Got a Knock on the Door Today...

[dewey]

Yeah, I've heard of this.
A long time ago I worked with a woman who lived in a big apt complex, with a lot of subsidized housing. I think it was twice a year, all the apt were inspected. There was no choice, you either allowed the inspection, or received a 20 day notice to vacate, then it was inspected. Was not an issue for her, and she usually got several weeks notice.

Imp

Yes, I think it's probably similar to that in a lot of areas.

The property owner receives the initial notice and the tenant has the right to refuse consent. I would think inspection warrants are not totally uncommon.

 

[OldGuy43]

Well, I did it. I let him in. Inspection took all of 10 minutes or less, and the only thing he found wrong was that we have no vent for the stove. Guess I was worried for nothing..

I'm truly sorry to hear that you let them in. It sets a bad president. "They" can only take away our rights if we allow them to.

 

[SillyChicken]

No...

1) NO ONE will get into this house without the proper identification.
2) I'm gonna be hovering, uncomfortably if I have to, in order to insure the safety of my belongings and cats.
3) As soon as this is over, I'm having a big, cold, glass of wine. PERIOD!

Ugh, I have literally worried myself sick over this... I just want it to be over.

Edited by Iowa Roo Mom - Yesterday at 10:11 am

Clearly I'm mistaken

 

[HHandbasket]

It does not matter what city or state you are in. Nor does it matter what the ordinance says. The fact is that you do not have to let any government agent on to your property without a warrant an you should never let them without one. Having nothing to hide is not a good reason to allow your rights to be violated.

X2!

 

[Mattemma]

I am so glad to read it went well for you.

 

[annageckos]

My Boyfriend and I use to live in an apartment. Once a year there was an inspection, whether we were there or not. I guess they got keys from the landlord. It only took a few minutes, but I hated it. One year my BF was in the hospital, and I would take the train to see him every other day. The inspector couldn't get in while I wasn't there because of the dogs. The basset hound was making a mess, ripping up boxes and things like that, but I was too tired to clean it up. One day when I took the dogs to go see my mom the inspector came by. He left a copy of the paperwork, it stated that the place was 'unkept' or something like that. That really ticked me off, I had a lot going on at the time, I didn't need anything added on top. I'm glad it worked out for you, I know it can be nerve racking.

 

[HHandbasket]

In California, if you are a renter, no landlord nor his agent nor government inspector may enter your property without 24 hours notice, and a government inspection has to be approved through your landlord. Of course, there is an exception if your house is on fire or in some other imminent, emergency type of danger.

I came home once in 1998 after being out of town visiting family for a couple of days and found my landlord in my apartment doing an "inspection". I had no idea how long he had been there. I called the police and had him arrested for breaking and entering, then filed papers against him in court for Unlawful Entry by a Landlord. Sac County Sheriff came out and cuffed him and hauled him off, but I did not follow through on the unlawful entry case. I just moved out of there and told him to kiss my you-know-what. He threatened to counter-sue, but when he talked to his lawyer, I guess he realized he didn't have a leg to stand on, that I had followed the Landlord/Tenant guidelines for my county to the letter while he, according to our local laws, committed B&E.

I had nothing to hide, but like rebel said, having nothing to hide should not mean giving up our constitutional rights.


Edited for typos.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

The thing to remember is that a landlord is not a government agent so the forth amendment does not apply to him. But he does lose rights to his property when he rents it out. It is yours as long as the rent is payed. It does have rights having to do with inspections an repairs but these are usually very restrictive though they vary widely from state to state.


With respect to government agents though, your rights are the same under the 4th amendment no matter where you live in the US. It does not matter if you own a huge house or rent a room over your dads garage. No government agent can inspect or search your home without a warrant or your consent. But unlike the Myranda laws there is no requirement for the government agent to tell you what your rights are. In fact they are aloud to trick you in to letting them. Its your responsibility to know your rights an to vocally tell them you do not consent to any search or seizure of your person or property.

If they have cause to search then hold them to the fire. Make them go to a judge an plead there case to get a warrant then have to go back an explain there finding to that same judge. Due proses is there to protect you so let it.


Also those interested in 4th amendment rights might me interested in whats going on with drug dogs in the court. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57351391/drug-sniffing-dogs-an-unconstitutional-search/

 

[Oregon Blues]

If you are renting in a city that requires a license to rent out a house, you will have inspections. The landlord doesn't get to schedule them. The inspector comes whenever he is in the mood.

If a license is required and you do not allow the inspection, the license will be denied, the house can not be legally rented, and you will be homeless very quickly.

Believe me, the landlord does not like the license, the inspection, or the large fee that the city charges him for the license. It is the tenants who have brought the licensing about by their complaining about housing conditions. It was not the landlord's idea.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

The landlord cant refuse but the tenant can. Its his home an he has the right to refuse search from any government agent without a warrant.


Here's some good reading on the subject. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/387/523/case.html