Tenants’ rights AIBU - LL not giving us notice for people repairing flat

[LimaLemur]

I live in a rented flatshare with a live-our landlord at the moment.

Earlier, I answered the doorbell and it was a plumber coming to have a look at the flat. We’ve reported issues with the plumbing in the flat to the landlord several times, and the plumber’s visited before.

However, the LL didn’t give us any notice about this visit (and often hasn’t about previous visits either from prospective tenants - people move in and out of the flatshare every few months - or from people coming to do repairs in the flat).

In the contract for our flat, it says the LL has to give us 24 hours’ notice before anyone enters the flat, although she’s only given us this much notice once or twice. We’ve mentioned this to her before, and she’s basically said that she doesn’t care and that we can move out if we don’t like it.

Anyway, we found out from the plumber that he has a key to the flat, so can let himself in whenever, and none of our rooms have lockable doors (the LL came and made us give our room keys to her).

What are our rights in this situation if a stranger can let themselves into the flat whenever?

The crucial point here is do the tenants have one contract between (with joint and several liability) or, as it sounds, does each have an individual contract.? If you all have individual contracts then the LL or his representative can enter the common parts at any time without giving notice. The LL only needs to give notice to enter individual rooms. This is where the 'quiet enjoyment' clause comes in - this doesn't apply to the common parts.

While it would be nice and polite for the LL to give notice it is not an obligation and you have no grounds to make a complaint to any authorities.

We’ve each got individual contracts, thecatneuterer.

There you go then. It's not harassment. She is within her rights and your fellow tenants are correct. I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm just explaining the law.

Your rooms should ideally have locks though. But that's something you should have insisted on before you moved in. That doesn't change the 'common parts' situation though.

Thanks thecatneuterer.

Re: insisting on locks, I had a lock on my door, and a key, when I moved in (we all moved in at different times).

A few months ago, our doors got replaced so they could be fire-proof. Although the handyman who replaced the doors fitted locks on them and gave us keys, the LL made us give her the keys. A couple of the housemates made copies of the keys.

Re: keeping the keys, my LL sent me this email when I insisted on keeping the key when the doors were replaced:

‘I do understand your concerns. I would suggest you getting a safe box to safe guard your valuables.

If I could provide you with a system whereby you could lock the door from outside but not from inside I would happily agree for you to keep the key.

However, I have been told that the rooms cannot have the facility to be located from inside in case of an emergency situation.
The room was rented to and accepted by you without the key.’ (Not true as my room had a key in the lock at the time, but I didn’t press this point as didn’t want to piss off LL).

My concern is, as we don’t have locks on our doors, how can we stop people that the LL allows to enter the flat (or the LL herself) from coming into our rooms without our knowledge when we’re not there? They can go into common areas in the flat, but how can we stop them (or know) if they go into our rooms without our knowledge?

Ah, OK. Well firstly she wasn't obliged to fit fire doors at all as it's a flat (unless your Council has some particularly draconian rules), so it's a plus that this has been done.

And she is correct that houses and flats in multiple occupation are not allowed to have doors that are opened by key FROM THE INSIDE. This applies equally to external doors (front door in your case). In this situation a thumb turn lock should be fitted. This is locked from a key from the outside but can be unlocked by turning a latch on the inside. They obviously fitted the wrong locks to the fire doors when they were put in. It's very easy to change locks to thumb turn ones. Just slide out the barrel and replace with a thumb turn barrel. I would suggest she does this.

I agree you should have locks. That doesn't alter her right to enter the common parts or allow other people to enter and probably you are are more risk from the other tenants than from workmen. Either way though you should have a lock but I'm not one hundred per cent sure of whether you can legally insist. If I get a minute I might do some research.

However you can remove the lock yourself and replace it with a thumb turn one (just unscrew the barrel and take it to a lock shop and ask them to give you an identical thumb turn one). You can inform her you plan to do this and she can't really refuse as it will comply with regulations and you don't currently have a working lock.

Here you are, it appears you do have to have working locks:

www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2014/11/11/do-house-shares-have-to-have-locks-on-the-doors/

interesting you share house but have own rooms?this may make things a bit different - landlord has to get permission to enter your room but (apparently) not common areas
www.creditladder.co.uk/blog/landlord-access-permission

You are getting some good and some not so good advice here. I would recommend contacting Shelter as they have a good handle on these issues. Mumwons link is a good one.
Plus, your landlady sounds like a jerk. You have my sympathy!
Make sure you take dated photographs of the property when you move out in case she suddenly remembers about that priceless Ming Vase of hers you broke...

Thanks again, everyone.

The interesting thing is, catneuterer, the locks on these newly replaced fire-proof doors are thumb-turn locks.

It seems that the LL is not allowing us to have keys to these locks (even though they are thumb-turn locks) because we can lock the doors from the inside.

(The reason why we have fire-proof doors is because the council required the LL to do this and said they would fine her if she didn’t do this within a set number of months - I think because of regulations brought in after the Grenfell Tower fire. She replaced the doors at the last possible minute.)

(Re: the locks on our bedroom doors, the LL says in the email I mentioned above that ‘If I could provide you with a system whereby you could lock the door from outside but not from inside I would happily agree for you to keep the key.‘ Surely all locks can be locked from the inside and the outside, though? So I don’t understand the logic of her decision to take our keys - and neither did my flatmates didn’t understand either. We were too tired to argue with her though as she gets very agressive and some of us were worried about kicked out of the property. We actually phoned the Shelter helpline, who confirmed we weren’t obliged to give the LL our keys, but we were so worried she’d kick us out).

Interestingly, I’ve also found this online about consumer rights:

Limited offers

Falsely stating that a product will only be available for a very limited time, or that it will only be available on particular terms for a very limited time, in order to elicit an immediate decision and deprive consumers of sufficient opportunity or time to make an informed choice.

Pressure selling

Creating the impression that the consumer cannot leave the premises until a contract is formed.

When I viewed the flat, the LL said that if I wanted to move in, I had to pay her £200 in cash so she could take the property off the site she was advertising it on. She also did the same to at least 2 of my current flatmates (one of whom viewed the flat on the same night as me).

I didn’t know at the time that this was illegal, but it was pretty dodgy. I was desperate to find somewhere to live though so I accepted it.

I’m not sure how to prove this apart from have my flatmate to support me (and I’ve also got confirmation in an email from my LL, sent to me the day after I paid the £200, that she has received £200 in cash as part of the deposit).

Corna, absolutely, good idea. My flat mates and I have taken lots of photos of the condition of the flat over the time we’ve lived here and I also save all emails relating to the flat.

None of us signed an inventory so I don’t think the LL can withhold our deposit on the grounds of us damaging anything listed in an inventory.

I'm pretty sure the pressure selling thing doesn't apply to renting rooms - only to products/services. Especially as there is only one room/flat/house available (exactly like the one you are looking at) and it is generally the case that the first suitable person who puts down a deposit gets it. So ignore all that stuff you've just found - it doesn't apply.

Thumb turn locks can't be locked with a key from the inside. If she means the problem is that you can lock them without a key from the inside then she has either misunderstood the legislation or is using it as an excuse - but I can't imagine what her motive would be for that.

I would go back to her and say 'you've taken advice' on the lock thing - I'm sure if you google enough you can find the legislation and point out that thumb turn locks are legal in this situation and that it is illegal to deprive you of locks as you are in an HMO (house/flat in multiple occupation). However if you really want to stay there then it is up to you how much of a fuss you want to make.

Received this email below about the plumber from my LL earlier today My flat mates and I were all surprised to receive it.

The plumber, in fact, mentioned to us when he came to do the works that evening that he found it difficult to work with the LL. We’re not sure, obviously, but we think he may have chose to stop working with the LL as he finds her difficult to work with.

Email from LL:

“Just to let you know my trusted plumber who sorted out the plumbing came to collect his payment and he informed me that he would no longer serve the flat in light of the rude and unpleasant treatment he met with on his visit.

In his view, he was going the extra mile, when he found he had finished his work early to see if he could complete the job he could not complete earlier in the flat as he had to get a small part.

As he said, he was aware he had not given notice and therefore he was prepared and would have understood if the resident(s) would have denied him entry if they felt it was not a convenient for them.

But he did not expect to be treated as a common criminal, especially as he had been there before and the resident(s) knew about the work he had to complete.

Please note this is for your information only and hopefully for your comprehension.

Please do not feel obliged to respond on this as these are the plumber's sentiments and I do not think I will be seeing him, at least, not in the near future.”

Any advice?

Should we get the plumber’s point of view (he left us his business card) by writing him an email?

Why would you do that?
It doesn't matter.
Your landlord is clearly unreasonable, the plumber has nothing to do with it.
I'd look for somewhere else to live tbh.

Exactly. Why would you do that? What difference would it make?

What exactly are you trying to achieve? If you don't like living there, then move. Otherwise just address issues which need to be addressed - namely - locks on doors.

You sound like someone looking for problems and complaining about anything. Why don’t you just look for somewhere else to live?

Re the locks on your doors- you have two options and both are quite simple.

If there is a thumbturn on the inside then you won’t be able to use your key inside to lock the door. In this case you can keep your key. The LL will be fine with this as she has already advised you of the regs regarding the locks.

If there is not a thumbturn on the inside of your door you can take out the barrel of the lock and change it as advised by someone above. The LL will not have a problem with this as she has already advised you of the reasons for her taking the keys and said she is happy for you to lock the door from outside but not inside due to legislation (which is to protect you).

The plumber was not happy with the way he was treated by the tenants- you or others- and has decided not to work in the house again. That’s fair enough. What could you possibly get from contacting him for more information?

It makes sense that the LL sent a plumber ASAP to do the work in your home. If it was a problem to let him in you could have said that and turned him away. If he was in the area it makes sense for him to come to the building and fix the problem doesn’t it? It’s always a nuisance to have workmen visit but sometimes it’s necessary because things go wrong.

I actually can’t understand others here advising you to complain to the council about your LL. Just move if you don’t like living in her property.

Also the consumer rights stuff you have looked up are not analogous to your viewing and taking on the tenancy of your room. They are to do with buying consumer goods and being hurried into purchases.

Are you sure your landlord is telling the truth? Have you had any of his confirmed independently? I havent read the whole thread but it all seems a bit odd.

Landlord's email sounds like bullshit to me but it doesn't matter does it?

Actually I think the LL's email is probably true. After all the tenants were up in arms about what they thought was illegal entry (it wasn't) and have been looking for 'revenge', so they probably did give the plumber a hard time.

Also what possible motive could the LL have for making this up?

You sound a bit hard work. The boiler needed fixing, plumber was in the area and was willing to do the job if it was convenient.
You could have turned him away but you let him in.
Why do you now want to report the landlord?