Consent to Entry document - Bank

[redraspberry194]

Hi Everyone

Tenants of ours via their lawyer and bank have asked us (as Landlords) to sign a Consent to Entry document. They say they are rearranging some of their finances. Basically if these tenants default on debt payments the bank gets to enter our property and repossess their property.

This particular tenant does not have anything more than desks and computers, however we do not feel comfortable signing this document and letting the bank just enter the property.

Has anyone come across this before ?

Sarah

[redraspberry194]

Just an update - we have decided not to sign this document and will ask the tenant and the bank to find another way to secure their security without involving landlord.

[Perry]

Or the LL's property.

[Keithw]

Good move (not signing), our lives are inter-twinted already just by them being our tenants, the last thing you would want to do is become defacto guarantor for them.

"Possession is 9/10ths of the law" and it seems that Repo agents take first & ask questions later.

Thanks for bringing this up, I had not heard about it before.

[redraspberry194]

Thanks for the comments. I explained our situation and uncomfortable-ness to the bank and they actually rather 'shirty' with me. Honestly..

[Sportsvee]

Turn it around on the bank.

Ask them to sign a Consent to Entry document. You are rearranging some of your finances. Basically if their atms are out of order you get to enter their property and repossess your property (money).

See how they like that.

[Keithw]

nice thought, but it highlights a common misunderstanding.
Once you deposit money in the bank it is no longer yours,it becomes the banks and you become an unsecured creditor !!!!

[redraspberry194]

Our tenant is going to revert back to the bank, so this may not be over. It will be interested to see if the bank start to get heavy handed.

[Perry]

NZ has a banking Ombudsman - keep that in mind.

[Keithw]

how can they get heavy handed, they are the tenants bank, what relationship do they have with you?

[Scouser]

Thanks for the comments. I explained our situation and uncomfortable-ness to the bank and they actually rather 'shirty' with me. Honestly..

The Bank I presume?

[redraspberry194]

yes, they didn't seem to like us saying no.

[Sportsvee]

yes, they didn't seem to like us saying no.

Can't remember if you said or not, but which bank is being a muppet?

[Scouser]

yes, they didn't seem to like us saying no.

I would essentially tell them to stick it - they have no rights or leverage and it's down to your generosity whether they get access or not and point out they're being rude and that isn't going to help their case.

However, I would not be letting them in if your tenant does have financial issues as if you're not getting paid it removes your option to change the locks and keep their assets. The latter is dubious in legality but once you've got the assets it's a painful process to get them back for either the bank or the tenant and provides leverage. If the tenant goes under owing you $ the bank would be ahead of you in the queue as a secured debtor so you could kiss those $s goodbye.

On an associated point I treat banks as what they are - service providers who want my business. This includes calling them out on stupidities and process issues that are their problem and not mine. This has occasionally resulted in being exceedingly abrupt without being unreasonable. They don't seem to know how to cope and are used to being treated almost with reverence in NZ. It's worked like a charm for me for 40 years.

[Perry]

However, . . . if your tenant does have financial issues . . . it removes your option to change the locks and keep their assets.

How would you do that and remain in lawful compliance with the RTA?