Should a landlord pay for a locksmith?

Reply to the comment left by Ricardo Weyman at 05/10/2022 - 07:50
What do you mean?

Of course it will breach the tenancy agreement. It's pointless having a tenancy agreement if you're not going to informed it.

And if all locks aren't secured the insurance definitely won't pay out if an incident occurs.

What do you mean?

Of course it will breach the tenancy agreement. It's pointless having a tenancy agreement if you're not going to informed it.

And if all locks aren't secured the insurance definitely won't pay out if an incident occurs.

Reply to the comment left by Lyn at 05/10/2022 - 11:32
Breach of tenancy is one thing.
Enforcing it is different.

If the property was actually secure with one lock, then there's no problem and no insurance issue. In fact, the issue here isn't one of insurance.

Go bacik to basics - the tenant permitted the landlord access (bear in mind they could have refused); the landlord locked the door differently when leaving than found on arrival; the landlord could not facilitate prompt supply of the correct key; the landlord told the tenants to get a locksmith.

To me (long term landlord) it's a no brainer that the landlord should pay.

No wonder society seems to have it in for landlords.

Reply to the comment left by Graham Bowcock at 03/10/2022 - 17:45
How is letting the landlord do viewings doing them a favour. I'd make a good guess that it's a term of the tenancy. Of course the tenant could breach the agreement and just say no if they wanted to be complete a55h0les but they certainly aren't doing them a favour by letting them.

Reply to the comment left by Graham Bowcock at 05/10/2022 - 11:39
Graham Bowcock, please do not defamate my character. It's insulting and unnecessary.
Your opinion is different to mine but I won't insult you for it.

For what it's worth, I am a long term landlord too, with long term, very happy tenants in well maintained properties and am certainly not contributing to the landlord bashing society.

I can understand why you're hacked off, however, I can also understand why the tenant feels you should pay.

1) You refer to a Yale lock and a "main" lock. I would ask the tenant why they did not use both locks. Maybe they feel that the Yale lock is secure enough? Did they "double-throw" it? Did they not use the main lock as they knew you were calling by?

2) I would want to know how the locksmith gained entry. If the Yale lock was not "double-thrown" and it was a simple matter of sliding something between door and frame, that would support your arguement that the door had not been secured properly.

3) Was the locksmith called out-of-hours? Was it a simple/quick job (as in 2. above)? Was £250 reasonable?

4) Did you attempt to phone the tenant before leaving to query the single locking (or did you not notice)?

Depending on the facts, you could suggest to the tenant that the cost is shared. However, on the basis of what you have posted, I would not push too hard. If the door was locked and required a key for entry, you should probably have left it the same way.

Reply to the comment left by Christopher Lee at 05/10/2022 - 12:08
It is in most agreements that tenants have to provide access, but if they don't then the landlord cannot unilaterally take access for viewings. Some tenants do decline, not beause they're A**eholes (to use your description), but it just may be difficult - WFH, family life, etc.

Bear in mind that vioewing with a tenant in residence may not be ideal - houses may be untidy, pets, food smells, etc.

We treat tenants very carefully when we want viewings to negotiate a sensible path. Sometimes we simpy, wait until the house is vacant. It's not normally a big issue.

I think this is all a matter of coincidence especially as landlord who would normally have been able to pop back quickly and unlock the door was visiting a friend for the weekend some 4 hours drive away. So some bad luck involved here.
Given the tenant is adamant it’s not their fault and has already deducted the £250 I’d be inclined to write the amount off now. You need to keep the tenant sweet so they leave the property in a good condition. Also the amount is tax deductible so you can claim 20% or 40% (or even 45% now Kwasi has unturned) off the £250 bill.

Reply to the comment left by Graham Bowcock at 05/10/2022 - 12:13
I stated I knew they could decline. With clauses like that they can clearly breach the agreement in favour of their right to quiet enjoyment but that doesn't negate the fact that they would still be in breach.

The issue is tenants sign agreements without really reading properly or necessarily 'meaning' what they agree to. Also, a lot tenants are perfectly happy viewing when its occupied when they're the ones looking.

Overall, I can't think of many circumstances where it would be really inconvenient to do a viewing it just comes down to being an accommodating person and abiding with an agreement you've entered into.

As I said at the beginning. I just don't see this as a tenant doing a favour to the landlord. Its just honouring what you've agreed to.

Reply to the comment left by Graham Bowcock at 05/10/2022 - 12:13
Hi Graham,
1- when tenants give notice they kindaa know viewings req is on the way.
2- It is clearly mentioned in contract to support all viewings.
3- In my case I arrange the viewings with there permission and on weekend to best accommodate them. I am sure no landlord forces themselves when tenants are living.
4- Are you suggesting for landlord to loose a one month of rent, wait for tenant to move out and before showing around the property.
I can't process your suggestions.