Craig Miller wrote: >> Mr. Luce is wrong. Common law, case law, and Con law all allow the landlord >> EXTENSIVE inspection rights, she/he must give "reasonable notice". In >> those two little words is the crux of so many disputes. >> The landlord can let in the inspector any time she choses. As long as >> reasonable notice is given. > Not trying to pick a fight here, but if I'm wrong about the constitutional issue, so is one of Minnesota's most reknowned constitutional scholars. Anyway, this is the rub: certainly a landlord has a right to inspect a unit if he or she has a "reasonable business purpose" and provides "reasonable notice." This is within a "Residential Tenant's Right to Privacy" and it is part of Minnesota's landlord-tenant law (the law also gives a list of what is a reasonable business purpose and includes allowing an inspection by a government official). A landlord has certain inspection rights within the confines of the tenant privacy law, which generally supersedes common law.
The constitutional issue comes about during a licensing inspection, where a governmental official is introduced as the person making the inspection of a tenant's home. A landlord cannot consent to that search/inspection because, despite it being the landlord's property, the tenant has exclusive rights to possess that property--it is the tenant's home. The significant addition of a government official--not the landlord's right to inspect-- raises the constitutional issue of a lawful search and it is the issue that inspections and city attorneys have been grappling with for some time. I think the issue has, in practical terms, mostly come about when inspectors have reason to believe that the landlord did not provide the notice to the tenants of the inspection and suddenly a government official is put in the position of inspecting a unit where there was no such notice and where the official's presence may or may not be wanted. Inspectors try to protect against this by using the consent cards in advance. > This is where the city has no idea what kind of headache they are creating > for themselves and all the decent landlords. > > By having those blue cards go out. They create in the mind of the > resident, that no inspection can occur with out their consent. Thus > creating instant disbelief that landlord can access when reasonable notice > is given. Good point about how it may change the tenant's perspective about allowing a landlord into the tenant's unit on some other occasion, though I've never heard from a tenant that the consent cards were why they thought they did not have to allow a landlord in. If I were you, I'd try to weigh in on this issue by writing a letter to the inspections division or to the city attorney's office. Gregory Luce North Phillips _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
