I have decided to install a security system in my home. My landlord constantly shows up unannounced and now wants the master security code for the system. Can I provide him with his own code to enter the premises or do I have to give him the master code?:mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nooneyouknow

I have decided to install a security system in my home. My landlord constantly shows up unannounced and now wants the master security code for the system. Can I provide him with his own code to enter the premises or do I have to give him the master code?:mad:

---

Hello no:

I'd write him a letter informing him that if he continues to violate the lease and state law, you will have NO alternative but to vacate. I'd send the letter certified, return receipt requested.

Clearly, your lease requires that he give "reasonable" notice. If your lease doesn't say that, your state law does.

Most leases also state that the landlord can enter WITHOUT notice in case of emergency... That would be cool, if you lived in an apartment building... But, in a house, WHY would HE be informed of an emergency instead of you?

Therefore, until he demonstrates his ability to adhere to the laws of our great country, I wouldn't give him ANY codes...

Ok, I changed my mind. Send him the code, but change your locks. If he shows up unannounced while you're NOT there, he won't be able to get in, and you'll KNOW he tried because he'll complain...

If he adheres to the lease, he'll NEVER know you changed the locks...

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Ok, I changed my mind. Send him the code, but change your locks. If he shows up unannounced while you're NOT there, he won't be able to get in, and you'll KNOW he tried because he'll complain...

If he adheres to the lease, he'll NEVER know you changed the locks...

excon

---

Oh come on ex; we don't want the OP getting in trouble, now do we? :)

To nooneyouknow: your landlord can show up anytime s/he wants. You don't have to let him/her into the property unless they've given the proper notice. I don't know what state you're in, but my state law(WI) says I have to give my tenant no less than 12 hours notice that I'll be coming onto the property. This tenant right gets waived if I believe there is danger to the tenant(i.e.: fire, domestic abuse, etc.). If I show up at their door and they don't want to let me in, I have to come back 12 hours later; that's the way it is.

Not to mention that a in lot of states, it's illegal for you to change the locks without your landlord's consent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

Oh come on ex; we don't want the OP getting in trouble, now do we? :)

---

Hello this:

If the landlord tried to get in WITHOUT having given notice, who's breaking the lease?

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello this:

If the landlord tried to get in WITHOUT having given notice, who's breaking the lease?

excon

---

Agreed; the landlord isn't doing things correctly. However, that doesn't give the tenant the right to do the same. Like I pointed out, they don't HAVE to let the landlord in at that very moment; that's their legal right. But changing the locks without consent opens a whole new can of worms.

I say leave the locks as they are and don't give anybody the code. If the landlord wants in, then s/he can give proper notice and the tenant can leave the alarm off that day.

I mostly agree with excon but would take a softer approach. I would read your lease and/or state law on the issue of landlord access to the premises. Assuming that either the lease or state law requires some notice before entry, I would write a letter like:

Dear Landlord,
I've checked with my lease/state law and under the terms you are required to give me x notice before entering the premises. I will be happy to give you an access code when you inform me of when you need to gain access. However, I dont' see any need for you to have the master code.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

I mostly agree with excon but would take a softer approach. I would read your lease and/or state law on the issue of landlord access to the premises.

---

Isn't that what I basically said in my first post? The landlord is in the wrong, but that certainly doesn't make it legal for the tenant to change the locks.

You, Scott, have even given people reddies for making that very suggestion:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/real-e...ml#post1494402

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello this:

If the landlord tried to get in WITHOUT having given notice, who's breaking the lease?

excon

---

If there is an emergency and the landlord cannot gain access - for example, a fire - the tenant can be civilly and criminally responsible if the landlord cannot gain access.

I say to read the lease and check what the provisions are for installing a security system and changing the locks. I'm a little surprised that the landlord is allowing the tenant to install a security system in the first place.

I don't think recommending that the OP disobey the law or violate the lease is sound legal advice.

Hello again, this:

This IS the legal board. And, I agree with you that the law, IS the law.

I don't advise people, however, to follow the law BECAUSE it IS the law.

There are those times on these boards when I have recommended that people act REASONABLE, even if contrary to law, and I ALWAYS spell out the options, and the risks.

Personally, I NEVER give my landlord a key to my home. I value my privacy over any breach of civil law that I might be committing.

I even risked getting a reddie when I said it. Imagine my surprise when the Padre said he doesn't do it either. And now Scott is sympathetic too.

I had no idea I had so much company in my lawbreaking...

I'll take my reddie now.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

I had no idea I had so much company in my lawbreaking...

excon

---

Nor, sadly, did I.

I'm not going to give reddies but I don't agree whatsoever. To tell someone that they can break the law just because someone else is doing it completely undermines our entire justice system and is the whole problem with our legal system today. Everyone is corrupt and we all turn a blind eye to it because there's always someone else, somewhere, who's doing something worse.

If we're going to criticize other members for giving out incorrect advice on the legal boards, then we need to hold ourselves to the same standards. The law doesn't come with a "make it up as you go" option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

To tell someone that they can break the law just because someone else is doing it completely undermines our entire justice system and is the whole problem with our legal system today.

---

Hello again, this:

I didn't say that, not that what I'm going to say will make much difference.

I DO dispense the correct law here. I don't tell people they CAN break it either. I simply tell them what I do and why, and let them decide on their own.

I don't know if that's good either. It's just what I do.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

I DO dispense the correct law here.

---

You can't possibly say that you're dispensing correct law by telling someone that if you were them, you'd break the law. That's like saying, "If I were you, I'd run from the cops next time you get pulled over." Theoretically placing yourself in the OP's shoes doesn't make it okay to suggest, because whether you're doing it or they are, it's still breaking the law.

Hello again,

I want to add, that in all the years I've been dispensing the law and advice on these boards, keeping the landlord out of one's house, is the ONLY law I have ever suggested that anyone break.

Is it better now?

excon

As an overall group, we've done quite a bit of criticizing people on the legal threads for giving opinion rather than fact.

To then turn around and do it ourselves makes absolutely no sense, whether it's for one law or forty of them. It's not good legal advice and that's the bottom line.

Let me clarify, I was not advocating changing the locks. I don't agree on that part of it. But I also don't agree that the landlord needs a master code.

In the case of an emergency, the landlord would have the keys and be able to enter. It might set off the alarm and result in police being called, but in an emergency that may be a good thing.

But, in the case of a scheduled visit, the tenant can create a temporary passcode for the landlord to use. That satisfies the landlord's need whjile protecting the tenant's security.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

Let me clarify, I was not advocating changing the locks. I don't agree on that part of it. But I also don't agree that the landlord needs a master code.

In the case of an emergency, the landlord would have the keys and be able to enter. It might set off the alarm and result in police being called, but in an emergency that may be a good thing.

But, in the case of a scheduled visit, the tenant can create a temporary passcode for the landlord to use. That satisfies the landlord's need whjile protecting the tenant's security.

---

And that was my whole point in this post:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/real-e...ml#post1600022
Tenant should not change the locks; landlord doesn't need the code.

Like I said earlier, if the landlord gives proper notice that they'll be entering the premises, the tenant can simply leave the house unarmed that day. Or if they're not comfortable leaving the system off for a day, then create a temporary password just as you suggested... although it seems the system was installed because of the landlord, not for safety concerns.

I'm apparently out of touch here but I thought the statement in question was: "Ok, I changed my mind. Send him the code, but change your locks. If he shows up unannounced while you're NOT there, he won't be able to get in, and you'll KNOW he tried because he'll complain..."

This takes me back full circle to emergencies.

Or did I miss something?

I still vote for the "stay out of my house or I'll have you arrested" letter.