Updating post from Reddit.
I will be clear it’s rare that it happen’s so there’s not a majority but it’s happened enough for me to ask the above question.
Me and my partner have been looking at renting a new place, upgrade from a flat to a house and a couple of the properties we’ve looked at were advertised as “preferably not working from home”. One property we even viewed and did the paperwork and the landlord pulled out when they found out I worked from home.
Why? I need a greater understanding about this because at the moment it feels petty, or potentially the landlord is annoyed they couldn’t snoop around while we’re out
[edit] seen a few comments asking about this. What I mean by work from home is as an employee. Not running a business.
It would be an unwise landlord who tries to let themselves in while he thinks you're out - they'd have no way of knowing when you were on annual leave, off sick, or working shifts.
If you're concerned, get a video doorbell - I know Ring do a no drill mount.
More likely it's a perception that you'll cause extra wear and tear (ridiculous, but that might be it) or in the case of a bills inclusive tenancy that you'll run up the bills.
>More likely it's a perception that you'll cause extra wear and tear (ridiculous, but that might be it)
This was my only ridiculous thought.
Letting themselves in would be illegal
Correct.
But let's not pretend it has never happened.
They can't do jack once you're in the door. Well s21 I guess but if I was a LL I doubt Id be bothered
To answer the original question, I think it's because of wear and tear
The LL has no right to dictate what you do in your own home, within the rules of the lease.
You may fall foul if you operate a business from your home, which is often outside what most leases allow.
WFH as an employee however shouldnt cause any issues to anyone?
Are these leases bills included or something petty like that?!
Likely a don’t operate a business rule on lease, mortgage or insurance that is been incorrectly understood for a wfh employee.
With lots of tenants chasing an indifferent pool of properties it’s easy for landlords just to say no rather than bother with detailed enquiries.
Just asking.
What if the tenant got injured when working from home? Is the landlord reliable or partly reliable? As the employer should be responsible for a safe working space for his employee.
If the insured activity is carried out in the household of the insured person or at another location, insurance cover is provided to the same extent as when the activity is carried out at the company premises.
Well it's sometimes not down to landlord but terms of the mortgage lender or insurance so landlord has to state no WFH.
No mainstream mortgage lenders prevent people from working from home in the property. They only prevent "operating a business", which uninformed landlords often confuse for 'working from home'.
Yes, home insurance usually has some clause about "not operating a business from the property" but refers to clients visiting the property etc.
Many have been updated to confirm that admin work, emails, and other general laptop work is fine.
I suspect the landlord is taking things to extremes and not really understood that it doesn't really cover the typical WFH activities.
Which lender or insurer bars tenants from doing clerical/desk work from home?
none that I've found. But most people conflate WFH with operating a business / receiving clients
Probably none, but most home insurances DO state you cannot run a business, any commerical activity, or have clients at your property and some probably don't expand on that to say "but clerical work, admin, and checking emails etc" (i.e. the typical office type job stuff) is fine.
Some do clarify from what I've seen.
The landlord is maybe taking things to extremes, being ultra cautious, or just misunderstood his home insurance.
I think this deserves an award for the most ridiculous comment of the day
Not really, as most home insurance policies DO state that you cannot run a business, do any commerical activity, or have clients at your home for work purposes though it's not really referring to typical WFH stuff like admin work, clerical tasks, checking emails etc but some policies probably don't clarify clearly enough which may spook landlords into thinking they cannot allow any WFH or they may be invalidating their insurance.
Many policies clarify that admin based and computer based work etc is fine but I'm sure many don't go into granular details about it.
I would assume WFH is working a remote job.
Running a business would be registering a business to that address.
As I said the home insurance is likely NOT saying you cannot work remotely at your property but more about having clients etc in there.
I imagine some landlords are either misunderstanding their insurance or just overly cautious and don't want to risk their insurance being invalid should they need it.
Many insurance policies actually state that admin and clerical work etc is allowed but maybe some aren't clarifying that at all so landlords aren't clear.
If I was OP I'd just stop mentioning they WFH and say they go to the office every day if it's becoming a recurring problem.
It might be less strict if it's not a business and purely just doing office admin work for a business registered elsewhere but it is a thing I had a strict insurance policy through total landlord insurance (not sure which company provided the insurance though) that the agents didn't believe would have this term. I had to send it over to the agent who agreed I couldn't let to a tenant they had because I wasn't covered for actual WFH tenants. I did a bit of digging it is mentioned a bit in this link.
https://www.arnoldskeys.com/about-us/blog/working-from-home-in-a-rented-property-are-you-covered/
I just remembered lease agreements can also forbid it but like others have mentioned it is usually running a business from home rather than WFH.
I have NO idea why a landlord would care if you worked from home. I don’t even ask.
I need to know if you work for insurance purposes. But beyond that it doesn’t matter to me. Very odd.
Also the idea that multiple landlords in multiple properties want to snoop around when you are out seems really far fetched.
It will likely be a landlord interpreting a clause in their home insurance too literally.
Usually home insurance does dictate that the property not be used for business purposes, any commercial activity, seeing clients etc but it's not designed to prohibit WFH.
Some policies are more clear and state the admin and clerical work are OK but I'm guessing some aren't that clear and a landlord just thinks "no working from home allowed" and doesn't want to risk it.
Unfortunately there are quite a lot of landlords who think it’s their property and they can pop in when they like. They know they should give notice but think it doesn’t matter if the tenant won’t know.
I must just run in professional circles as this notion would be abhorrent to any of the landlords I know
In my experience as a renter there are two landlord circles. The good one like you describe, which is my current landlord. Totally hands off and only contacts us if necessary and vice versa. Then the second one, who have no idea how to be a landlord, such as my previous one who left all her stuff behind and was still living in the property when we collected the keys. She definitely let herself into the house when we weren't in at least twice. Absolutely insane women. One before that also didn't seem to realise that stuff like the boiler was their responsibility when it broke down in the winter and dragged their heels for weeks over fixing it.
It's illegal to enter a rental property without permission. If you suspect this is happening change the lock barrel and/or get a camera doorbell.
Why do you need to know if someone works for insurance purposes? Genuine question.
My insurers at some of my properties don’t accept DHSS tenants
Isn't that illegal now?
Not sure. Haven’t asked them recently
Illegal for landlords to discriminate, not illegal for the insurers to do it I don't think
I would say there is more wear and tear if someone is at home all day then someone who is at work most of the day
From what my old LL told me; it's because you are at home more, will use the facilities more and create wear and tear over a shorter period. This would require more maintenance and cost in the short and long run.
I mean, that's utter bollocks if you ask me. When I did WFH I was at my desk for 8-10 hours pretty much, occasionally getting up for coffee and loo breaks. My leccie bill went down £13 a month when going back to site work, so clearly wasn't using much of anything more.
LLs saying you can use the property, but not too much.
Yes, I think it's this - more wear and tear. Unless it's a bulls included deal, in which case, it's because, whilst the difference may not be massive for some people, if you're someone who boils the kettle every hour, whacks the heating on in the day (or whacks it up if it's anyway on), runs the washer during the day instead of the night etc it can add up quite fast.
Actually not bollocks, we can tell the difference in wear & tear whether we have a single person or couple in ours. Twice the use, twice the friends/family coming round etc . It's subtle ,, but it's there.
I mean a person could equally create more wear and tear just by having friends visit more frequently then, which would be allowed and reasonable for them to do.
If they're renting somewhere it's their home and they can spend 24/7 there causing wear and tear
Yep but couldn't be arsed to do a full scientific analysis to keep every pedantic redditor happy, I just pointed out a simple fact that we can notice the difference!
You noticed the difference in your case between a couple Vs single person, which is just anecdotal evidence
That's entirely different though.
A couple are gonna live in their home and utilise it. A single person is far more likely to spend more time out of the house.
Used to be true but Today young people go out less.
Only if bills are included.
Some may assume it means more wear and tear
If bills are included it is still possible to set a cap. I used to live in a place where bills were included but we would pay anything above the cap each month
Just more hassle compared to renting to someone who doesn't WFH.
Just lie, I am office based... Done.
Or maybe it's a flat and the landlord is friends with the person that lives downstairs who they know works night shifts.
Because some landlords like to sneak in and sniff underwear while tennants are out at work
of all the answers on here this one seems the most sensible
Landlord here.
This is specifically why I haven’t fixed my tenants’ washing machine ssssniiiiff
There is no reason for your landlord to know about your flexible working arrangements, no matter what they are.
My landlord made sure there was a desk and office chair in the back bedroom after I told him I'd be working from home.
I can only see it being an issue if bills are included or its a house share. Maybe if it's your own business, there could be limitations on the mortgage about operating from there?
As a landlord, the only reason I can think for this being a preference for other landlords would be wear and tear.
Think about the only differences that could be possible. The more someone is home.the more they will ruin it. Simple as that. The more footsteps, the more dragging of furniture, the more hinges get used, the more carpets get stained, etc etc etc. Which also could mean more noise and more chance of issues or repairs being needed more frequently.
Personally, I love the wfh bunch... generally wfh positions are professional positions that again generally offer more job security and higher salaries. Depends on what they do, obviously... but generally from my experience. So I tend to welcome the wfh tenants. I wfh also if that helps, and tend to sympathise with other wfh people. But I do see the arguments against it too. All are valid imo.
The only time it made sense was when the bills were included in the rent
I would find that to be an odd stipulation, is it possible there’s a confusion between working from home and running a business from home.
It’s this.
I've noticed there is a slight higher "wear and tear", therefore, it is likely that more maintenance issues arise from tenants who are full-time at home...
Nevertheless, this is expected in the business... that you are giving the possession of the property to someone enjoy and live their lives on whichever way they please... as long as they don't break clauses in the contract...
But tbh, there are morons everywhere, so there will always be some landlords out there who don't understand basic law and the property letting business. There are even comments in this post about surveillance cameras to watch tenants. You have got to be kidding....
Please tell me that last bit isn’t true?! My son is starting to be in a position to rent a place and wow, the rental situation today, is completely different to when I rented in the 90s.
I believe the rental market today is much better for tenants than the 90's... Nowadays there is huge amount of regulation protecting tenants and providing higher standards in general. In the 90's you would just need to open the door to be legally letting out the house or even a shed if you wanted.
The bad examples today come from people who don't properly follow the law/regulations or are just cowboys in business, which you will find a small portion of those in any sector of the economy.
The only reason (and it’s a stretch) is that they think you are self-employed / contracting and they are worried about your future earning capabilities.
Could be insurance complications. Some insurances may perceive it at a higher risk factor and increase premiums or deny cover.
Some LL might fear pets in the property and fear someone working from home may request one.
Some people will just be prejudice because it's new and unfamiliar to them and they may wrongly perceive this as less stable situation than a person with a traditional workplace.
Sadly today as LL risk increase they become more picky as any mistakes can potentially be hugely costly and complicated. It will only get worse and harder once the renters rights bill comes in. I'm betting without a guarantor many LL won't even rent to many individuals.
We just moved, both wfh and literally saw not one property advertised as such. Didn't even come up in application, just whether we were employed full time (which we are, employer is a company). The fact we wfh never came up from their end, although we did mention it to a couple estate agents when they asked 'so why you moving' and we were just like 'a bigger space to live in, since we wfh as software developers' and they were completely unbothered, just like 'fair enough! Bigger spaces makes sense'.
What kind of places you applying to? Like are they shares or bills incl? For a regular flat where you pay all your bills, they should only ask whether you're employed full time or not.
Job sustainability?
There are valid reasons.
For example, in a development where building works are ongoing, that would disturb the tenants ABILITY to work from home, due to noise.
It’s a responsible landlord that makes tenants aware of these situations.
However, if the tenant knows that this is the case, and still wants to take up residency, and sign a tenancy agreement, then a landlord should necessarily not prevent that.
Interested in other people’s views on this, especially how renters reform affects it.
If bills are included you can assume that someone working from home will have the heating on, use more hot water etc.
We don’t care, so long as credit checks come back ok. There are some weirdos is every large group of people, just avoid them.
Questions:
I sit at a PC 8 hours a day for work then I move to my ps5 for 4 hours of the day again sitting.
Insurance and mortgage reasons most forbid tenants working from home or running business from the address.
False. Running a business yes, wfh no.
Because they want their own space and you would use extra utilities especially in the winter. You’d take over the place. A definite no.
I’m never planning on living with my landlord so this is a useless take
Regardless. It’s pretty obvious. I don’t know why you felt you had to disclose this to them in the first place. I think suspecting they would snoop around while you’re believed to be at work is a tad dramatic. You’re probably not that interesting
I am very boring it’s true
I changed jobs during my tenancy and my landlord said he’d have to put my rent up, when it was due, to cover “the extra wear and tear” of me sitting at the end of my bed hunched over a desk.
Surely that's illegal??
If the bills are paid and the place is in good order who cares…they aren’t your parents. It’s time the laws changed to address these wannabe “aristocrats”.
It's likely because someone working from home will have a 25% to 50% increase in wear and tear on the property versus someone that is out of the property for 10 hours a day for work. This will include foot traffic damage to carpets, use of plumbing, cooking and heating / air con facilities, knocks and scuffs to doors, fixtures, walls etc. and furniture use (if furnished). This could introduce additional costs to the landlord.
Renting to a work from home tenant for 12 months is likely to be similar wear and tear costs to the landlord to renting to an office based worker for 18 months.
I don't agree with it, but statistically it boils down to a higher likelihood of increased costs to the landlord.
Use of plumbing??? So because someone works from home they might have an extra shit a day and thats forbiddden?
If that is any landlords reasoning, they should not be a landlord, they clearly cant afford the risk
Dishwashers, washing up, laundry, making drinks, more water for cleaning, mopping floors etc is all a lot more for home workers. Add a lunchtime workout or park run and you've also got an extra shower per day as well. An office worker might flush their home toilet 3 or 4 times a day. A home worker might flush double or triple that amount. How do you think central heating works? I WFH every day and have the heating on in the winter during the day. If I was in an office it would be off. That's 160 hours of heating per month extra. That is all use of a plumbing system and significantly increases the risk of a landlord having to pay for a boiler repair or something like that.
Not plumbing related but I have a building in my garden that I work in 5 days a week and have done for the last 5 years. Prior to that it only had occasional use. Since I started using it 9am - 5pm every day, for 5 years, I have gone through 2 office desks, 2 chairs, a broken coffee table, I've repainted twice and I've put some scuffs on the wooden floor. The doors have also started to drop on the hinges from a lot of use meaning it doesn't lock and the blinds also need replacing.
Like I said I don't agree with it. But as a long term WFH person, there is definitely a change in my house upkeep since I've been doing it.
Washing up? Dishwashers? I work from home, you know how much washing up i create from 9am til 5pm?
A single glass.
Laundry? Less i dont have to wash work uniform
Mopping floors?? Sat working on excel? Really?
In five years you've gone through 2 desks? Sounds like you need to buy a better desk or youre being daft with its use , because thats not normal at all
Simply put the tenant is allowed quiet enjoyment of their property they are renting , even WFH, what else are you gonna police if so, if someone bakes? Thats additional wash. If someone enjoys a bath? If someone washes their work uniform?
Its an absolutely unreasonable intrusive level of control that a landlord should not have
Insurance.
If someone hurt themselves, they could technically claim against the liability part of the buildings insurance as it's a workplace.
Working from home normally means more tech in the house, which technically increases fire risk.
But landlords can't dictate what you can/can't do in the home.
Probably to do with how much time is spent in the house. If it's 24/7 then they may be wary of more maintenance requirements. They prefer someone to be out at work all day and only sleeping at the house I guess.
It might be a home insurance thing but they are probably taking the clause in their insurance a little too far.
It will likely state something that the property is not to be used for "running a business" or "any commercial activity" but that usually relates to not performing any manual or dangerous work at the propert or having customers in the house for services because then those could become issues with people getting injured or accidents happening etc.
These clauses aren't meant to cover someone sitting on a computer typing away or whatever, I mean even before WFH was a big thing people did that anyway outside of work hours to catch up on work etc.
It's strange the amount of landlord in this thread saying "I have no idea why this would be" or "it'll be because wear and tear" when it's far more likely to be because home insurance typically DOES state that no business must be run from the property, no commercial activities, no clients etc visiting.
Now it's not designed to prohibit WFH but many policies probably don't specify or go into details about what IS allowed which most WFH activities (office based stuff, admin, clerical etc) are fine.
Just get an RV and travel you have the perfect opportunity
They may think WFH jobs are probably more at risk of redundancy now than other jobs? The only logical thing I can think of
It’s the wear and tear and thing
If you’re at home 8 more hours the wear and tear will accumulate a lot quicker.
It depends on the property size and also what work you are doing from home.
If it is an office style job it is generally seen that you will have greater wear on the property
No idea but it's none of their business so literally just lie and what will they do about it anyway? Sorry you're having to deal with this
Many tenancies dont want orvallow a business to be run ftom the property. I work from home and esp where bills are included its just seen as making heating bills more. In my case it's the odd hours and socially unacceptable nature of my job. But also they may envision people coming and going etc. Mostly think it's to do with bills and disturbing others.
My properties are always very sought after. So I can consider small details others might find ridiculous.
WFH are more likely to have issues than those that don't. I am not saying any are likely.. but more issues may arise. Its only very minor, but I may as well pick someone who doesn't if given the choice.
Theres certainly no positive having someone WFH vs. going to work that I can think of as the LL.
Depends what they do. Some lines of work have both council tax and insurance implications. A little home office to do Teams calls is one thing, but then you get people doing in-home hair dressing and mechanics and all sorts.
Never asked (as a landlord) and never heard it.
If you have neighbours that are also tenants it can lead to disputes. I had a new neighbour move in, started to complain if we played music during the day or even had the TV at an audible level. Turns out they'd decided to run their business out of the property. They were really shitty about it but were screwed as the complained to the landlord but they were prohibited from running a business there. We'd been there 10 years and landlord was reasonable.
Surely it’s some fucked up capitalist brain worm idea, because “the property won’t get as much wear and tear if the person isn’t home 40+ hours a week”, that’s the only reason I can think of
Why are you even telling them? It's none of their business.
Because there a risk that you will have to convert a room to be able to work from home. A renter I had in one of my properties removed wardrobes and shelves from the wall and painted the back wall a different colour for video calls and in the agreement I told her that she couldn’t do anything like that. After that I kicked her out and she also was home all the time so I couldn’t go round to check things
Well, she could have returned it back to the state it was in when she left. The fact she was home all the time so you couldn't go round d to check things shouldn't be an issue, you need their permission to check things so the snooping element appears to be at play for you.
To be that’s wrong, it’s my house so I should be able to go in without permission. The rules on this need changing
Its their house for the duration of the tenancy, its your investment. You are the type of landlord that give others a bad name.
Why is it always assumed the property is an investment? I worked abroad for 2 years and would have rented out my house if I could. It's not 'an investment ' it's my house. I fully understand that the tenant has full right to peaceful enjoyment while they are tenants, but it's still my house that I worked years to pay the mortgage for.
Don’t rent it out then.
Is your gripe that you cannot just poke your head round the door as a moments notice? Imagine the bank did that because they had the mortgage.
If you read my post you will see that my gripe was that people think rented properties are for investment, not ever a personal/family home temporarily unused.
Also if you read it you will see that a) I absolutely agree tenants shouldn't be disturbed, b) I was in another country so not likely to 'poke my head around the door at a moment's notice '.
Ok so I was just a little confused as it didn’t seem relevant to the original post.
Fair enough if your house is your house while you are away but the same laws still apply. Only thing that may help would be renting to family or something like that
You have to be trolling?
I’m not, on the street this property is 8/12 of them are rented out and we have a WhatsApp group to tell each other when the idiot tenants are breaking the rules and to let each other know when they are out to go and check things, one of the tenants that is a couple of doors down from mine found the camera the landlord put in the tree so I went round and stopped him from taking out out. The cameras we have installed in our properties are a lifesaver and can quickly kick a tenant out if they find them. It’s a gated street so that’s the other bonus 😁 can’t get petty old tenants trying to post stuff through the door as we have spare keys for the postboxes on the automatic gate to the street 🥰
I don't think you would want the authorities reading this
That's criminal association right there. I hope somebody will report you.
‘Can quickly kick a tenant out if they find them’
Proof positive you are a troll
You've just admitted to breaking the law and being an awful person, I hope you're trolling. If not, I hope you get caught out and lose everything
Doubt it, the renters are niggers who don’t know anything about the law but are rich so it’s a win for me
Please Keep it Civil
This is why we need a Land Reform Movement.
Admitting to crimes on Reddit, holy shit land lord from hell
Which street and town/city it is?
Not exactly gonna say am I 🤣
Because you’re a troll.
You should, as you put it as the example to follow.
Nah
You have got to be joking. Tenants have a right to live in the property undisturbed.
It's your property, but it's their home.
The law is very clear that you need to give 24 hours notice and gain permission before entering.
If you don't want to comply with the most basic of laws, then sell up and leave the industry - and good riddance to you.
It's your building, not your house. It's your tenant's home, them having privilege over you is just part of the risk / reward of being a landlord.
You don't have the right to enter and do what you like with the place at any time you want while they live there because you sold away that right for a temporary period to your tenant(s) (that's why they pay you rent, to live there in peace free of disturbance.) If you want the right to barge in unannounced, expect to be able to charge way less rent in the future as no-one would want to live like that
If it’s rented, it’s not
They don't. You are renting the place for someone to live there. I have had landlords visiting frequently but they always let us know in advance. I think the problem is not about the rules, it's about your coercive tendencies. The ironic thing is that you are probably making things worse by repelling good tenants and ending up with those who have fewer choices. So over time you may be falling deeper in a spiralling abyss of paranoia and coercive behaviour. I think you should consider therapy.
Did you fall down a flight of stairs before writing this?
You own the property, that's it. You have no more right to enter it or make demands than the bank does on the properties you have mortgaged. While you are renting it, it is the tenant's home and they have all the rights and protections as you do in the house you live in.
Now stop being silly.
Your asset, their home. By agreeing to a tenancy, you sign away the right to enter it. If you are a landlord, you really should know this stuff. What other laws do you not know?
Dear lord no. why the fuck.
Having a tenant wfh is no different to a SAHM.
Why shouldn't she change the decor if she's paying to live there? As long as it's returned to the original state when she leaves. If you want to control how the place is decorated maybe you should live there yourself.
“ she also was home all the time so I couldn’t go round to check things”
Does she need to be home for you to check things regardless? I’d have changed the locks on you
If you want to check things you must agree visits with the tenant. You can't just go in as you please, you realise you could get in trouble for doing that?
You are an asshole landlord. She could have very well returned the palce at the state she found it, which is what is actually written in all standard tenancy agreements.
Troll having fun.
This is a community for Landlords. You can be anti-landlord in other places like /r/HousingUK/
Would she not let you go round when she was there?