Forum menu
100%.
They were lucky, really, that the inspectors weren’t ‘less ethical.’
I also agree 100% ... the property management, are leaving themselves wide open here, if what we are told is verbatim.
I also suspect the property company doesn't give a toss, why would they? It's easy money.
they are fufilling thier contract, no more, no less, and that's the issue.
I see this bullshit all the time in contracts.
You can write whatever you want, and have it signed and whitnessed ... if it's an illegal, or an 'unfair term' it's invalid, legally speaking.
A person cannot sign thier rights away.
Did I shock you? Good
Middle aged men making crude comments for effect about teenage women is more icky than shocking, to be honest.
What I've learned from this thread? Perhaps a deeper appreciation for Prince's little red courgette.
A person cannot sign thier rights away.
Brexit is differnet though, it seems other people can sign other peoples rights away.
Yes, I know I've just quoted myself.
This is a health, safety and welfare issue and an important one and should be treated accordingly. I’d take the following steps:
(a) raise a formal complaint with the accommodation provider (use the contact details provided in the licence to occupy / handbook, which should contain a complaints procedure). Then you need to wait for it to go through that procedure but if not satisfactorily deal with then escalate it (eg: find out which company is the ultimate owner of the company that owns the halls (is there any branding?) and approach the directors of that business on LinkedIn
(b) report in writing to the University via the student welfare officer / dept
(c) also report in writing to the students union and ask for their advice. That’s exactly what they are there for.
Include details of how the incident made her feel (scared, intimidated, privacy violated or whatever it is).
Whilst the threat of legal action might help get engagement, it’s not in itself going to lead to a worthwhile outcome.
So you wrote your post, and ended it with this,
If a tenant refuses this tho you cannot force entry except for emergency repairs and it would be up to a court to decide if it was reasonable
which shows that the landlord does in fact not have a right of entry. (I will accept I should have modified it to "except if they have a court order it then it must be executed by an officer of the court").
The analogy is debt.
I loan you 500 quid, you agree to pay me back next week.
After a year of waiting and asking and demanding I lose my patience and pop round your house, break in and take loads of stuff that I can sell to recover my debt and costs.
Is this legal? Do I have a right to do it? No and no.
If I did this would I feel the long arm of the law. Yes most definitely.
However I can go to the courts and ask them to do it for me, they will arbitrate the facts to decide if you do owe me the money and they will effectively direct the actions taken.
Same with landlords. The landlord can get the courts to grant them access, but they need to prove a need.
With my tenants, I ask for access and get written or electronic acceptance. (e.g. a reply to a text is good enough for me. "Bob, can I pop in and do a maintenance inspection on weds?" Bob replies "Yeah I won't be there though does that matter" Me "No prob, I'll let you know if I find any issues")
If they refuse, and I have had tenants refuse, well without resorting to the courts there is nothing I can do.
SO just giving notice, and then turning up, effectively breaking in, without being able to prove acceptance, to me is breaking the law. And I know of cases where landlord who have been egregious is in this way have been criminally prosecuted.
To me even if they can prove the OP's daughter was given notice (eg in a recognized way), but without acceptance this does not give the right of entry.
Once again. University halls are not standard tenancies.
You do have a right of entry under an standard tenancy contract but not a right to break in. You may need a court to enforce your right. that is not the same as not having a right of entry.
Surely also depends on what is agreed to in the Uni accomodation agreement. If they have included access in that and as long as it's not an unfair contract, and the student has agreed to it, what a standard (non-Uni) tenancy agreement would look like is of not great import?
FWIW (my D is not at So'ton, and IDK where the OP is so this is just an example because when I googled it came up)
Page 8 clause 7.4 covers Allowing us access. Have not pasted because then it'll be covered in <span> brackets and don't have time to edit down but they refer to the Universities UK / Guild of HE code of practice
- and states clearly they will try and give notice but "we reserve our right to enter the Accommodation on shorter notice or no notice
at all....."
- they then state what they would consider necessity but if the OP contract is anything similar, the only issue is whether that necessity was reached..... and then whether that was properly documented (and we go off on another lap because we'll never really know)
Once again. University halls are not standard tenancies.
Once again; explain how this affects the student’s right to privacy under the HRA. Keep saying ‘it’s different’ doesn’t explain anything.
– and states clearly they will try and give notice but “we reserve our right to enter the Accommodation on shorter notice or no notice
at all…..”
Even if this is stated in a contract, if the law trumps this, it’s irrelevant and invalid. This is what we need to actually know. I’m pretty sure landlords or their agents can’t just force entry whenever they choose, regardless of how much ‘notice’ they have given.
In the Soton contract, it does state that they can gain access under particular circumstances, or if they have ‘reasonable grounds’ to suspect a breach of rules is taking place. That bit is very important. ‘Reasonable Grounds’. This could be open to interpretation, but forcing an entry would require someone to have to explain themselves. That would be the tricky legal bit. I’d imagine all sorts of protocols would have to be met before such a thing could happen. Was this the case with the incident in question? That’s the real crux of the matter.
I don't have a lot to add, as this is taking the usual STW route, but these are my internal feelings about this situation:
1) Universities handle hundreds of thousands of halls residents a year - I suspect that they all have very similar contracts and access rights
2) I bet this sort of situation occurs a lot
3) I'm wondering why they needed to inspect the room seeing as they've only been occupied about 6 weeks
4) As a father with 3 girls at university I've learnt that it's best that I keep out of the way. I'm sure I don't hear about 95% of the stuff that they get up to and frankly I don't want to know* - they will sort anything that's not right. YMMV obvs.
5) As I said before - things are rarely as clear cut as they seem, especially when working with just one side of the story.
* Eldest daughter broke the extended family records for hospitalisation - after 5 days my rather pissed eldest daughter fell over some barriers whilst trying to crash a club! Her elder cousins were well impressed!!
I’m wondering why they needed to inspect the room seeing as they’ve only been occupied about 6 weeks
Ha ha never actually seen inside a student room then. From my perspective it's best to reinforce the rules early on.
Mini kitchens set up, gas heaters gas stoves. Smoking in rooms posters on walls, repainting of rooms, once away from home they let their creativity go wild, the list is endless.
All the damage has to be repaired but of course its never their fault.
Ha ha never actually seen inside a student room then.
Only when they've moved in and when they're moving out!! As I said, in my view, they're adults and are best left to figure life out for themselves!
(The only time my 'help' was welcomed was when one daughter's halls [actually a group of purpose built townhouses in a gated area] were locked shut due to covid back in 2020. She was running very low on food and nobody was allowed out so I did a big shop and went over there to hand it through the guarded gate!!)
Edit:
Just for shits & giggles I had a look at the T&C of the halls at one of my girls' universities:
As this Agreement is a licence, we have the right to enter the Accommodation at any time (including during the night)
without giving you notice.
In most instances (out of courtesy only and not because we are legally obliged to do so*), we will enter the Accommodation
during the day giving reasonable prior written notice (poster, text or email) of our intention to enter.
If we do not give you prior notice of our intention to enter the Accommodation, we will knock on the door first in order to
see if you are present then we will let ourselves into the Accommodation using our master key.
Draw whatever conclusions you want from that but I'm pretty sure they'd have drawn that up with full knowledge of the law.
* It's not their first rodeo.
Even if this is stated in a contract, if the law trumps this, it’s irrelevant and invalid. This is what we need to actually know. I’m pretty sure landlords or their agents can’t just force entry whenever they choose, regardless of how much ‘notice’ they have given.
I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest that if a major institution like So'ton has that written into their formal contract then it's legal.
I just checked it for Warwick too and they have similar......
In circumstances where the University reasonably suspects that the Student and/or
any other person is/are engaging in conduct which presents a risk to health and/or
safety and/or may amount to a criminal offence, including possession of an illegal
substance or weapon, the University may in its absolute discretion and without notice
enter and search the Accommodation
again - not disputing this shouldn't have happened in this case and the OP is right to raise to management and if necessary escalate based on what is found / proven from that. And NWS discussions about whether there really was a concern for welfare / illegal activity / H&S breach or whatever and whether the decision process to 'force' entry was valid and documented, which forms part of the above decision process - in simple terms it looks to me that in the case of Uni halls the management is allowed access without notice without breaching tenancy law or the HRA.
Wow you lot are still arguing about this!
Why are they even carrying screwdrivers in the first place?
And remember, the OP said this happened to multiple rooms. It wasn’t a one-off so ‘they panicked’ is no excuse either.
I think essentially I made that point way back at the beginning, except it was part of my "I don't buy the chain being removed, quickly, quietly, easily - are you sure you have the whole facts".
If she had topped herself then breaking in wouldn’t have achieved anything anyway. Might as well wait for reports of missing person, or smell. If my neighbour didn’t answer the door I wouldn’t immediately smash my way in to see if they’d just had a stroke or a fall even though that’s far far more likely than anything happening to the young lady in this thread.
OK, but lets say you have the key to an elderly neighbour's house for whatever reason (this was not an uncommon situation where I grew up, my parents still have next door's key, and I know friends who have a key for a neighbour they are close to). Perhaps you go round to change a light bulb at 1pm, your neighbour knew you were coming and expects you to let yourself in to change the bulb if she is out. There's no answer. You get your key and discover the chain is on. You continue to shout and get no response. Do you force your way in or go call the police to ask them to let you in? Its irrelevant - what would be odd would be if you got in, changed the lightbulb and left without wondering how or where the old lady was!
@configuration - presumably your wife has now explained the human rights act to you and that it primarily serves to stop the state from exploiting/mistreating its citizens? It may be argued that a university is an arm of the state, but I'd bet the halls are sufficiently "arms length" that their policies are unlikely to be determined by the state. If they are considered a "Public authority" then presumably any one of the long list of exceptions would apply (such as checking that your room is not a fire hazard about to burn the building down and endangering all the other students). Its not clear that even if there was no necessity and it was a public authority that privacy was actually invaded - had they ripped the covers off that would be different, but since they didn't search the room nor expose the poor girl its not clear anyone actually lost any privacy. Perhaps your wife has also read a university halls "license agreement" and knows they aren't tenancies at all, nor are they likely to be considered your home. Legally, usually they are akin to staying in a hotel. Legally using keys to open a locked place without authority can be a crime but they were authorised by the owner, I'm certain that the police will have zero interest.
How would you feel if you’d booked a hotel, the cleaners couldn’t gain access to change the bedding so they unscrewed the security chain whilst you were still in bed?
Given the amount of time, effort, noise, I'd likely have had to ignore to get to that point I'd not be surprised. If they sneaked up and surreptitiously unlocked the door and removed the chain so they could watch me sleep that would be different, but since the OP's daughter was asleep and then froze we've no suggestion that they were trying to do this by stealth.
@Cougar - your comments that were intended to shock are about a real person who might actually read this thread. I'd suggest your thoughts are probably at least as gross an invasion of her privacy as anything the university did.
Duty of care is on all employees.
Comments like this make me understand why Americans like guns so much.
Do that in Texas and the employees risk getting both barrels of a sawn off shotgun in the face.
WTF are you on about? It's a simple statement of fact. If an employee has a concern for H&S or Welfare they have a duty to act, it's not complex. What has America's gun lobby got to do with that simple premise?
As this Agreement is a licence, we have the right to enter the Accommodation at any time (including during the night)
without giving you notice.
In most instances (out of courtesy only and not because we are legally obliged to do so*), we will enter the Accommodation
during the day giving reasonable prior written notice (poster, text or email) of our intention to enter.
If we do not give you prior notice of our intention to enter the Accommodation, we will knock on the door first in order to
see if you are present then we will let ourselves into the Accommodation using our master key.Draw whatever conclusions you want from that but I’m pretty sure they’d have drawn that up with full knowledge of the law.
Hmm. Can you verify this is legal? This is the bit that people need to know. As already mentioned; you can write any old guff into a contract, but it's not enforcable/valid unless it falls within the remit of law. Full stop.
Personally, I' not be living anywhere where the landlords claim they can enter your 'home' without any notice, at anytime. End of.
Hmm. Can you verify this is legal? This is the bit that people need to know.
IANAL, but as i said the fact it seems to be in the contracts with many Universities and HEI's leads me to believe that it is. As said - they have legal depts and have been operating these contracts / licences for donkey's years. I'd say unchallenged, maybe it has been and the challenge has been rebuffed, IDK.
Can you verify that all the HEI's operating to this code of practice or versions of it are in fact operating illegally?
Personally, I’ not be living anywhere where the landlords claim they can enter your ‘home’ without any notice, at anytime. End of.
Yeah, but as i think we've said time and again, it's not a 'home' in the same sense of the word.
@configuration – presumably your wife has now explained the human rights act to you
She listened briefly to my explanation, then said 'I haven't got time for this'. Which is fair enough. She's not being paid to give advice here, and she's too busy anyway. Hence why it's a good idea to employ a lawyer specialising in such matters.
Perhaps your wife has also read a university halls “license agreement” and knows they aren’t tenancies at all, nor are they likely to be considered your home.
Can you verify this 100% as fact? Because facts, not opinions, are what's important here.
IANAL, but as i said the fact it seems to be in the contracts with many Universities and HEI’s leads me to believe that it is
So, you can't, then? Ok. Anyone who can?
Legally, usually they are akin to staying in a hotel.
Again, can you verify this 100%? Are you suggesting that hoteliers can just enter your (locked) hotel room at any time, without notice or warning? Facts please.
Yeah, but as i think we’ve said time and again, it’s not a ‘home’ in the same sense of the word.
And again; can we verify this 100% please? What is the UK legal definition of a 'home'?
Hmm. Can you verify this is legal?
Do you honestly think that it isn't?
As I've already said, we're talking about universities here - they've been around a long time and have probably come across [multiple times] every situation you can imagine. And I'm pretty sure they've got legal departments containing legal types.
Anyway... From gov.uk
4.5 What access rights does the landlord have?
The landlord, or his or her agent, has the legal right to enter your accommodation at reasonable times of day to carry out the repairs for which he or she is responsible and to inspect the condition and state of repair of the property. For tenancies, the landlord must give 24 hours’ notice in writing of an inspection. For licences where unrestricted access is agreed, or required for the landlord to carry out his or her responsibilities, it is not necessary to give notice. It may be helpful to include the arrangements for access and procedures for getting repairs done in a written agreement. In an emergency, the landlord can enter without giving notice.
Again, can you verify this 100%? Are you suggesting that hoteliers can just enter your (locked) hotel room at any time, without notice or warning? Facts please.
You're welcome.
(the above also applies to hotels, etc. Google it yourself.)
Well, well, so it is legal then
What a surprise.
– and states clearly they will try and give notice but “we reserve our right to enter the Accommodation on shorter notice or no notice at all…..”
Two things jump out me here.
The first is broadly as Config is saying. They can say anything they like, but a contract cannot waive statutory rights.
Posters here have variously posted with about landlord rights, analogised with hotels, asserted that a halls is different from both of those, and stated that a uni probably knows what it's doing. But unless I missed it, no-one seems to actually know definitively what her rights are.
Secondly, nowhere in this or other subsequent posts copying policy does it say "if you don't answer the door we'll break in." They read to me like it's intended as an emergency measure, they reserve the right to enter the property if it's on fire or there are safeguarding concerns, not because it's Sunday afternoon and there's nothing on telly. Do any of the Uni contracts include a clause claiming the right to enter by force? I'll bet they don't.
@Cougar – your comments that were intended to shock are about a real person who might actually read this thread. I’d suggest your thoughts are probably at least as gross an invasion of her privacy as anything the university did.
This has been pointed out to me outside of the forum by a friend with a daughter who I asked for a steer. I apologise unreservedly, potentially upsetting the OP was the last thing I meant to do. I wanted readers to take the issue more seriously, was all.
Do you honestly think that it isn’t?
I didn't know, that's why I've been asking questions. Because that's how you learn.
The section of law you've quoted pertains to renting a room in someone's house; ie where the landlord is resident. There is also a section that would have been helpful had you also quoted it:
"This list only gives an indication of how different arrangements might be viewed: it is not definitive, and the important factor for any particular case is how the arrangement works in practice. Only a court can say with any certainty whether a letting is a tenancy or a licence to occupy; and the fact that a landlord may say that what he is offering or has granted is a licence rather than a tenancy (or the written agreement is headed “licence”), does not necessarily mean that this is what it will be considered to be. If there is a dispute or other issue where the nature of the let could be important, it is advisable to get legal advice."
Well, well, so it is legal then
Is it?
no-one seems to actually know definitively what her rights are.
This. We're back to square one really.
This has been pointed out to me outside of the forum by a friend with a daughter who I asked for a steer. I apologise unreservedly, potentially upsetting the OP was the last thing I meant to do. I wanted readers to take the issue more seriously, was all.
Fairs.
Cross-posted with Sharkbait.
So it's not necessary for a landlord to give notice.
Were the room inspectors "the landlord" from a legal standpoint? (Ie, does "the landlord's representative" count?)
Where does it give them the right to break in? "No notice" implies turning up unannounced on your doorstep, not turning up unannounced in your bedroom, no?
There are other professional landlords on here also, so I am not trying to claim appeal to authority, but I have been doing this for over 20 years.
I can promise you all the legal guidance we receive is that it is in fact illegal for a landlord or agent to enter the premises without permission from the tenant. Ultimately, a landlord has no right of entry unless the tenant grants access or the landlord is given permission by the courts.
OFT 356 which is enforcable states in section 3.32
3.32 We would object to a provision giving the landlord an excessive right to enter the rented property. Under any kind of lease or tenancy, a landlord is required by common law to allow his tenants ‘exclusive possession’ and ‘quiet enjoyment’ of the premises during the tenancy. In other words, tenants must be free from unwarranted intrusion by anyone, including the landlord. Landlords are unfairly disregarding that basic obligation if they reserve a right to enter the property without giving reasonable notice or getting the tenant’s consent, except for good reason.
The https://www.gov.uk/ page is not a source of law. They often get it very wrong.
You need to look at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/
Start with housing act 2004 look at section 11 that covers this.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/34/contents
Section 11 does make it clear that if there is an emergency the landlord can enter without permission, an inspection is not an emergency.
Any other entry inteferes with a tenants right of quiet enjoyment.
You also need to look at Protection from Eviction act 1977 which also covers harrassmanet.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/43
The landlord of a residential occupier or an agent of the landlord shall be guilty of an offence if—
(a) he does acts likely to interfere with the peace or comfort of the residential occupier or members of his household, or
(b) he persistently withdraws or withholds services reasonably required for the occupation of the premises in question as a residence,
and (in either case) he knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, that that conduct is likely to cause the residential occupier to give up the occupation of the whole or part of the premises or to refrain from exercising any right or pursuing any remedy in respect of the whole or part of the premises.
Despite what all the armchair lawyers and philosophers on here think, if the OP wanted to enforce this I would expect plenty of legal firms to be interested.
There is a great blog here for landlords that covers most of the points I have made.
here
Personally I won't be trying to shoehorn bullshit clauses into contracts to allow me to break into girls rooms under the guise of inspection or any other crap, I am morally opposed and also don't want to fall foul of the civil or criminal courts.
I have once forced entry when my tenants were seemingly away and the neighbours complained of a gas smell, me and a Transco engineer that I called, attended and I used my key to let us in where he found a leak and shut everythign off. I felt pretty confident that this would not lead to harrassment charges.
So it’s not necessary for a landlord to give notice.
We're still not 100% sure, as what Sharkbait posted relates to lodgers rather than halls residents really.
Were the room inspectors “the landlord” from a legal standpoint? (Ie, does “the landlord’s representative” count?)
Where does it give them the right to break in? “No notice” implies turning up unannounced on your doorstep, not turning up unannounced in your bedroom, no?
This stuff is also important. Employees of the landlord can be 'agents', but even that can be a bit of a grey area. And we still don't know 100% if they can enter an occupied room.
5plus8
You are clearly a decent landlord and the debate between you and I is merely one of semantics. IMO you do have a right of entry ( under some conditions) but may need a court order to enforce this right.
Other than that semantic point we are in agreement
Problem is that University halls are not normal tenancies. Beyond that I know no more detail
I don't doubt any of that (and harassment is a great point).
But does landlord / tenant legislation apply to a student in halls? And has she in fact implicitly given permission in the contract?
Morally it's off the scale wrong. Legally it seems it's a bit tricksier.
it is in fact illegal for a landlord or agent to enter the premises without permission from the tenant.
But the tenant has signed a contract agreeing to::
As this Agreement is a licence, we have the right to enter the Accommodation at any time (including during the night)
without giving you notice.
In most instances (out of courtesy only and not because we are legally obliged to do so*), we will enter the Accommodation
during the day giving reasonable prior written notice (poster, text or email) of our intention to enter.
If we do not give you prior notice of our intention to enter the Accommodation, we will knock on the door first in order to
see if you are present then we will let ourselves into the Accommodation using our master key.
which in essence gives permission. Unless (and with due respect to Config and Sharkbait, maybe that Gov.uk statement is NOT as definitive as i thought) it is breaking statutory law. And the lap counter goes up again.
We’re still not 100% sure, as what Sharkbait posted relates to lodgers rather than halls residents really.
No, it relates to licences. Lodgers have a licence in the same way that a halls resident does. Go and google it.... the Shelter web site says the same.
no-one seems to actually know definitively what her rights are.
This. We’re back to square one really.
No we're not. She signed the licence agreement and the above clearly states that entry is permitted at any time.
Secondly, nowhere in this or other subsequent posts copying policy does it say “if you don’t answer the door we’ll break in.”
Well they didn't did they?!
They read to me like it’s intended as an emergency measure, they reserve the right to enter the property if it’s on fire or there are safeguarding concerns, not because it’s Sunday afternoon and there’s nothing on telly.
No it says they can enter a room at any time they want to - and that's what every renter of a uni halls room agrees to in writing (and the gov document states is legal).
Jeez... some of you just want to argue!
Problem is that University halls are not normal tenancies. Beyond that I know no more detail
Well stop ****ing saying it over and over again then! 🤣
No we’re not. She signed the licence agreement and the above clearly states that entry is permitted at any time.
If the licence agreement isn't valid in law, then....
↪️🟥1️⃣
No it says they can enter a room at any time they want to – and that’s what every renter of a uni halls room agrees to in writing (and the gov document states is legal).
Does it? 100%? Can you verify this?
Jeez… some of you just want to argue!
I want to learn, to become better educated and informed. I see it as 'questioning' rather than arguing.
But the tenant has signed a contract agreeing to
This might fall foul of fair trading, unfair terms and conditions, you can't sign right your rights away etc. I am no lawyer but I wouldn't be trying to use any contract terms to get around inalienable rights...
TJ -indeed semnatics, Barclays has a right to the money I owe them, but they can't come round and take it without the courts. Same with landlord, he has all kinds of rights, recovery, rent, entry, eviction etc, but can't enforce it without the courts to prove that these rights apply in the circumstances.
Sharkbait - the implication of your stance is that if I could persuade you to sign a contract agreeing it, then I could legally cut your fingers off. I mean you signed it, so tough right?
You cannot sign your rights away and big block landlords will try and use any bullshit means to have power over you so they can do what they like. Doesn't make it right, fair, enforcable, or legal.
What is a tenancy?
A tenancy is a legal interest in land where an occupier has the exclusive possession of premises for a period of time and pays rent.What is a licence?
A licence is personal permission for someone to occupy accommodation and does not give an occupier a legal interest in the land.
Uni halls residents are not tenants (they have entered a legal agreement stating as much) and as such have different rights.
I don’t doubt any of that (and harassment is a great point).
But does landlord / tenant legislation apply to a student in halls? And has she in fact implicitly given permission in the contract?
Morally it’s off the scale wrong. Legally it seems it’s a bit tricksier.
Cougar - in answer, I dunno, but given the cases I hear about of foolish landlrods being prosecuted for exactly this type of thing I wouldn't want to test it from a landlords point of view.
Sharkbait - again sources. Shelter have a reputation for getting this stuff wrong.
Done.... this is ridiculous!!
Uni halls residents are not tenants (they have entered a legal agreement stating as much) and as such have different rights.
So what are their rights? That pertain to this thread?
So what are their rights?
They signed them away I think.
She listened briefly to my explanation, then said ‘I haven’t got time for this’. Which is fair enough. She’s not being paid to give advice here, and she’s too busy anyway. Hence why it’s a good idea to employ a lawyer specialising in such matters.
She strikes me as a very wise woman. What she should have said is, "and you don't have time to be arguing with people on the internet about someone you don't actually care about hypothetical human rights either" 😉
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">Can you verify this 100% as fact? Because facts, not opinions, are what’s important here.</span>
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">I can verify 100% that most classic halls of residences are rented on a "License to Occupy basis" not a tenancy. As you point out later ultimately a court could determine that's nonsense (like a court might determine Uber drivers have workers rights even though they are self employed etc), but nobody who reads and signs a normal uni halls agreement does so under the belief they are entering a formal tenancy. </span>
IANAL, but as i said the fact it seems to be in the contracts with many Universities and HEI’s leads me to believe that it is
So, you can’t, then? Ok. Anyone who can?
Ultimately only the Supreme court can - but what we are telling you, even if you are trying to shout very loudly that we have to prove it or you refuse to accept it, is that (a) its a widely used form of agreement in the higher education accommodation market; (b) the universities all believe it is the correct form of contract and valid; (c) if its not a formal tenancy then tenants rights are totally irrelevant.
Legally, usually they are akin to staying in a hotel.
Again, can you verify this 100%? Are you suggesting that hoteliers can just enter your (locked) hotel room at any time, without notice or warning? Facts please.
Yes I 100% can verify that the standard T&Cs used by many universities for their halls of residence are written on the same basis is a hotel / holiday rental etc. (Some unis may use different terms for some of their accommodation - e.g. where its is rented as a flat to a group of students with shared liabiity). Most universities will have their T&Cs available somewhere on line - feel free to go and look. I obviously haven't read them all so can't say how many say they will enter without notice. I'd expect if you leave a tap running and go away they will all use their master key to turn it off. Every one I've ever seen says they will (or have the right to) carry out inspections. Hotel T&Cs generally do have an explicit right of access written in - imagine if they needed court proceedings to chuck you out for living your rock n roll lifestyle fantasy.
Yeah, but as i think we’ve said time and again, it’s not a ‘home’ in the same sense of the word.
And again; can we verify this 100% please? What is the UK legal definition of a ‘home’?
You know your 100% proof type shouting sounds like an anti-vax nutter? How about you prove we are wrong and the courts have determined that university halls of residence are the students' home? I'm willing to consider appropriate contexts beyond the human rights act too, and don't need the law to have been tested in the Appeal Court, but I would prefer actual law or case details rather than a daily mirror story.
She strikes me as a very wise woman.
She's just eaten a crumb of something she found on the kitchen table, thought it was a piece of biscuit perhaps; turns out it's actually a bit of plaster or house debris. 🤨
Yes I 100% can verify that the standard T&Cs used by many universities for their halls of residence are written on the same basis is a hotel / holiday rental etc.
So you'll be happy to show us then, so that we can become better informed.
You know your 100% proof type shouting sounds like an anti-vax nutter?
The thing is, in law, you generally have to be 100% right, or you end up looking a bit of a tit. Isn't it better, for the sake of the OP, his daughter and anyone else on this thread who is still even remotely interested, that we can establish the facts of law here, rather than people assuming and 'believing' things that might not actually be true?
Most universities will have their T&Cs available somewhere on line
As we've already established, this may well not actually be valid anyway. It's good to check things properly.
How about you prove we are wrong and the courts have determined that university halls of residence are the students’ home?
I'm not trying to prove anyone 'wrong'. I just want to know 100% what rights people have. Instead of being rude to me, why not prove your own arguments right?
Secondly, nowhere in this or other subsequent posts copying policy does it say “if you don’t answer the door we’ll break in.”
Well they didn’t did they?!
They unscrewed the bloody lock! What would you call it?
Isn't there a legal concept here, "going equipped"? Right lads, today you're going to be undertaking room inspections on single young women. Don't forget your screwdriver!
Cougar – in answer, I dunno, but given the cases I hear about of foolish landlrods being prosecuted for exactly this type of thing I wouldn’t want to test it from a landlords point of view.
I'm increasingly of the opinion that it should be tested in this case. 😁
Yes I 100% can verify that the standard T&Cs used by many universities for their halls of residence are written on the same basis is a hotel / holiday rental etc.
Sure. But.
Your hotel staff have a right to attend to your room without notice, and this is expected when you rent a room. No fish no fowl, or something. They have an all-rooms master key and everything. Would you say that this right extends, under normal circumstances, to them then snaking an arm through the gap in the door to unscrew a security chain if you haven't answered their knocking in a timely manner?
An inspection without notice is fair game. It's invasive and I don't agree with it, but I've known students and been one myself so I understand it. But that surely does not mean they can just stroll on in unannounced. They turn up, you let them in after you've got your pants back on. No?
What's the purpose of this inspection exactly, one which necessitates access right now rather than coming back tomorrow?
The thing is, in law, you generally have to be 100% right, or you end up looking a bit of a tit
If this is how you think the law works then you're very mistaken. I'd suggest another conversation with your wife.