Lost Key, required to Change locks

[miller6161]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I have a tenant recently check out and only left 1 of the 2 assigned keys. Indicated that one of them was "lost" - he wasn't exactly sure where, but indicated that it may have been at a friends house, or similar. But also said that it could have been out randomly as maybe at the beach or in public. There was no markings on the key, no key ring with identifiable info, etc.

Am i required to change the locks? It's a small 1BR apt, so only a single door with a deadbolt so wouldn't be a big hassle, but one that i'd like to avoid if possible.

I wouldn't be concerned as much if the lost key was highly unlikely to be found, but thoughts of it turning up at said friends house and them later on taking advantage.

Any insight?

 

[Who's Liable?]

Techinically, the house has not been turned over until ALL the keys have been surrendered.

I would change the locks as a precuation. Billing the tenant for said lock change is up to you.

 

[xylene]

Techinically, the house has not been turned over until ALL the keys have been surrendered.

The tenant has surrendered possession of the property. To suggest otherwise is pure slumlord. To claim loss of a key equates to a holdover is incorrect.

Of course the landlord can bill for this damage.

A smart landlord would be sure to include a (if allowed by law) a lock charge to re-key the door after every tenant for the security of all and the protection against possible liabilities for lost and duplicated keys.

 

[sandyclaus]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I have a tenant recently check out and only left 1 of the 2 assigned keys. Indicated that one of them was "lost" - he wasn't exactly sure where, but indicated that it may have been at a friends house, or similar. But also said that it could have been out randomly as maybe at the beach or in public. There was no markings on the key, no key ring with identifiable info, etc.

Am i required to change the locks? It's a small 1BR apt, so only a single door with a deadbolt so wouldn't be a big hassle, but one that i'd like to avoid if possible.

I wouldn't be concerned as much if the lost key was highly unlikely to be found, but thoughts of it turning up at said friends house and them later on taking advantage.

Any insight?

Think about it - what is less expensive and more secure? Keeping the locks as they are, and risking the possibility that the tenant didn't really lose them, or worse, that the "missing" keys fell into the wrong hands? Knowing for sure that your personal property stored within YOUR home stays there?

This is a no-brainer for me. I'd rather be safe than sorry. It's not like re-keying is going to be so prohibitively expensive or troublesome that you want or need to explore the other options. Think about how you would feel if you came home to find that all your best electronics, jewelry, and other valuables are gone.

That choice would be pretty easy for me. Makes no sense to do it any other way. But, heck, that's just me.

 

[Gail in Georgia]

Many landlord change locks between tenants. Even if exiting tenants turn in the same number of keys they received when they moved in, this does not mean there aren't extra keys to these locks floating around.

It's often routine to change locks between tenants.

Gail

 

[OK-LL]

I agree with Gail, changing the lockset or rekeying the lock should be a standard part of your turnover activity. It safeguards the tenant and you from theft and/or vandalism, or worse. Just buy an extra lockset or two and rotate them between your rentals. If you have only one rental, you can rotate 3 locksets over 3 rental periods and beat the odds of breakin. You have no idea how many duplicate keys have been made to your rental over the years -- how would you like to come to the rental for a showing and find someone camping in it because they had a key from a friend of a friend who lived there 2 years ago? It's just not smart to not change the locks.

 

[Who's Liable?]

The tenant has surrendered possession of the property. To suggest otherwise is pure slumlord. To claim loss of a key equates to a holdover is incorrect.

Agree with you, but unfortunately I've seen it ruled both ways more than once. Must be something in the water those days.