Re: Landlord Unauthorized Entry - Items Missing

Re: Landlord Unauthorized Entry - Items Missing by Betty L on May 23, 2012 @09:52

No, the landlord can not just enter by posting a notice for 24 hours. Some States require two days. The landord is required to give a reason and time for entry. In this case the landlord should have posted notice of abandonment on the door for the required time under State law, and changed the locks to prevent re entry by the tenant or tenants guest. Even if the rent was not paid, the landlord should have served the tenant (in jail) with a pay or quit notice and followed up with a proper eviction again following State law. What this landlord seems to have done was to enter without notice, move the tenants things and start cleaning. The landlord could be on the hook for unlawful entry, trespass and theft. Not a smart move by the landlord if the landlord proceeded to take back the rental without following the correct steps under the law.

[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: Landlord Unauthorized Entry - Items Missing by OK-LL on May 23, 2012 @14:48	[ Reply ]

Why do you assume no notice by LL for entry? Just because OP didn't see or report a notice doesn't mean it wasn't done. I assume the LL removed the notice from the door once he made his entry. In fact, the OP would not have known about any of the notices and/or summons served in this situation, because he is not a resident of the property and by his own description he just visited the property. He is jumpting to conclusions about the actorsand activity which may have taken place in the rental .

Re: Landlord Unauthorized Entry - Items Missing by Brenda on May 23, 2012 @16:55	[ Reply ]

The landlord had no reason to enter unless the landlord knew the tenant was in jail or has not paid rent or the landlord believed the rental was abandon. Either way, if the landlord knew the tenant was in jail, then the landlord should have served the tenant in jail. If the rent was not paid, then the landlord should have posted notice and proceed with eviction process. If the landlord believed the tenant had abandoned the rental the the landlord should have changed the locks to prevent anyone from entering the rental. The landlord did not change the locks and the tenants friend re entered the rental. The tenant might claim construtive eviction be clause the landlord failed to reclaim the rental by not changing locks and the tenants friend entering showed that the tenant had not abandoned the rental. It always pays to follow the correct proceedures and the law to the letter. This landlord has left him/herself open to legal action.

Re: Landlord Unauthorized Entry - Items Missing by OK-LL on May 23, 2012 @23:04	[ Reply ]

The law doesn't require the LL to change the locks, although common sense does. It comes down to the timeline involved. If the tenant has been absent from the property long enough, the LL may have taken all the appropriate legal steps to reclaim the property. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I prefer to believe that the LL did the right thing, rather than imagine that the friend of a jailbird knows the whole situation and has related it clearly here.