Free North Dakota Notice to Enter

This North Dakota Notice to Enter gives a tenant clear written notice before the landlord enters the rental unit. Under N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3, the landlord must give reasonable notice naming a time certain and enter only at reasonable hours – there is no fixed hour figure; a landlord may enter anytime in an emergency. See our tenant screening laws by state hub and how to screen tenants guide to keep your North Dakota tenancies documented from the start.

Complete the fields below to generate a North Dakota Notice to Enter. N.D. Cent. Code 47-16-07.3 requires reasonable notice naming a time certain – there is no fixed hour figure – and entry only at reasonable hours. Name the exact day and time, state the purpose, list who will enter, and record how the notice is delivered.

Watch: North Dakota Notice to Enter explained

▶ Watch overview

North Dakota is one of the states that puts landlord entry in statute. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3 sets out when a landlord may enter an apartment, and its hook is distinctive: it does not name a number of hours. Instead, for any routine entry, it requires the landlord to give notice and obtain the tenant’s consent identifying a time certain – consent that the tenant may not unreasonably withhold – and to enter only at reasonable hours and in a reasonable manner. The lawful trigger is a specific agreed time, not a generic notice window, so a North Dakota notice should always name the exact day and time the landlord intends to enter.

The same provision pairs that access right with a second command that matters just as much: a landlord shall not abuse the right of access or use it to harass or intimidate the tenant. So the statute does two things at once. It grants the landlord a right of access for legitimate purposes on proper notice, and it caps that right by forbidding its abuse. Giving formally correct notice does not license an entry that is, in substance, harassment, and a landlord who enters repeatedly or at provocative times can violate the access duty even while technically announcing each visit.

The statute carries clear no-notice exceptions. A landlord may enter at any time in case of emergency – a fire, a flood, a gas leak, or another immediate threat to the property or its occupants. Entry is also allowed when the landlord reasonably believes the tenant has abandoned the premises, or reasonably believes the tenant is in substantial violation of the lease or rental agreement. Outside those situations, the reasonable-notice-and-consent structure governs. For every routine entry, this form gives the tenant clear written notice that names a time certain and leaves you a dated record that you provided it. The sections that follow walk through the purposes that justify entry, the timing that keeps an entry reasonable, how the emergency and abandonment exceptions work, what the lease can and cannot do, and – most important for a landlord managing risk – exactly what remedies a North Dakota tenant has when entry goes wrong.

N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3(2) frames routine entry around an enumerated list of legitimate landlord functions, and that list is the practical guide to what counts as a proper reason to be in the unit. The statute authorizes entry, at reasonable hours and in a reasonable manner, for inspecting the premises; for making necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations, or improvements; for supplying necessary or agreed services; and for exhibiting the dwelling unit to actual or potential purchasers, insurers, mortgagees, real estate agents, tenants, workmen, or contractors. The unifying test is the same one the no-abuse clause implies: the landlord must have a real, property-management reason to be inside, not a pretext for checking up on or pressuring the tenant.

Repairs and maintenance are the most common reason a landlord needs access – responding to a tenant’s repair request, performing scheduled upkeep, and addressing conditions the landlord is obligated to fix under the maintenance duty in § 47-16-13.1. Inspections – annual condition checks, move-out walkthroughs, and pre-renewal assessments – are equally routine, and a clear notice describing the inspection keeps it from feeling intrusive. Supplying agreed services covers utility work, pest control, and servicing of heating, cooling, and safety systems the landlord must maintain.

Showings are a frequent flashpoint, and North Dakota’s statute is unusually specific about who may be exhibited the unit: § 47-16-07.3(2) names actual or potential purchasers, insurers, mortgagees, real estate agents, tenants, workmen, or contractors. That breadth covers the end-of-lease re-rental showing, the for-sale showing to a buyer, and the access an insurer, mortgagee, or appraiser needs during a refinance or claim. Each is a legitimate purpose the legislature expressly blessed, but each also brings strangers into the tenant’s home, so generous notice of a time certain and reasonable scheduling matter most here.

Because showings cluster and involve outsiders, they are where the no-abuse limit and the “reasonable manner” requirement do their hardest work. A landlord marketing a unit should group showings into defined windows rather than scattering them across a tenant’s week, give the tenant as much lead time as the schedule allows, and offer a way to reschedule around the tenant’s commitments. A flurry of poorly-noticed showings can itself become an abuse of access even though no single visit broke a fixed rule – North Dakota has no fixed rule to break, so the reasonableness of the whole pattern is what a court would weigh. Across all of these purposes, the form lets the landlord state the exact reason, describe the work, and list everyone who will enter, which is the single most effective way to turn a potentially contested entry into a routine, documented visit.

It is worth being explicit about what is not a legitimate purpose, because that is where the no-abuse, no-harass, no-intimidate clause of § 47-16-07.3(2) bites. Entering to check whether the tenant is keeping the unit “well enough” without any maintenance reason, to look for lease violations on a hunch, to confront a tenant over a dispute, or simply to remind a tenant who is in control of the property are not property-management purposes; they are the kind of pretextual entries that look like harassment and that a court will treat as an abuse of access. The discipline of writing the purpose down on a notice is itself a useful filter: if a landlord cannot articulate a concrete, legitimate reason on paper, that is a strong signal the entry should not happen at all.

Because North Dakota sets no hour count, the words that do the real work are reasonable hours, reasonable manner, and a time certain the tenant consents to. A landlord who gives notice naming a specific time and enters at a reasonable hour for a legitimate purpose is on solid ground; a landlord who gives little or vague notice, or who shows up at odd hours, invites a dispute even when the underlying reason for entry was valid. The statute’s “time certain” requirement is the heart of it: the notice must identify a specific day and time, not a generic range of days, because the tenant’s consent attaches to that named time.

On how much notice, the statute does not impose a flat figure, and a landlord should not pretend it does. The standard is notice far enough ahead that the tenant can object, secure pets, or raise a scheduling conflict – and many North Dakota landlords default to giving a day or more even though the law names no number, simply because it is hard to call same-day notice “reasonable” when the tenant’s consent is what authorizes the entry. Because § 47-16-07.3 presumes consent from a failure to object, the safer the lead time, the stronger the presumption that the tenant truly had a chance to respond.

On hours and manner, “reasonable hours” generally means normal daytime hours, and “reasonable manner” means doing only what the stated purpose requires. Entry early in the morning, late at night, or on weekends is harder to defend unless the tenant agreed to it or an emergency requires it. Matching the entry to the tenant’s schedule where practical, and offering a window rather than a single rigid minute, both reinforce that the landlord is acting reasonably and within the access right the statute grants. A landlord who enters for a repair should do the repair and leave, not use the visit as an opening to look through the home.

Reasonableness also has a frequency dimension that the no-abuse language makes explicit. A single, well-noticed entry to make a repair is plainly reasonable. A pattern of frequent entries, or repeated demands for entry, can cross into harassment or intimidation and expose the landlord to the chapter’s damages remedy, because at some point the sheer volume of intrusions interferes with the tenant’s possession regardless of how politely each one is announced. The safe practice is to consolidate work, enter no more often than the task genuinely requires, and document each visit.

North Dakota is unusually explicit about delivery, and that flexibility is a practical gift to landlords – so long as the method actually reaches the tenant. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3 states that notice may be given by personal service, by posting the notice in a conspicuous place in or about the dwelling unit for a reasonable period of time, or by any other method that results in actual notice to the tenant. The closing phrase is the key: the statute cares about actual notice, so the method matters less than whether the tenant in fact receives the message in time to respond.

Personal delivery to the tenant is the strongest method, because it is hard to dispute that the tenant received it. Posting in a conspicuous place is expressly authorized and is the practical answer when the tenant is hard to reach in person; the prudent practice is to pair posting with a call, text, or email so there is corroboration that the tenant actually saw it, and to photograph or date the posted notice. Email or text fits the “any other method” language well where the tenant routinely uses that channel, and it produces a timestamped record. Certified mail creates an excellent paper trail but is slow, so reserve it for situations where the schedule comfortably allows the tenant to receive and respond.

Whatever method is chosen, the goal is the same: pick the channel most likely to reach this particular tenant, and keep proof that you used it. Because consent under § 47-16-07.3 is presumed from a failure to object after notice of a time certain, a delivery method that the tenant never actually received undercuts the whole presumption – a notice the tenant did not see is not notice that produces consent. This form is built to generate a clean, dated notice that names the time certain; the delivery field records how it went out, so the file shows both what was said and how the tenant received it.

N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3(1) names three situations in which a landlord may enter without the usual notice and consent: a genuine emergency, a reasonable belief that the tenant has abandoned the premises, and a reasonable belief that the tenant is in substantial violation of the lease or rental agreement. Each is narrower than it first appears, and a landlord who stretches any of them is the one most likely to face a claim.

The emergency exception is the clearest. A burst pipe actively flooding the unit, a gas smell, a fire alarm, or a report of a medical crisis behind a locked door are emergencies that justify immediate entry, because every minute of delay risks serious harm to people or the building. It helps to draw a bright line between a true emergency and mere urgency: a lease violation the landlord is eager to confront, a repair the tenant has been slow to schedule, or a desire to get ahead of a deadline are urgent to the landlord but are not emergencies, and using the emergency label to cover them is the kind of overreach the no-abuse clause is meant to stop. Because an emergency entry happens without notice, documentation is the landlord’s protection: record the date and time, the nature of the emergency, what was found, what was done, and who entered, and notify the tenant promptly afterward.

The abandonment exception turns on a reasonable belief, which a landlord should reach carefully, because acting on a mistaken belief that a tenant has left can itself create liability. Abandonment generally requires both that the tenant has actually gone and that the tenant intends not to return – shown by facts such as removed belongings, disconnected utilities, unpaid rent, and no response to contact. A tenant who is merely traveling, hospitalized, or temporarily away has not abandoned the unit, and treating an occupied home as abandoned can expose the landlord to a trespass claim. When the situation is genuinely ambiguous, document the indicators, attempt to reach the tenant, and use the court process rather than self-help.

The substantial violation exception lets a landlord enter on a reasonable belief that the tenant is materially breaching the lease – it is aimed at protecting the property and addressing serious lease breaches, not at routine snooping. As with abandonment, the operative word is “reasonably,” and the safer course for anything short of a real, documented violation is to give ordinary notice naming a time certain. Stretching the substantial-violation label to justify a fishing expedition is exactly the kind of pretextual entry that the harass-or-intimidate prohibition forbids.

Even though North Dakota fixes the entry duty by statute, the lease still shapes the day-to-day mechanics of access, and a tenant’s real-time consent still matters. The lease can spell out how showings, inspections, and maintenance visits are coordinated, can set notice practices more generous than the statute requires, and can establish the delivery channel the parties will use. A tenant’s consent also matters in real time: § 47-16-07.3 builds the whole routine-entry rule around consent to a time certain, and a tenant who affirmatively agrees to a specific entry – a tenant who asks for a repair, for example – has invited it. The cleanest practice is to memorialize that consent in a text or email confirming the date, time, and purpose, so an agreed-upon visit cannot later be recast as an intrusion.

What the lease cannot do is license what the statute forbids. A clause cannot authorize entries that abuse the right of access or harass or intimidate the tenant, and it cannot erase the reasonable-notice-and-consent structure for routine entry. North Dakota also gives a court a tool against one-sided clauses: under § 47-16-13.3, a court may refuse to enforce a rental-agreement provision it finds unconscionable, enforce the rest without it, or limit its application. So an “enter any time, no notice” clause buys far less real-world freedom than its words suggest – the statutory duty caps it, and an unconscionability finding can strike it.

For that reason, the smarter drafting choice is usually a clause that is clear rather than maximal. A clause that tracks the statute – notice naming a time certain, entry at reasonable hours in a reasonable manner, an emergency and abandonment carve-out, and a stated delivery method – gives the landlord everything a normal operation needs while signaling good faith to a court. A balanced clause is both more enforceable in spirit and more persuasive evidence that the landlord respected the tenant’s possession if the tenancy ever turns adversarial.

This is the heart of North Dakota entry law and the part most often gotten wrong, because the remedy is not a stand-alone penalty inside the entry section. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3 states the duty – reasonable hours, a reasonable manner, notice and consent to a time certain, and the command not to abuse, harass, or intimidate – but it does not itself fix a damages figure. The recovery comes from the chapter’s general remedy machinery and from background law, and the theories below are presented roughly in the order a North Dakota tenant in possession would consider them.

Appropriate damages under § 47-16-13.5

This is the primary statutory recovery. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-13.5 provides that any party aggrieved under sections 47-16-13.1 through 47-16-13.6 may recover appropriate damages, subject to a duty to mitigate. Where a landlord’s entry conduct breaches the duties the chapter imposes, this is the section that lets the tenant recover for the harm caused. “Appropriate damages” is not a fixed dollar figure – it tracks the actual harm – which is why North Dakota tenants must prove their loss rather than point to a statutory penalty the way tenants in some other states can.

Enforcement and attorney’s fees under § 47-16-13.6

The companion section gives those rights teeth. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-13.6 states that any right or action provided by sections 47-16-13.1 through 47-16-13.6 is enforceable by action, and that the court may award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party. The fee provision is significant: it makes a meritorious entry claim worth bringing even where the actual damages are modest, and it cuts both ways, since a tenant who loses a weak claim can also face fees. Together, § 47-16-13.5 and § 47-16-13.6 are the statutory backbone of a North Dakota entry-abuse claim.

The statutory covenant of quiet possession – § 47-16-08

North Dakota puts quiet enjoyment in statute, which is a meaningful advantage over states where it is only an implied common-law covenant. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-08 binds the lessor to secure to the lessee the quiet possession of the property during the term of the lease against all persons lawfully claiming it. Entry conduct severe enough to interfere substantially with the tenant’s beneficial use and possession can implicate that covenant. In practice a quiet-possession theory overlaps with the § 47-16-07.3 duty and the § 47-16-13.5 damages remedy; it is the statutory expression of the background principle that an abusive entry violates the tenant’s right to be left in peaceful possession.

Common-law trespass

A landlord who enters a unit the tenant lawfully possesses, without a right of access and without legal process, can also be liable to the tenant in common-law trespass. Possession, not title, founds a trespass action – which is exactly why a tenant in possession can sue a landlord who holds title but has entered unlawfully. Trespass is the doctrinal backstop that runs alongside the statutory remedy; in most North Dakota entry disputes the § 47-16-13.5 damages claim and the quiet-possession covenant do the heavy lifting, with trespass available as an additional common-law theory for an entry made with no right at all. The practical reason to plead trespass alongside the statute is proof and measure of harm: a trespass can be actionable on the intrusion itself even where the tenant’s out-of-pocket loss is small, which complements the “appropriate damages” standard of § 47-16-13.5 that ties recovery to demonstrated harm. Pleaded together, the statutory and common-law theories give a North Dakota tenant the fullest reach the law allows for an entry the landlord had no right to make.

Lockouts are a different, more serious wrong – Chapter 47-32

It is worth separating an over-entry from a lockout, because North Dakota treats them differently. A landlord may recover possession only through a court eviction action under Chapter 47-32, never by self-help. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-32-01 makes an eviction action available where a party by force, intimidation, fraud, or stealth has entered upon another’s prior actual possession and detains it, or turns the party in possession out by force, threats, or menacing conduct. So a landlord who breaks in and takes possession faces the forcible-entry framework and the eviction statute – a connected protection against being dispossessed by force, distinct from the general remedy for entering on short notice. An ordinary over-entry that does not dispossess the tenant is governed by § 47-16-07.3 and the § 47-16-13.5 damages remedy.

One more citation note, on retaliation. Some states bar a landlord from retaliating against a tenant who complains or asserts a legal right, and tenants in those states fold retaliatory entry into that protection. North Dakota’s Chapter 47-16 has no such general anti-retaliation statute; the only anti-retaliation language is the narrow domestic-abuse provision in § 47-16-17.1, which protects a tenant who exercises the right to terminate a lease as a victim of domestic violence and has nothing to do with routine entry. A North Dakota tenant facing entry abuse should therefore frame the claim around the no-abuse, no-harass, no-intimidate command of § 47-16-07.3 and the general damages remedy – not around a general retaliation statute the chapter does not contain.

North Dakota regulates landlord entry by statute, but the entry duty and the tenant’s remedy for an abusive entry live in different places in Chapter 47-16 – and unlike some states, North Dakota does not pair the entry section with a single, dedicated abuse-of-access damages award. The duty is in N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3; the remedy runs through the chapter’s general damages and enforcement sections and the statutory covenant of quiet possession, backed by common-law trespass. The table below collects the authorities that actually govern entry in North Dakota and what each one does, so a landlord can see at a glance where each rule comes from and avoid citing the wrong provision for the wrong purpose.

Read together, these authorities tell a coherent story that is easy to get wrong if you grab the first plausible-looking section. North Dakota did legislate landlord entry, so the duty is statutory and concrete – reasonable hours, a reasonable manner, notice, and the tenant’s consent to a time certain, all in N.D. Cent. Code § 47-16-07.3, which also forbids abusing the right of access or using it to harass or intimidate. But the consequence for breaking that duty is not a stand-alone penalty in the same section. It comes from the chapter’s general remedy machinery: appropriate damages under § 47-16-13.5, enforceable by action with attorney’s fees to the prevailing party under § 47-16-13.6, supported by the statutory covenant of quiet possession in § 47-16-08 and ordinary trespass. A landlord who reads only § 47-16-07.3 sees the obligation but misses where the teeth actually are.

A word on using this reference responsibly, because the entry area is full of citation traps. North Dakota does not have a dedicated abuse-of-access statute that fixes a damages figure, so do not cite a phantom “§ 47-16-07.3 penalty” or borrow another state’s fixed-dollar entry remedy; the recovery is the general damages-and-fees chain. North Dakota also has no broad retaliatory-entry statute – the only anti-retaliation language in the chapter is the narrow domestic-abuse provision in § 47-16-17.1, which protects a tenant who exercises the right to terminate a lease as a domestic-violence victim and has nothing to do with routine entry. And North Dakota has not adopted intrusion upon seclusion, so the privacy-tort theory that works in many states is not a safe hook here. The right move for a North Dakota over-entry is the § 47-16-07.3 duty plus the general damages remedy, the statutory quiet-possession covenant, and trespass – never a borrowed penalty, retaliation statute, or privacy tort the state has not adopted.

None of this substitutes for advice on a specific situation. The authorities here describe the general shape of North Dakota entry law, but the outcome of any actual dispute turns on the exact lease language, the facts of the entries, and how a particular court reads them. The official Century Code text on the North Dakota Legislative Branch site is the best free starting point for both sides, and a qualified North Dakota landlord-tenant attorney is the right resource when a real conflict is on the table. Used alongside disciplined, well-documented notice, this form gives a North Dakota landlord a clean, defensible record for every entry – which is the most reliable protection the law actually allows.

A North Dakota Notice to Enter is the written notice a landlord or property manager gives a tenant before entering the rental unit. North Dakota addresses entry directly in N.D. Cent. Code 47-16-07.3, and what sets the state apart is what the statute leaves out: it does not fix a number of hours of advance notice. For routine entry it requires notice and the tenant’s consent identifying a time certain – a specific day and time the tenant may not unreasonably withhold – with entry only during reasonable hours and in a reasonable manner. The full requirements, exceptions, delivery rules, and tenant remedies are covered in the sections below; this overview sets the frame.

Because the standard is consent to a named time certain rather than a fixed hour figure, the notice has to do real work. Propose an exact day and a defined time window, describe the purpose, and give the tenant a genuine opportunity to respond. The statute presumes consent from a failure to object after notice of a time certain, so a clear, dated notice that names the time is both the authorization to enter and the record that protects the landlord. This form lets you state the exact purpose, list who will enter, and record how the notice is delivered – personal service, posting in a conspicuous place, or any method that gives the tenant actual notice, all of which 47-16-07.3 permits.

The statute also draws lines a landlord must respect. The landlord may enter without notice in a genuine emergency, on a reasonable belief the tenant has abandoned the unit, or on a reasonable belief of a substantial lease violation – but the right of access may not be abused or used to harass or intimidate the tenant. When entry goes wrong, the tenant’s recovery runs through the chapter’s general damages and enforcement sections and the statutory covenant of quiet possession rather than a stand-alone penalty, a distinction the remedies section explains in full. A dated, signed notice naming a time certain for every routine entry is the durable record that you acted within the statute. Pair a consistent entry practice with disciplined tenant screening and a documented screening process so your North Dakota tenancies are well-run from application through move-out.

• N.D. Cent. Code 47-16-07.3 governs entry; it sets no fixed number of hours.
• For routine entry, give notice and obtain the tenant’s consent identifying a time certain, which the tenant may not unreasonably withhold (unless notice is impractical).
• Enter only at reasonable hours and in a reasonable manner, for an enumerated purpose – inspection, repairs, agreed services, or exhibiting the unit.
• Consent is presumed from a failure to object after notice of a time certain; notice may be by personal service, posting in a conspicuous place, or any method giving actual notice.
• No notice is needed to enter in an emergency, on a reasonable belief of abandonment, or on a reasonable belief of a substantial lease violation.
• A landlord may not abuse the right of access or use it to harass or intimidate the tenant.
• Recovery for a violation runs through 47-16-13.5 (appropriate damages) and 47-16-13.6 (enforceable by action; attorney’s fees), plus quiet possession under 47-16-08.

• Personal delivery to the tenant.
• Posting on the unit – expressly permitted under 47-16-07.3 – ideally paired with a call, text, or email.
• Email or text where the lease permits electronic notice.
• Certified mail for a documented record when timing allows.

• Assuming a fixed set-hours rule applies – North Dakota names no number of hours; the standard is notice naming a time certain the tenant consents to.
• Giving vague notice that does not name a specific day and time the tenant can consent to.
• Entering at unreasonable hours or for a purpose the tenant was never told about.
• Using the right of entry repeatedly or pretextually, crossing the statute’s no-harassment limit.
• Keeping no dated copy, leaving no record that reasonable notice was given.

• Always name a time certain – a specific day and time window – rather than a range of days.
• Give enough advance notice that the tenant can object or arrange the visit.
• Use posting when the tenant is hard to reach, and pair it with a call, text, or email.
• State the exact purpose and persons entering, and keep every signed notice on file.

Published by Tenant Screening Background Check

Established 2004 · 20+ Years · All U.S. States & Territories · Statute-Based · Attorney-Reviewed

A Private Eye Reports™ service trusted by landlords, property managers, and attorneys.