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

[tyler80]

Maybe, but that doesn't help the OP does it

So Knittedbreast, you're perfectly within your rights to refuse access. The landlord/agent cannot enter without your consent. Clearly others see differently

If you still doubt this maybe this thread at Landlordzone forums will reassure you.

[WelliesinJune]

Better to disagree than give incorrect advice. My view remains that in terms of marketing there is nothing statutory so you have to rely on the contract. One visit to take photos is not disturbing your right to quiet enjoyment of the property. Even in terms of repairs you can refuse but only with a valid reason is not just a blanket refusal because you don't like the idea of your LL entering your property.

[WelliesinJune]

Sorry should have read "i.e." not "is". Stupid iPhone.

[tyler80]

I am not giving incorrect advice.

A 2 minute google would confirm this ten times over.

[WelliesinJune]

What that the tenant can give a blanket refusal? Don't think so.

[WelliesinJune]

www.themovechannel.com/guides/Letting/Being_a_landlord/Landlord_and_tenant_rights

[tyler80]

The tenant only has to grant reasonable access. Access that is generally considered reasonable relates to repair and periodic inspections. It does not relate to taking photos, conducting viewings etc. When you sign a tenancy agreement you get exclusive use of the property. Exclusive use means only gaining access with the express permission of the occupants, the same as any homeowner.

If an arrangement for viewings is written into the contract then in theory refusing viewings is breach of contract. But the landlord would have to show that they suffered a loss because of this. Very difficult to prove as it is hard to show that a void period would have been avoided if viewings had been allowed. Ten people could have viewed but doesn't mean any of them would have rented the property.

[WelliesinJune]

Disagree completely. Think reasonable access does relate to marketing. Or thousands of LLs across the country would have a problem. And if arrangement for viewings written into contract LL would not have to show anything - tenant broke contract so burden of proof would be on them.

[tyler80]

Thousands of landlords across the country don't know the law, and as we see in the OP rely on saying things such as

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

Whether or not you think that the tenant has the right to refuse access indefinitely you can surely see that the above statement is incorrect as entry can only be obtained with the tenant's permission, anything else is illegal.

[WelliesinJune]

Eh? Are you saying the majority of LLs are acting illegally based on this one comment?

But yes, the statement in isolation is dubious. However it depends on the contract which the OP signed.

[tyler80]

No, I'm basing that on personal experience, with both private landlords and ARLA registered letting agents, frequent incorrect 'advice' provided by people who are landlords on internet forums (not exclusively mumsnet!), experience of friends in rented accommodation, work in housing for a local authority etc.