Here is a question to the blog clinic from Dean who is a tenant.
I privately rent my house at the moment, and my land lord is trying to stop me from keeping my push bikes in the house over night. The value of the push bikes is far too great for me to want to do this.
I was just wondering whether my landlord has the right to dictate this to me? (May I add that no damage has been cause to the property because of keeping the push bikes in the house.)
I’m confused and I feel like I’m being punished in my own home. Can you please help with some advice?
Answer
The first thing you need to do is take a look at your tenancy agreement. Does it have any clauses which would apply to this situation? Some tenancy agreements do specify that the tenant cannot store bicycles inside.
If there is nothing in the agreement, particularly if the bikes are doing no damage, then you are not doing anything wrong. If your landlord keeps pestering you about it, this could be deemed harassment.
However if there is a clause in the tenancy agreement, then the question is – is it enforceable?
There is a limit to how much a landlord can dictate to a tenant what he does in what, as you say, is your own home. So depending on how it is worded, the clause may be unenforceable.
The main reason why landlords often prohibit bicycles being stored inside though, is that they can obstruct passageways and would prevent people getting out easily in case of fire.
If the purpose of the clause is to prevent this type of thing, it will be reasonable. So make sure, if you take the bikes inside, that they are not causing this type of obstruction.
Then of course bikes often CAN cause damage. The fact that your bikes have not caused any damage so far does not mean that they will not do so in the future.
If there is a valid clause in your tenancy, then if you breach it, the landlord’s main remedy is to claim the cost of any damage done to the property as a result, from your deposit when you leave.
Which, if they have not caused any damage, will not be a problem for you.
However, if you want to stay at the property long term, it may be wise to reach some kind of agreement with your landlord. As otherwise he may decide he does not want you to stay at the property beyond the current fixed term.
Wow. Queries like this continue to demonstrate just where the power balance really lies in the PRS. (“tenants have all the rights” do they?). What reason does this landlord even give?
I wd do as you please; call the landlord’s hand. If the landlord says anything, explain your valid reasons and carry on regardless. I keep two bikes inside my flat and my landlord knows that but frankly, I would not care less if they disagreed. If there is any damage then that is what the deposit it for; to negotiate at the end. I doubt that this has anything to do with health-and-safety, c’mon; that’s just the excuse used by so many to give a blanket “no”.
I wd consider any tenancy clause restricting this is just unfair, as per the OFT guidance on this. But, of course, a power-tripping landlord can so easily evict an assertive tenant – and so the it goes on. Forced to decide between your bikes or your home; that’s the PRS in Britain today. The day might even come when retaliatory eviction is outlawed. Or landlords like this dismount their high horses.
It seems unlkely that the retaliatory eviction Bill in its provisions will include such circumstances as this one. The provisional Bill concerns physical property standards, not other disagreements between tenant and landlord for which remedies exist at present – albeit perhaps unsatisfactory ones.
More and more people are cycling these days so quite often tenants will want to keep a push bike in a property. As long as they take extra care not to damage walls or flooring it shouldn’t be a problem.
@Colin, what other remedies are you alluding to?
The point being of course that retaliatory evcitions can and do occur if the landlord takes umbrage and thinks the tenant disagreeable – and currently no Bill seeks to give tenants some actual security of tenure (or peace of mind) and prevent the landlord from evicting for-no-good-reason-given with just two months notice, for disagreements just like this. Of course, it cd be otherwise if we had decent legislation.