I know, YANAL etc. Our son and DIL own a rental property that they are trying to sell. The tenant was in arrears to the tune $3000. They went court and the tenant agreed to pay the back rent. As of today AM, the payment (to be made through the court) has not happened or at least hasn’t made it into the system. In the meantime, the tenant was formally notified that the house being sold and the buyers home inspector would be coming later this week. The owners asked my wife to go check that the keys they had would work to let the inspector in and told the tenant that she was coming to do so. (We live very near the property) The tenant met her at the house and told her that she had changed the locks and refused to supply her with the new keys. This is in direct violation of the terms of the lease. My wife offered to go get the keys made and even allow the tenant to come along. The tenant refused.
Without an inspection, the sale won’t happen and the offer will be withdrawn. My question is, given fair notice (already done), can’t the landlord bring a locksmith to open the house for inspection? Not change the lock, simply open it. If the lock is damaged. it would be replaced and the tenant given a new key. All this to be billed to the tenant in the end. This is New Jersey, FWIW. There’s a lot money at stake here and it seems unfair that a tenant can screw things up so much and not face consequences.
Yes, the owners have a lawyer involved but he is not getting back to them.
As an aside, my wife is a former psych nurse and said the tenant displays all the symptoms of having borderline personality disorder. Manipulative, pitting the owners against each other and playing the victim.
IANAL of course, however you need to see a copy of the lease. IF and this is a big if the changing of the locks is illegal, and the tenant has had 24 hours notice of inspection I believe in some venues one can get a locksmith in to pop the lock and change it back. One can perhaps combine it with an eviction order?
I know tenants have a lot of protection in the law, but there are some landlord rights also, but oyu have to be absolutely careful to follow the terms of the lease and the local laws.
If the tenant has moved out, then I don’t see a problem. If they’re still living there, then make sure you give proper notice that you are going in with a locksmith, so you don’t get met at the door by someone with a shotgun. I don’t know how NJ law is, but in some states it’s nearly impossible to get people out of a rental. Oregon has a no-notice/no fault eviction law, which owners regularly abuse when they want to sell.
She’s still in there. That’s the whole problem. We’ve contacted two locksmiths. One said only if the Sheriffs Department would be present. Here in NJ, Sheriffs aren’t the “real” police for the most part but do handle evictions, court security, fugitive warrants etc. I don’t know that they’d send someone since this isn’t an eviction but I have connections with them and can find out. I’m pretty sure the local police would send a car to just stand by, if we asked. The other locksmith said he’d come. $175 plus cost of a new lock and installation if he damages the existing lock while opening it. Given that the house is selling for near $300K, its worth it even if they end up eating the cost.
You should have them change the locks in any case, then YOU give HER a copy of the key. You didn’t say whether your lease allows you access to the house, but if it does then you should point that out to the tenant and tell her that if she changes the lock again without your approval, you’ll report it to the police. It may be an empty threat, but perhaps she’d pay attention.
In Pennsylvania, a tenant cannot prevent the landlord from accessing the building. If the tenant changes the locks, they are required to give the landlord a set of keys. The landlord is well within his/her rights to have a locksmith remove the changed locks and install new locks so that the landlord can access the building.
Landlords also cannot change locks to prevent the tenant from accessing the building. If the tenant has not been evicted, if the landlord puts new locks on the door they must provide new keys to the tenant.
I agree that you should stop trying to placate the tenant and move straight to eviction. If the current lawyer isn’t answering, I would get a new one. The problem with this is that it sounds like the tenant is vindictive and is going to destroy the house if evicted, and eviction takes a long time.
Sometimes in this instance “cash for keys” is an effective tactic for getting rid of problem tenants. Talk to the tenant and see if you pay them some amount (deposit + moving fees, for example) they will leave peacefully. It may seem crazy to pay someone that owes you thousands, but it might be easier than trying to fix whatever they end up doing with the house out of spite.
I don’t know the answer, but I recommend not going down the path of going with a locksmith to do anything, because this can very quickly lead to a physical confrontation. If the tenant is at the house when you arrive with a locksmith, they are likely to resist that and to try to stop the physical act of changing the lock from taking place. Throw in some heated exchange and you’ve got a pretty hairy situation on your hands.
It turns out the tenant paid all the back rent at the last possible moment, thereby putting and end to those eviction proceedings. The failure to provide keys to new locks is a clear violation of the lease but requires starting the process all over again. The thing is, time is of the essence here. When asked about bringing a locksmith to open the lock the lawyer said .“I don’t think you can do that.” WTF kind of answer is that? He is supposed to be the expert, IDK if he is, in fact, a landlord/tenant lawyer or just a generalist. I have been a tenant and am currently a landlord (one unit) myself. Sometimes, the rights of tenants defy common sense. I also think landlords are often depicted as evil people who sit in a tower counting their gold. Many of us are just trying to make ends meet and having people work the system to avoid meeting the terms of their lease is infuriating.
It should go like this:
Judge: Show up in court tomorrow with new key or I will find in the landlords favor and allow entry.
If the tenant shows up,
Judge: Did you change the locks and not supply a new key?
Tenant: Yes, but
Judge Do you have a new key with you right now?
Tenant: Only mine but
Judge: It is ordered the landlord be allowed to enter the property by using a locksmith and the tenant pay the associated costs. The Sheriff will accompany the landlord. Next case.
I know. Landlords assume some risk when getting into the business but dealing with people who intentionally abuse the system is a freaking nightmare. I would recommend against anyone becoming a landlord and I’ve had, mostly. good luck.
I was curious about the differences between PA (where I live) and NJ, so I went poking around on google.
I found conflicting information about whether or not tenants can lock out a landlord. But I did find a cite from the state of NJ itself, so I take that as a much more credible site than other random google hits.
(PDF warning)
More info in the linked document.
Things would be much easier for you if you were in PA.
Like you, I’m a little guy, not some evil overlord sitting in an ivory tower. I have two buildings with two units each. I personally don’t regret becoming a landlord, and it has worked out pretty well for me, but I also don’t recommend it to others.
While relevant, the cited document doesn’t apply in this case as there is a specific provision in the lease that requires the tenant provide the landlord a new key with 24 hours of changing the locks. This is an outright refusal to comply with the lease. There is a place 5 minutes from the property to get copies made and she refused. Now, the fear is that she will let the inspector in and complain about all sorts of issues in an attempt to sabotage the deal. Hopefully, the inspector is professional enough to see through her BS, should that happen. I think the buyer is going to be warned of the possibility ahead of time.