Request from tenant to replace locks

[dehgam]

I self manage a property.
I got a call this morning from a tenant advising that her car was stolen when it was parked on the driveway.
She left duplicate keys of the house in the car and is now concerned that same people will use the keys to break in the house as well.
She is asking me to replace the locks but not willing to pay for it.
I told her that there is nothing wront with the lock, i.e. it is in a working condition so that it is not my responsibility to replace.
I just wanted your thoughts on where the responsibility lies for this?
Thanks.

 

[HotRod]

I self manage a property.
I got a call this morning from a tenant advising that her car when it was parked on the driveway.
She left duplicate keys of the house in the car and is now concerned that same people will use the keys to break in the house as well.
She is asking me to replace the locks but not willing to pay for it.
I told her that there is nothing wront with the lock, i.e. it is in a working condition so that it is not my responsibility to replace.
I just wanted your thoughts on where the responsibility lies for this?
Thanks.

Her problem.

If you had the required-by-law locks on the doors and windows and she chose not to use them correctly and then the keys got stolen, that's her problem, not yours.

If she feels unsafe now, it's up to her to remedy, not you.

 

[wylie]

Your post seems to be missing some words, but I guess the tenant had her car stolen, or maybe her keys stolen.

I don't see this as something that you are obliged to do anything about. Perhaps she needs to check to see if her insurance will cover replacing the locks if the car and/or keys were stolen.

Of course, the issue for you is that whilst the tenant will want the locks changed to protect her belongings and for her own safety, it is your house that could be damaged if someone entered and damaged it.

I still see it as a problem for the tenant though (mostly).

 

[HotRod]

Your post seems to be missing some words, but I guess the tenant had her car stolen, or maybe her keys stolen.

I don't see this as something that you are obliged to do anything about. Perhaps she needs to check to see if her insurance will cover replacing the locks if the car and/or keys were stolen.

Of course, the issue for you is that whilst the tenant will want the locks changed to protect her belongings and for her own safety, it is your house that could be damaged if someone entered and damaged it.

I still see it as a problem for the tenant though (mostly).

Also depends what's on the lease. I think it you lose the keys you have to pay to have a new set re-cut. Might be something about stolen keys but I have not checked any of my leases lately.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

I had an issue with a former flatmate once (oy vey! what a nightmare!) and spoke to the PM, re: changing the locks. They told me it was my responsibility, which was fair enough - it's not the landlord's fault I wasn't careful - so I changed the locks and gave them the spare set of keys.

A locksmith can just replace the barrel (or whatever it's called), no need to replace the whole thing.

 

[Dreamrunachieve]

Re-key the locks

Re-keying the locks might be the cheaper practical solution. It depends on how long and good the tenant has been within your IP. If its over two years or so and IP is tenanted by a single mother etc and in medium to high crime rate area I would suggest you split the costs with them, but otherwise they lost it cause they left the spare keys in the car. I am not sure if the lease would cover that sort of thing specifically.

 

[S.T]

No way I'd pay or split the costs, they've lost the keys - they pay. Pretty simple!

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Re-keying the locks might be the cheaper practical solution.

Yeah, that's what I meant re: changing the barrel. The locksmith guy did what he does and gave me the new keys. Done and done!

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

No way I'd pay or split the costs, they've lost the keys - they pay. Pretty simple!

Yeah, I'm with you simtr. It's not the OP's responsibility to ride in on his trusty white steed and save the day.

 

[Ed Barton]

Of course, the issue for you is that whilst the tenant will want the locks changed to protect her belongings and for her own safety, it is your house that could be damaged if someone entered and damaged it.

Very very unlikely.

Tenant wants, tenant pays.

 

[Perp]

I'll add to the chorus: if the tenant, as a result of her negligence, wishes to change the locks, it's at her expense. It may be covered by her car insurance or contents insurance. s 54 of Sch 1 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (Vic) would seem to support that position.

 

[dehgam]

Great. Thanks Everyone for your quick response.

 

[thatbum]

I'll add to the chorus: if the tenant, as a result of her negligence, wishes to change the locks, it's at her expense. It may be covered by her car insurance or contents insurance. s 54 of Sch 1 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (Vic) would seem to support that position.

So - how exactly was the tenant negligent?

 

[Perp]

So - how exactly was the tenant negligent?

Not the legalese "negligent" - the everyday sense. Leaving house keys in the car strikes me if not strictly "negligent", then at least "the tenant's problem". If they choose to store their keys in the vehicle, they're responsible for the consequences if that proves to have been a bad choice, no?

 

[thatbum]

Not the legalese "negligent" - the everyday sense. Leaving house keys in the car strikes me if not strictly "negligent", then at least "the tenant's problem". If they choose to store their keys in the vehicle, they're responsible for the consequences if that proves to have been a bad choice, no?

Not so clear cut unfortunately. The default position is that the landlord has to keep the place reasonably secure.

Without any negligence in a legal sense, then a landlord is going to struggle to get a tenant to pay for a change in locks.

Sometimes there is an argument to be made around whether the property remains reasonably secure, but its definitely not as clear cut as some of the above posters suggest.

The proposal to go 50/50 on costs might not be a bad one in this case.

 

[Perp]

Not so clear cut unfortunately. The default position is that the landlord has to keep the place reasonably secure.

Surely their obligation is to make the property "securable" rather than secure, as the landlord can't control the tenant's lack of care for their own safety.

The logic that a landlord is obligated to provide a workaround for the tenant's own behaviour adverse to their interests would surely lead to some absurd conclusions. e.g. If the tenant said "I always forget to lock the doors when I go out, but I don't feel safe with my place wide open all day. Could you please pay for self-closing and self-locking doors?", I presume that would be legitimately denied.

 

[Blueberry]

Forgetting the "who's responsible" thing. Another issue may be whether it will be an issue for your insurance?

 

[Perp]

Forgetting the "who's responsible" thing. Another issue may be whether it will be an issue for your insurance?

Well, you can't forget it, because you'd only claim on your insurance if it's your liability. Also, the issue then becomes about who pays the excess... which may not be any less than the cost of the claim anyway.

 

[redwing]

Where's Dazz

He loves these threads

 

[Sez]

Whenever a tenant asks me if the locks can be changed I respond with.

"Sure, legally you are entitled to change the locks at your own expense if you wish but you must provide a copy of the new keys to the office within a week of having the locks changed."

I would suggest she follows up with her insurance though, it may be covered.

Additionally, if there is a security door then she would only have to get the lock on the security door changed - if they can't unlock that they can't use the working keys on the timber door . A handyman can do this at a cheaper rate than a locksmith .