Owner Key to your Rental

[jantango]

When his mother died several years ago, he rented her apartment to the worst tenants he could have found. Years later a couple from Venezuela signed a rental contract. They seemed like nice people, but they stopped paying the rent, and everything else for three years. In the meantime, their son was born and the woman asked her partner to leave. The heir initiated a legal proceeding with the court. The woman got a notice and left the premises before a lawyer and a court official arrived. The heir didn't have a set of keys, so he had to get a court order to break down the door. I arranged for the locksmith to do the work, which took hours. I hope he has finally decided to sell his mother's unit and pay all the debts.

I thought that evicting persons from a unit where there was a small child was impossible. That applies only to uninhabited spaces. In this case, the renters signed a contract and provided guarantees. It took more than three years to get a court order, and finally they were gone, probably to another place to con the owners.

I got to know my next door neighbor well enough after many years to feel confident in giving him my door key, and he gave me his key. That way if either one of us lost our keys, we had access to our units.

 

[wrangler]

Regardless of what the contract or the law says, assume the owner has a set of keys. If I am the owner, I certainly will have a copy. If you were the owner, won't you? As others have noted, it's for emergencies. No sane owner would want an unhappy renter, so they won't come in unannounced with the key, especially when you're home. Yes, there are bad owners who might do that just like there are bad renters who abuses the place they rent, regardless of what the contract or the law says.

If you want total privacy, don't rent. If you do you rent, accept the fact that someone else has a key. If not already installed, install something (door latch, door jammer, etc...) that prevents the door from opening even with the keys when you're inside. Store your valuables in hidden locations, locked draws or safe. Install a security camera.

(If you are the owner, you should have the number of a locksmith handy in case the tenant changes the lock, again, regardless of what the contract or the law says.)

This is completely illogical. The contract must specify all permissible and prohibited actions. If the owner intends to retain a key, this detail needs to be clearly included in the contract. In the event that the property owner and renter cannot reach an agreement, the owner should refrain from leasing to that particular renter. The scenario you propose risks legal consequences for the owner if they enter the property without authorization during the rental period. As a renter, I will not make any assumptions; it's important to avoid assumptions altogether. Clarity in the contract is essential before I commit to signing. Should I discover unauthorized entry into my property that contravenes the contract and violates the law, I would promptly take legal action.

 

[Rich One]

One can always install another lock the ones that consist of a bar that goes thru on the inside. Very easy to install.

 

[Reply Guy]

I didn't even know this was a controversial thing. I've always assumed the owner had a key to the apartments that I've rented, and that they wouldn't enter unless arranging with me. Rented many apartments, never had a problem. I make sure that I feel comfortable with the owner before renting. If they seem sketchy, I would never rent even with a 20 page contract, notorized, etc, etc.

 

[wrangler]

I didn't even know this was a controversial thing. I've always assumed the owner had a key to the apartments that I've rented, and that they wouldn't enter unless arranging with me. Rented many apartments, never had a problem. I make sure that I feel comfortable with the owner before renting. If they seem sketchy, I would never rent even with a 20 page contract, notorized, etc, etc.

Trust with a property owner will lead to a good renting experience. It’s great you’ve never encountered issues with owners having a key and respecting your privacy. I have not either. However, while trust is an important component of any rental agreement, explicitly detailing rights and responsibilities in a contract provides clear guidance and protection for both parties. It’s not about distrusting the owner but ensuring that expectations are transparent and legally binding. This not only protects against potential misunderstandings but also offers a recourse in rare instances where disagreements or unauthorized entries occur. Trust is indeed crucial, but combining trust with clear contractual terms ensures that all parties understand their boundaries and obligations.

 

[Reply Guy]

You make a good point about making sure expectations are transparent.

I try to rely so much on gut feeling of trust, because even with a clear contract, to pursue a breach is time consuming and doesn't make sense monetarily in many cases.

 

[wrangler]

You make a good point about making sure expectations are transparent.

I try to rely so much on gut feeling of trust, because even with a clear contract, to pursue a breach is time consuming and doesn't make sense monetarily in many cases.

Trust and clarity are both necessary...

 

[TonyTigre]

This is completely illogical. The contract must specify all permissible and prohibited actions. If the owner intends to retain a key, this detail needs to be clearly included in the contract. In the event that the property owner and renter cannot reach an agreement, the owner should refrain from leasing to that particular renter. The scenario you propose risks legal consequences for the owner if they enter the property without authorization during the rental period. As a renter, I will not make any assumptions; it's important to avoid assumptions altogether. Clarity in the contract is essential before I commit to signing. Should I discover unauthorized entry into my property that contravenes the contract and violates the law, I would promptly take legal action.

It is not illogical to have backup plans. Of course BOTH sides should try to include clear details in the contract that defines their rights and interests. However, in the real world, people have different interpretations of the contracts and laws, no matter how clear one side thinks the contract or law is. Sometimes people just out right knowing break them, for good reasons. Sometimes the consequences of breaking the contract or law is relatively minor compared to inaction. You can file complaints and initiate lawsuits, but it's also a fact that a conviction and/or even winning a lawsuit doesn't necessarily bring about satisfactory justice or even net you monetary compensation. Besides losing your time, you can literally lose money even if you're the winner of a lawsuit.

Let me repeat, if you do you rent, accept the fact that someone else has a copy of the key. That someone else could be the owner and anyone he has ever given the key to, and that includes but not limited to family, friends, anyone he hired to manage or maintain the place, and of course previous renters. So if you are renting, don't have the illusion that you will have the same privacy and security as owning your own home.

Any combination of a good contract, trusting your instincts, and having backup plans are not mutually exclusive. We can and should have all three.

 

[wrangler]

It is not illogical to have backup plans. Of course BOTH sides should try to include clear details in the contract that defines their rights and interests. However, in the real world, people have different interpretations of the contracts and laws, no matter how clear one side thinks the contract or law is. Sometimes people just out right knowing break them, for good reasons. Sometimes the consequences of breaking the contract or law is relatively minor compared to inaction. You can file complaints and initiate lawsuits, but it's also a fact that a conviction and/or even winning a lawsuit doesn't necessarily bring about satisfactory justice or even net you monetary compensation. Besides losing your time, you can literally lose money even if you're the winner of a lawsuit.

Let me repeat, if you do you rent, accept the fact that someone else has a copy of the key. That someone else could be the owner and anyone he has ever given the key to, and that includes but not limited to family, friends, anyone he hired to manage or maintain the place, and of course previous renters. So if you are renting, don't have the illusion that you will have the same privacy and security as owning your own home.

Any combination of a good contract, trusting your instincts, and having backup plans are not mutually exclusive. We can and should have all three.

A contract is not a constitution in that it allows for little to no ambiguity if properly written. As I've previously mentioned, combining trust between the renter and the owner with the utmost clarity in the contract, and ensuring all parties fulfill their obligations, significantly reduces the likelihood of issues arising. My experience, both as a renter and with owners in the United States, has been positive, following this approach without incident.

I recognize that in certain jurisdictions, including Argentina, legal frameworks may not always favor owners, potentially leading to feelings of vulnerability. It's undeniable that there are problematic tenants just as there are negligent owners, or "slum lords," who fail to maintain their properties, indicating that issues can arise from both sides.

Your admission that you would keep a set of keys regardless of the contract's stipulations, even if it explicitly states you should not have a copy, strikes me as deceptive. I believe in transparency and would caution against such practices. Instead of resorting to deceit, owners should not lease to those who do not accept their terms. While I personally would not agree to such terms, other renters might, I strongly urge you to make clear to your tenant, that you will be keeping a copy of the keys. I advocate for adherence to the law and honesty in dealings, despite the challenges owners may face.

 

[TonyTigre]

A contract is not a constitution in that it allows for little to no ambiguity if properly written. As I've previously mentioned, combining trust between the renter and the owner with the utmost clarity in the contract, and ensuring all parties fulfill their obligations, significantly reduces the likelihood of issues arising. My experience, both as a renter and with owners in the United States, has been positive, following this approach without incident.

I recognize that in certain jurisdictions, including Argentina, legal frameworks may not always favor owners, potentially leading to feelings of vulnerability. It's undeniable that there are problematic tenants just as there are negligent owners, or "slum lords," who fail to maintain their properties, indicating that issues can arise from both sides.

Your admission that you would keep a set of keys regardless of the contract's stipulations, even if it explicitly states you should not have a copy, strikes me as deceptive. I believe in transparency and would caution against such practices. Instead of resorting to deceit, owners should not lease to those who do not accept their terms. While I personally would not agree to such terms, other renters might, I strongly urge you to make clear to your tenant, that you will be keeping a copy of the keys. I advocate for adherence to the law and honesty in dealings, despite the challenges owners may face.

As I said before, what you consider to be clear, unambiguous, might not be for others. What I said was that I would have a copy of the key if I were the owner. I also said was that both the owner and the renter would want the contract to state their responsibilities and interest. What I didn't specifically say is that I would have a copy of the key even if the contract explicitly states I cannot. You can argue that my statement preceding my statement noting my preference to keep a copy as implying that I would go against a contract that explicitly say I won't. However, that is certainly debatable in my opinion. For one thing, it's clear from my comments that it's my opinion that the owner should have a copy of the key, therefore, why would I sign a contract stating I would not keep a copy of the key? I also agreed that trusting one's instinct is an important part, so why would I agree to rent to a tenant who insists that I not keep a copy of the key (requesting that I state that in the contract)? I would consider that to be a clear red flag. Besides, a contract could say the owner 'has a copy', 'not have a copy', or simply don't not mention it at all. Therefore, I would argue that you owe me an apology for declaring that I'm a deceptive person. You can certainly give your opinion on the subject without resorting to a direct personal attack on my character. Of course you can argue that you didn't specifically say I was a deceptive person, but simply noted that in the hypothetical scenario where I was the owner and doing what you accused me of stating, that it would be a deceptive act.