[tyler80]

Landlord's property, tenants home.

[hairylights]

Tyler is right

[WelliesinJune]

Tyler, thinking about it, you may be right. I don't think quiet enjoyment is a statutory right as such - although I'm thinking it would be an implied term.

However, there is more than likely something in the tenancy agreement about marketing/other access to the property with 24 hours notice. And I think the tenant would have a difficult job proving in court that this was a breach of their right to quiet enjoyment.

[tyler80]

Why would they be in court?

The landlord gives 24 hours written notice, the tenant refuses entry/permission. You think the landlord would go to court to gain entry?

[DeWe]

If tenants start saying that LL have to leave a month between tenacies so they can do photos/viewings etc. when it's empty, then LLs will use that to up the rent, and renters will end up paying more, surely.

[WelliesinJune]

Okay, you don't have to agree but could be liable for court costs if you are unreasonable about refusal.


www.privaterentedservice.co.uk/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=130&Itemid=142

[WelliesinJune]

Tyler, no idea, LL may well do if can't gain access for what I see is a perfectly reasonable request.

[WelliesinJune]

DeWe, LLs will lose a month of rental income in the meantime ...

[tyler80]

That link is talking about repairs and inspections. In the OPs case they want to come in to take photos, this is neither repair or inspection.

[tyler80]

"they said we can enter your house anyway we only have to give 24hrs notice"

It is this part of their request that isn't reasonable. Stating that they will do something that is actually illegal if you don't comply.

[WelliesinJune]

Yes but there is nothing statutory re taking photos/marketing, so it would likely be implied. It is not unreasonable access, given there would likely be a term in the tenancy agreement too.

[tyler80]

The right to quiet enjoyment includes the right to refuse access. If notice is given and denied the landlord/agent has no right to enter the property. The landlord cannot insist on access. If a landlord/agent gives written notice and the tenant refuses and the landlord enters without consent that is illegal. Yet knittedbreast's letting agent say this is what they will do!

[tyler80]

Giving your landlord access when necessary - Shelter

[WelliesinJune]

I'm pretty sure it would still be construed as unreasonable access if repeated refusal is given, particularly taking into account the contract. Let's agree to disagree.