Letting Agent Flat checks

"since you visited when I was not in, unannounced. My £2500 Macbook Pro has disappeared. "
I like that idea!

When my girlfriend and I moved in together she was moving from just round the corner. As such it was quite comical that the easiest way to move was to still get movers (well, man and van) to spend half a day loading it up, then driving about 5mins round the block to the new place :p As it was just round the corner she left some of her more important/personal items in the first flat and was going to carry them round on foot once the movers had started unloading. After spending an hour or so helping the movers start unloading at the new place she wandered round to the old place to do a last check and bring over the last few items. She was shocked to find that the letting agent had let himself in and was about to start the "checkout" inspection!

Firstly, the flat was hers until the next day officially, according to the contract. She at some point must have told them when she was physically moving. Secondly, she had to be there for the checkout inspection (to stop them pulling a fast one). Thirdly, she was absolutely fuming that they were wandering around her old flat when she'd specifically left a bunch of things that she wanted to move herself because they were so precious to her! Honestly, letting agents are just sub-human scum. Don't trust them with anything. She went ballistic at him.
 
I don't think a 10 minute pop around once every 6 months is breaching quiet enjoyment and privacy. It's not as if they are giving you a prostate exam at the same time :p

Every country has their quirks and I think this is one of the least obtrusive and easily understandable - owner wants to check their property is good nick. I mean, in Germany when poeple rent they have to supply their own kitchen and remove it when they leave! How weird is that!
just as an aside that isn't everywhere in germany, it's just some places, and they also have an average rental time of 7 years. Make of that what you will.

B@
 
just as an aside that isn't everywhere in germany, it's just some places, and they also have an average rental time of 7 years. Make of that what you will.

B@

Yeah - when I was looking there, a lot of places were phasing that out.

It only seems to be the really cheap ones now, like the smaller apartments and things.

Most of the places I was looking at had a fitted kitchen.
 
If a landlord wants access to a tenanted property and the tenant is uncooperative they just have to declare someone reported a smell of gas to them and they were investigating if the authorities needed to be called... Any tenant of mine that was uncooperative would be on the notice to quit list immediately, but I have never had the need to get Bolshy, we have amicable relationships, fortunately.
 
You're just borrowing it. Rejecting an inspection is a one way ticket to being given notice to leave as soon as the contract is up in my eyes!
Renting property is not just "borrowing" it and I personally think calling it that is quite insulting. Nearly 50% of the population are now tenants, and to demean it to something more akin to "borrowing" a DVD off a mate is just stupid. Read the definitions or "borrow" compared to "lease" or "rent". They're miles apart. Anyway, if you lend a book or DVD to a mate you wouldn't expect to check-in with them that they're looking after it would you? Landlords need to understand that their rental property is an investment and not their home, or a backup home etc. Landlords that can't get get away from being emotionally attached to their properties are always going to have issues.

Given your above example on rejecting inspection requests can't the landlord do the same if you reject the inspections that are written into a contract?
Only if the tenant rejects inspections that have given the full contracted notice.
 
Any sensible person that owned a property being borrowed rented out would want to check it was still being looked after properly. Comparing that to a DVD is a bit over the top. The very point you make about it being an investment is exactly the reason they are checking up on it.
 
Any sensible person that owned a property being borrowed rented out would want to check it was still being looked after properly. Comparing that to a DVD is a bit over the top. The very point you make about it being an investment is exactly the reason they are checking up on it.

And yet every other country I know of follow the same rental mechanism and don't subject tenants to home invasions.
 
Any sensible person that owned a property being borrowed rented out would want to check it was still being looked after properly. Comparing that to a DVD is a bit over the top. The very point you make about it being an investment is exactly the reason they are checking up on it.
except they don't do this almost everywhere else. I guess everyone else is foolish.

B@
 
I have always find tenants who later become landlords themselves change their perceptions on the rental market :)
How so? I find landlords that have never been tenants to generally completely fail to understand that their investment is somebody's home. Where they live their life, where they raise their children, where they sleep with their partner, where they feel safe and warm. Having some numpty knock on the door unannounced to check their money is still safe -- is unfathomably rude.

Any sensible person that owned a property being borrowed rented out would want to check it was still being looked after properly. Comparing that to a DVD is a bit over the top. The very point you make about it being an investment is exactly the reason they are checking up on it.
See above.
 
How so? I find landlords that have never been tenants to generally completely fail to understand that their investment is somebody's home. Where they live their life, where they raise their children, where they sleep with their partner, where they feel safe and warm. Having some numpty knock on the door unannounced to check their money is still safe -- is unfathomably rude.

See above.


When you have £200K or more in a property and you suspect it's being trashed etiquette is not a high priority.
 
How so? I find landlords that have never been tenants to generally completely fail to understand that their investment is somebody's home. Where they live their life, where they raise their children, where they sleep with their partner, where they feel safe and warm. Having some numpty knock on the door unannounced to check their money is still safe -- is unfathomably rude.

It's also a bit of a stretch calling it their (landlord) investment, often.

What they are doing is getting other people (the tenant) to pay for their investment for them... living off the lives of others is never a great thing.

As long as things go to plan and I start building houses... I'm planning to build affordable houses to rent out and then 50-65% of the rental income goes into a savings account towards their mortgage deposit, rather than it just go into a black hole... many are stuck from getting the deposit together, simply because they have to pay so much in rent.

I think that's a better and fairer option than the current rent-to-buy schemes around.

Hopefully when one person starts doing it, others will be forced to follow suit.

As long as these break-even & cover costs... I'll be happy... the bigger/flashier houses will be the profit-makers.
 
What they are doing is getting other people (the tenant) to pay for their investment for them... living off the lives of others is never a great thing.
I totally agree. Winston Churchill said it very well;

Winston Churchill said:
Fancy comparing these healthy processes with the enrichment which comes to the landlord who happens to own a plot of land on the outskirts of a great city, who watches the busy population around him making the city larger, richer, more convenient, more famous every day, and all the while sits still and does nothing.

Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains -- and all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is effected by the labor and cost of other people and the taxpayers. To not one of those improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived.

While the land is what is called "ripening" for the unearned in-crement of its owner, the merchant going to his office and the artisan going to his work must detour or pay a fare to avoid it. The people lose their chance of using the land, the city and state lose the taxes which would have accrued if the natural development had taken place, and all the while the land monopolist only has to sit still and watch complacently his property multiplying in value, sometimes many fold, without either effort or contribution on his part!

When you have £200K or more in a property and you suspect it's being trashed etiquette is not a high priority.
And this is exactly the problem with landlordism. Profit over everything else :rolleyes:
 
Correct, or hamstrung by legislation that forbids a property owner being able to properly vet the usage of his property. EU legislation perhaps??
If it was EU legislation, we'd be 'hamstrung' by it as well.

Personally, I think it's more likely just a result of people elsewhere having more respect for other people's property than we do here, so no one feels the need to check in because the tenants aren't as likely to be destroying the place.
 
Personally, I think it's more likely just a result of people elsewhere having more respect for other people's property than we do here, so no one feels the need to check in because the tenants aren't as likely to be destroying the place.
Indeed. I'm sure landlords have other things to do other than checking on their property and pestering tenants if they knew they were going to be ok.
 
Correct, or hamstrung by legislation that forbids a property owner being able to properly vet the usage of his property. EU legislation perhaps??

If that was the case, then surely it would be banned here too and not in Switzerland :p

So no, it's more of a human "respecting peoples personal space and privacy" type of thing.

When you have £200K or more in a property and you suspect it's being trashed etiquette is not a high priority.

Houses in Switzerland often exceed £600k for a basic house and £1-2m for a good one.
 
Back
Top Bottom