Pennsylvania landlords have the right to enter rental property at any time, unless terms in the lease say otherwise.
[1]
Renters do have a right to quiet enjoyment of rental property. This means the landlord needs a justifiable reason to enter (such as repairs). He also can’t enter in ways that harass the renter or prevent the expected use of the property.
[2]
[3]
Pennsylvania landlords can legally enter a rental property without permission.
[1]
Pennsylvania landlords can legally enter a rental property without the tenant present.
[1]
Pennsylvania landlords can show an occupied house, but usually only if they reserved this privilege in the lease. S howings might limit the renter’s access or prevent the expected use of the property, so if it’s not the lease, the landlord will have to negotiate case by case with the tenant.
[2]
[3]
[4]
Pennsylvania landlords have no specific limit on how often they can enter for inspections. The landlord isn’t allowed to enter so often that it prevents the expected use of the property, but what is and isn’t too often gets decided case by case.
Pennsylvania landlords don’t need to provide advance notice before entering.
[1]
Pennsylvania landlords can enter without notice at any time, as long as this doesn’t prevent the expected use of the property.
[2]
Pennsylvania landlords can notify tenants verbally or in writing about an intention to enter.
[1]
Pennsylvania tenants can only refuse entries that will prevent the expected use of the property.
[3]
Pennsylvania landlords can get an injunction to force access or deliver a Notice to Quit and begin eviction, if a tenant illegally refuses entry.
[5]
Pennsylvania tenants can change locks without permission if the lease doesn’t say otherwise. Note that the landlord still has a right to enter for specific reasons, so it’s reasonable for tenants to provide copies of current keys.
Pennsylvania tenants can do any of the following if the landlord enters illegally:
[6]
[7]
There is no specific Pennsylvania caselaw limiting right to entry, and the landlord’s right of access at common law is more or less absolute except as limited by implied warranties of habitability and quiet enjoyment.
“A warranty of habitability is implied in all residential leases in this Commonwealth, by the terms of which the landlord warrants that the leased premises will be free of defects ‘of a nature and kind which will prevent the use of the dwelling for its intended purpose to provide premises fit for habitation by its dwellers.’”
“There is an implied covenant for the quiet enjoyment of the demised premises.” Kelly v. Miller, 249 Pa. 314, 316 (1915) . The covenant of quiet enjoyment is basically defined as a right to the ordinary use of the property for the purpose it was rented: “The lavatory, the kitchen sink and the blinds were part of the demised premises at the date of the lease and the change resulting from their removal was a violation of the tenant’s implied covenant for quiet enjoyment of the premises.” McCandless v. Findley, 86 Pa. Super. 288, 292 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1925)
“Any wrongful act of the landlord which results in an interference of the tenant’s possession, in whole or in part, is an eviction for which the landlord is liable in damages to the tenant.”
“(a) A landlord desirous of repossessing real property from a tenant … may notify, in writing, the tenant to remove from the same… under the following circumstances, namely… upon forfeiture of the lease for breach of its conditions…
“(b) Except as provided for in subsection (c), in case of the expiration of a term or of a forfeiture for breach of the conditions of the lease where the lease is for any term of one year or less or for an indeterminate time, the notice shall specify that the tenant shall remove within fifteen days from the date of service thereof, and when the lease is for more than one year, then within thirty days from the date of service thereof.”
“A breach of the implied warranty may be the basis of a complaint, as well as a defense or counterclaim to a landlord’s suit for rent or possession.”
“Damages suffered as a result of the breach are to be measured by an abatement of rent equal to ‘the percentage [of the rent] which reflects the diminution in use for the intended purpose,’ and ‘there should be no doubt that recovery will not be precluded simply because there is some uncertainty as to the precise amount of damages incurred.’”
