When asked if there was a specific reason they said they "wanted to see it". Does there need to be any more clearer reason to make such inspection or does "just wanting to see it" suffice?

  • What, specifically, is the landlord doing? "Popping over" might involve walking by the place and seeing if it looked to be in good order. It might involve knocking on the door to ask the tenant if everything was going well (and incidentally seeing whatever was visible from the front door). It might mean wanting to walk through the interior of the house doing a detailed inspection. Different answers will apply depending on what they were trying to see. Did they provide notice that they were going to "pop over"? Or was it unexpected? Jun 10 at 18:27
  • They proposed popping over, which was their words, which were taken to mean visiting with an expectation to be let in.
    – Joseph P.
    Jun 10 at 19:34

1 Answer 1


A landlord can “pop over

As a tenant you can agree to this request without further formality but here are the legal rights.

If the landlord gives a written notice (emails and SMS count) giving at least 24 hours notice, the time of the visit, who will be making it and why, then they have a right to enter providing the time is reasonable for the tenant. If the tenant refuses because the time is inconvenient, they should propose one or more convenient times. If damage accrues to the property because of a delay, the tenant may be responsible for it.

A landlord may also enter immediately in an emergency such as a fire, a gas leak or a flood.

A landlord faced with tenant that unreasonably refuses entry can get a court order to allow it. Likewise a tenant faced with a landlord who makes voluminous requests for entry (say more than once every 6 months) and thus preventing their “quiet enjoyment” can get a court order to regulate that.

  • Suppose they provide the time of the visit, the identity of the visitor, and why, but as far as the reason they simply say "because they want to see it". Inspection is largely synonymous but only slightly removed from visit. To say they want to inspect the place because they want to see it is virtually tautological, so is that a valid provision of the reason for a visit?
    – Joseph P.
    Jun 11 at 0:21
  • Furthermore, if a tenant repeatedly refuses inspection access, shall we say unreasonably, and the LL gave sufficient valid notice then you say the LL has a right to enter. Does that mean that they can exercise this right by letting themselves in while the tenant is out without a court authorization? Or does this right require a court's affirmation in order to be exercised without later sanction?
    – Joseph P.
    Jun 11 at 0:26
  • 2
    An inspection is a valid reason. Whether they need a court order is in the answer.
    – Dale M
    Jun 11 at 2:42
  • But must there be a reason or objective given as motivation for the inspection?
    – Joseph P.
    Jun 11 at 8:55
  • Also, where does the frequency threshold of once every six months come from? Is it in a precedent case?
    – Joseph P.
    Jun 11 at 8:58

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.