Free Rhode Island Notice to Enter

This Rhode Island Notice to Enter gives a tenant clear written notice before the landlord enters the rental unit. R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-26 requires at least two (2) days notice at reasonable times, and the right is non-waivable. See our tenant screening laws by state hub and how to screen tenants guide to keep your Rhode Island tenancies documented from the start.

Complete the fields below to generate a Rhode Island Notice to Enter. R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-26 requires at least two (2) days notice at reasonable times, so set the entry date at least two full days out. The form records the date, time window, purpose, the persons entering, and how the notice is delivered.

Watch: Rhode Island Notice to Enter explained

▶ Watch overview

Rhode Island is a statutory entry state. Under R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-26(c), a landlord may enter the rental unit only after giving the tenant at least two (2) days notice of the intent to enter, and only at reasonable times. The statute is written in days – the words are two days, not 48 hours – so count two full days before any non-emergency entry. The same subsection pairs that notice duty with a second command that is just as important: a landlord shall not abuse the right of access or use it to harass 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.

Permitted purposes are listed in sec 34-18-26(a): inspecting the premises, making necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations, or improvements, supplying necessary or agreed services, and exhibiting the dwelling unit to prospective or actual purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, workers, or contractors. The statute also runs in the other direction. Under sec 34-18-26(b), the tenant shall not unreasonably withhold consent to a properly-requested entry, so a landlord who gives the right notice for a legitimate purpose at a reasonable time is entitled to access, and a tenant who refuses it without good reason is the one out of step with the statute.

The statute carves out two situations where the two days notice does not apply. First, in a genuine emergency – fire, flood, gas leak, or another immediate threat – or where advance notice is impracticable, sec 34-18-26(c) excuses the notice; document the emergency and what was done. Second, where the tenant is absent from the unit in excess of seven (7) days, the landlord may enter as reasonably necessary for the protection of the property. For every other routine entry, give the tenant clear written two (2) days notice; this form records the date, time window, purpose, and delivery, and leaves you a dated record that you satisfied sec 34-18-26. The sections that follow walk through the purposes that justify entry, the timing that keeps an entry reasonable, how the emergency and extended-absence exceptions work, what the lease can and cannot do, and – most important for a landlord managing risk – exactly what remedies a Rhode Island tenant has when entry goes wrong.

Section 34-18-26(a) frames entry around legitimate landlord functions, and the permitted purposes follow directly from the statute’s own list. The unifying test is the same one the no-abuse clause implies: the landlord must have a real, property-management reason to be inside the unit, not a pretext for checking up on or pressuring the tenant. When the reason is genuine and the two (2) days notice is proper, entry is rarely controversial.

Repairs, decorations, alterations, and improvements are the most common reasons a landlord needs access – both work the landlord is obligated to do and agreed work the tenant has accepted. Inspections are equally routine: annual condition checks, move-out walkthroughs, and pre-renewal assessments all fall within the statutory power to inspect the premises, and a clear notice describing the inspection keeps it from feeling intrusive. Necessary or agreed services – pest control, servicing heating and cooling systems, and testing smoke and carbon-monoxide detectors – round out the maintenance side, and most tenants welcome safety-device work when it is scheduled with notice.

Showings are the statute’s other major category, and a frequent flashpoint. Section 34-18-26(a) lets a landlord exhibit the dwelling unit to prospective or actual purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, workers, or contractors – covering an end-of-lease re-rental, a sale, a refinance appraisal, and a contractor walk-through alike. Each is a legitimate purpose, but each brings strangers into the tenant’s home, so generous two (2) days notice and reasonable scheduling matter most here.

It is worth being explicit about what is not a legitimate purpose, because that is where the no-abuse clause of sec 34-18-26(c) bites. Entering to check whether the tenant is keeping the unit well enough without any maintenance reason, to hunt for lease violations on a hunch, to confront a tenant over a dispute, or simply to remind a tenant who controls the property are not property-management purposes; they are the pretextual entries a court will treat as an abuse of access. The discipline of writing the purpose on the notice is itself a filter: if a landlord cannot state a concrete, legitimate reason on paper, that is a strong signal the entry should not happen.

Two phrases in sec 34-18-26(c) do the real work: two (2) days notice and reasonable times. The notice period is the statute’s one fixed number, and it is written in days. Count two full days from delivery to the entry date – if the notice goes out Monday, the earliest comfortable entry is Wednesday – and write the period as the statute does, in days rather than as 48 hours, so there is no argument about how it was measured. The two days is a floor, not a target; giving more notice for a non-urgent visit only strengthens the record.

On hours, reasonable times generally means normal daytime hours. Entry early in the morning, late at night, or on weekends is harder to defend as reasonable unless the tenant has 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 moment, both reinforce that the landlord is acting reasonably and within the access right the statute grants.

Reasonableness also has a frequency dimension that the no-abuse and no-harass language of sec 34-18-26(c) 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 and expose the landlord to the general noncompliance remedy in sec 34-18-28, 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.

How the notice is delivered feeds directly into whether it is reasonable. A notice the tenant never actually receives gives the landlord little protection, even if it was technically sent. Personal delivery is the strongest method because it is hard to dispute. Posting on the door, especially paired with an email or text, is a practical and widely used approach. Email or text alone is reasonable where the lease allows electronic notice and the tenant routinely uses that channel. Certified mail creates an excellent paper trail but is slow, so reserve it for situations where the schedule comfortably allows the full two days. Whatever the method, choose the channel most likely to reach this particular tenant, and keep proof that you used it.

Section 34-18-26(c) excuses the two days notice in a genuine emergency and where giving notice is impracticable. A fire, a flood, a gas leak, a burst pipe actively flooding the unit, or any other immediate threat to life, safety, or the property justifies immediate entry, because waiting to give notice could turn a containable problem into a catastrophe. 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 exactly the overreach the no-abuse clause is meant to stop.

Because an emergency entry happens without the usual notice, documentation is the landlord’s protection. Record the date and time, the nature of the emergency, what was found on entering, what was done, and who entered, and keep any photographs. Notify the tenant promptly afterward, explaining what happened and why immediate entry was necessary. Scope matters too: an emergency justifies the entry needed to address it, not a general search of the unit. A landlord who enters to stop a flood should deal with the water and leave, not inspect the tenant’s belongings, because an emergency entry that balloons into a broader, unconnected search can lose its protection and revert to an ordinary unauthorized entry.

The statute’s second carve-out is the extended-absence rule. Where the tenant has been absent from the unit in excess of seven (7) days, sec 34-18-26 lets the landlord enter as reasonably necessary for the protection of the property – to check for a heating failure in winter, a water leak, or another condition that could worsen while the tenant is away. This is a narrow allowance, not a free pass: it is keyed to protecting the property, not to inspecting the tenant’s possessions, and a tenant who is merely traveling for a few days has not triggered it. Outside a true emergency and this seven-day situation, the two (2) days notice and reasonable-times rule govern every entry.

Showings deserve their own treatment because they put the landlord’s legitimate business needs in the sharpest tension with the tenant’s right to be left in peaceful possession. Section 34-18-26(a) expressly authorizes a landlord to exhibit the dwelling unit to prospective or actual purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, workers, or contractors – so a marketing showing is squarely a statutory purpose. But every one of those showings brings outsiders into an occupied home, and that is precisely where a tenant’s patience runs thinnest.

The protection for both sides is the same two (2) days notice of intent at a reasonable time, applied with extra care because showings cluster and involve strangers. When a lease is ending, the landlord may reasonably need to show the unit to prospective tenants so it does not sit vacant; when the property is for sale, the landlord may need to show it to prospective buyers, and a buyer’s lender or appraiser may need access as well. A well-drafted Rhode Island lease often addresses how showings near the end of the term are handled, and a landlord should follow that clause while never falling below the statutory two-day standard. Because showings are not emergencies, the full two days notice applies to each one – there is no marketing exception that shrinks the period.

Practical courtesy goes a long way during a sale or re-rental, and it maps directly onto the no-abuse limit. Group showings into defined windows rather than scattering them across the week, give the tenant as much lead time as possible beyond the two-day minimum, and offer a way to reschedule around the tenant’s commitments. A flurry of poorly-spaced showings can itself become an abuse of access under sec 34-18-26(c) even though no single one violated the notice rule, because the cumulative intrusion is what the no-harass language guards against. A tenant who feels respected during a marketing period is far less likely to refuse access or to claim harassment, and the landlord keeps the dated notices that show every showing was properly announced and reasonably timed.

The entry rules of sec 34-18-26 assume the tenant is still in possession. Subsection (d) makes that explicit: the landlord has no right of access other than by court order, as permitted by sec 34-18-39, or where the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the premises. When a tenant abandons or surrenders the unit, the possessory interest that the two-day notice protects begins to dissolve, and the landlord’s ability to enter changes. Abandonment, however, is a conclusion 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 left the premises 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; that situation is governed instead by the extended-absence rule, which lets the landlord enter only as reasonably necessary to protect the property, not to take it back. Treating an occupied home as abandoned can expose the landlord to a trespass claim and to the abuse-of-access exposure that runs through the Act. Surrender is the cleaner case: the tenant affirmatively gives the unit back, by returning keys or by agreement, which ends the tenancy and the tenant’s possessory rights.

The safe approach is to confirm abandonment or surrender before relying on it. Document the indicators, attempt to reach the tenant, and, when the situation is genuinely ambiguous, use the legal process rather than self-help. Rhode Island is strict about self-help: sec 34-18-44 forbids the landlord from recovering possession except by judicial process, abandonment, or surrender, and a wrongful lockout channels into the heavy sec 34-18-34 damages of up to three months periodic rent or threefold the actual damages. Until the landlord is confident the tenant has surrendered or abandoned possession, the ordinary entry rules – two (2) days notice at reasonable times, with the emergency and extended-absence exceptions – continue to apply in full.

Even though Rhode Island 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 statutory two days, and can establish the delivery channel the parties will use. What the lease cannot do is contract below the statutory floor. Under sec 34-18-17 a term by which the tenant agrees to waive or forego rights or remedies under the Act is prohibited, so a clause purporting to let the landlord enter on less than two days notice, or with no notice of intent at all, does not override sec 34-18-26.

The penalty for trying is real. Section 34-18-17(b) provides that if a landlord deliberately uses a rental agreement containing a provision known to be prohibited, the tenant may recover actual damages plus an amount up to three (3) months periodic rent and reasonable attorney’s fees. A maximal any-time, no-notice entry clause therefore buys a landlord very little – the statutory duty caps it anyway – and it can affirmatively backfire if a court finds the landlord knew the clause was prohibited and used it deliberately.

A tenant’s consent also matters in real time. A tenant who agrees to a specific entry has invited it, and a tenant-requested repair is the clearest example. The cleanest practice is to memorialize consent – a text or email confirming the date, time, and purpose – so an agreed visit cannot later be recast as an intrusion. The smarter drafting choice is usually a clause that is clear rather than maximal: one that tracks the statute – two (2) days notice of intent at reasonable times, an emergency carve-out, the extended-absence allowance, and a stated delivery method – gives the landlord everything a normal operation needs while signaling good faith to a court.

Rhode Island’s entry statute is a two-way street, and the tenant’s side of it is easy to overlook. Section 34-18-26(b) provides that the tenant shall not unreasonably withhold consent to the landlord to enter the dwelling unit for the statutory purposes. The access right and the consent duty are paired on purpose: the landlord earns access by giving proper two (2) days notice for a legitimate purpose at a reasonable time, and once that is done, a tenant who refuses without good reason is the party out of step with the statute. A landlord whose request is clean does not have to talk a reluctant tenant into compliance; the law already obliges the tenant to allow the entry.

What counts as reasonable withholding turns on the facts, but the contours are intuitive. A tenant may reasonably ask to move a properly-noticed entry to avoid a genuine conflict – a work obligation, a medical appointment, a need to secure a pet – and a cooperative landlord will usually accommodate a small shift. A tenant may also reasonably object to an entry that is not actually proper: too little notice, an unreasonable hour, a vague or pretextual purpose, or a parade of repeated visits. By contrast, a flat refusal to allow any access at all, a demand that the landlord never enter, or a refusal aimed at frustrating a legitimate repair or a lawful showing is the kind of unreasonable withholding the statute forbids. The distinction tracks the same reasonableness standard that governs the landlord’s side.

The practical lesson for a landlord is that the consent duty is a reason to keep every request scrupulously proper, not a license to bully. The cleaner the notice – right purpose, full two days, reasonable time, named entrants – the more clearly any refusal becomes unreasonable, and the stronger the landlord’s position if access has to be sorted out later. This form is built to produce exactly that clean request: it forces the landlord to state the purpose, fix the date and time window, and record the delivery, so that the tenant’s sec 34-18-26(b) duty is squarely engaged. When a tenant still refuses a properly-noticed, reasonable entry, the landlord’s path is the court, not the lock – and the dated notice is the record that shows the request was reasonable to begin with.

This is the heart of Rhode Island entry law and the part most often gotten wrong, because the remedy is not in the entry section. Section 34-18-26 states the duty and the command that a landlord shall not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant, but it ends at subsection (d) – which merely provides that the landlord has no other right of access except by court order, as permitted by sec 34-18-39, or where the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the unit – and it contains no remedy of its own. The remedies below are presented in the order a Rhode Island tenant in possession would consider them, starting with the general noncompliance statute that actually supplies the relief.

R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-28 – the general over-entry remedy

For an ordinary abusive entry – one made on short notice, at an unreasonable time, or one too many times – the operative remedy is sec 34-18-28, noncompliance by the landlord in general. Under it the tenant may recover actual damages and obtain injunctive relief for the landlord’s noncompliance, and may recover reasonable attorney’s fees where the noncompliance is willful. This is the right home for an over-entry claim: it reaches the entry made the wrong way and the campaign of harassing demands alike, and it gives the tenant a real choice between stopping the conduct by injunction and exiting the lease, with damages and – for willful conduct – fees on top.

The termination branch of sec 34-18-28 runs on a defined timeline rather than an instant exit. The tenant delivers a written notice that specifies the breach and tells the landlord to remedy it, and if the noncompliance is not cured, the rental agreement terminates on a date the statute sets out – not less than thirty (30) days after the landlord receives the notice, with the cure window measured against the same notice. The point of the structured timeline is to give the landlord a genuine chance to fix the problem and reform its entry practice; a landlord who stops the abusive entries after the notice keeps the tenancy intact, while one who persists hands the tenant a clean basis to leave. On termination, the landlord must return all security recoverable under the Act and any prepaid rent, so the remedy unwinds the tenancy cleanly rather than leaving the tenant out of pocket.

One limit is worth naming so the section is used honestly: the tenant cannot terminate under sec 34-18-28 for a condition the tenant, a household member, or a guest deliberately or negligently caused. That carve-out is aimed at maintenance disputes more than at entry, but it underscores the shape of the remedy – it is a tool against the landlord’s own noncompliance, including an abusive entry pattern, not a hair-trigger escape from the lease. For most over-entry problems the tenant in possession will reach first for actual damages and an injunction to stop the conduct, holding the termination branch in reserve for a landlord who will not change course.

R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-34 – unlawful ouster, exclusion, or diminution of service

When the landlord’s conduct crosses from an over-entry into a lockout or a utility shutoff, the heavier remedy in sec 34-18-34 applies. If the landlord unlawfully removes or excludes the tenant from the premises, or willfully diminishes services by interrupting heat, running water, hot water, electric, gas, or another essential service, the tenant may recover possession or terminate the rental agreement and, in either case, recover an amount not more than three (3) months periodic rent or threefold the actual damages sustained, whichever is greater, plus reasonable attorney’s fees. Match the section to the conduct: sec 34-18-34 is for the heavy self-help wrong, not for an entry that was merely early or too frequent, which belongs to sec 34-18-28.

R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-44 – the self-help prohibition

Section 34-18-44 is the statute that makes a lockout unlawful in the first place. It forbids the landlord from recovering or taking possession of the dwelling unit except by judicial process, abandonment, or surrender – so changing the locks, removing a door, or shutting off utilities to force a tenant out is prohibited self-help that channels straight into the sec 34-18-34 damages. A Rhode Island landlord who wants the tenant out must use the court eviction process, not the door.

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 a doctrinal backstop that runs alongside the statutory remedy; in most Rhode Island entry disputes the sec 34-18-28 claim does the heavy lifting, with trespass available as an additional common-law theory for an entry made with no right at all.

Breach of quiet enjoyment

Every Rhode Island lease carries an implied common-law covenant of quiet enjoyment, and a landlord whose entries substantially interfere with the tenant’s beneficial use and enjoyment of the home can breach it. This is a common-law covenant, not a code section, so it should be described as the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment rather than pinned to a statute. In practice a quiet-enjoyment theory overlaps heavily with the sec 34-18-28 remedy; for a Rhode Island over-entry, sec 34-18-28 is the cleaner statutory hook, with quiet enjoyment available as the background common-law principle that an abusive entry violates.

Retaliation is a separate protection that can also touch entry. R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-46 prohibits a landlord from retaliating – by raising rent, cutting services, or threatening eviction – after a tenant complains to a government agency about a code violation, complains to the landlord, or organizes or joins a tenants’ union, and a complaint within six (6) months before the alleged retaliation creates a presumption of retaliation. The section points to the sec 34-18-34 remedies. If a landlord weaponizes entry to retaliate after a protected action, the retaliation statute can apply on top of the entry remedy – but, like the ouster statute, it is a connected, distinct rule rather than the general entry remedy, which remains sec 34-18-28.

Rhode Island entry law sits inside the Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, but the duty to give notice and the tenant’s remedy for an abusive entry live in separate code sections – a distinction that trips up template after template. The access duty is in R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-18-26; the general remedy for the landlord’s noncompliance is in a different section, § 34-18-28, and the heavy remedy for a lockout or shutoff is in § 34-18-34. The table below collects the authorities that actually govern entry in Rhode Island and the consequences of getting it wrong, so a landlord can see at a glance where each rule comes from and avoid the common error of citing the entry section itself for a remedy it does not contain.

Read together, these authorities tell a coherent story that is easy to get wrong if you grab the first plausible-looking section. Rhode Island did legislate landlord entry, so the duty is statutory and concrete – two (2) days notice, reasonable times, the emergency and impracticable carve-outs, and the seven-day extended-absence allowance, all in § 34-18-26. But the consequence for breaking that duty is not housed in the same section. Section 34-18-26 ends at subsection (d), which simply provides that the landlord has no other right of access except by court order, as permitted by § 34-18-39, or where the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the unit. The remedy for an abusive entry lives in the general noncompliance section, § 34-18-28, while the separate ouster section, § 34-18-34, supplies the heavier damages when the landlord crosses into a lockout or a shutoff.

A word on how to use this reference responsibly, because the entry area is unusually full of citation traps. The remedy for an ordinary over-entry is § 34-18-28 – not § 34-18-26, which is only the duty and states no remedy of its own. The three-months-rent-or-threefold-damages figure belongs to § 34-18-34, the ouster section, and applies to a lockout or a diminution of essential services, not to an entry that was merely too early or too frequent. The waiver penalty – actual damages plus up to three months periodic rent and fees – comes from § 34-18-17 and punishes a landlord who deliberately writes a prohibited clause into the lease. Keeping each statute in its own lane is the whole discipline: § 34-18-26 for the duty, § 34-18-28 for the general over-entry remedy, § 34-18-34 for ouster, § 34-18-44 for the self-help prohibition that defines a lockout, § 34-18-17 for prohibited lease terms, and § 34-18-46 for retaliation. Any template that answers an over-entry by quoting a remedy out of § 34-18-26 itself is not making the page stronger; it is making it wrong.

None of this is a substitute for advice on a specific situation. The authorities here describe the general shape of Rhode Island 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 statute text on the Rhode Island General Assembly law portal is the best free starting point for both sides, and a qualified Rhode Island landlord-tenant attorney is the right resource when a real conflict is on the table. Used alongside disciplined, well-documented two (2) days notice, this form gives a Rhode Island landlord a clean, defensible record for every entry – which is the most reliable protection the law actually allows.

A Rhode Island Notice to Enter is the written notice a landlord or property manager gives a tenant before entering the rental unit. Unlike states that leave entry to the lease, Rhode Island has a clear statute – R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-26 – that controls when and how a landlord may enter, and a notice that tracks the statute is both the legal requirement and the best protection against a dispute. The headline rule is simple: at least two (2) days notice, at reasonable times, for a legitimate purpose. The statute is written in days, not 48 hours, so the safe practice is to count two full days and deliver the notice in language that mirrors the text.

The detail that catches landlords out is where the consequences live. Section 34-18-26 states the duty – two days notice, reasonable times, and the command that a landlord shall not abuse the right of access or harass the tenant – but it ends at subsection (d) and contains no remedy of its own. The general remedy for an abusive entry is sec 34-18-28; a lockout or utility shutoff carries the heavier damages of sec 34-18-34; and a lease clause that tries to waive the notice runs into sec 34-18-17. The body of this guide maps each of those sections to the conduct it actually governs so the right cite is used for the right wrong.

This form is built to produce the clean record the statute rewards. It lets you state the statutory purpose, describe the work, set the entry date at least two days out and at a reasonable time, list who will enter, and record how the notice was delivered. The detailed sections below walk through the permitted purposes, reasonable timing, the emergency and seven-day extended-absence exceptions, what a lease can and cannot do, and the full ladder of tenant remedies – so the short answer here can stay short. Pair a consistent entry practice with disciplined tenant screening and a documented screening process so your Rhode Island tenancies are well-run from application through move-out.

• Give at least two (2) days notice under R.I. Gen. Laws sec 34-18-26(c) – the statute is written in days, not 48 hours.
• Enter only at reasonable times for a statutory purpose under sec 34-18-26(a): inspection, repairs, alterations, services, or showings.
• Do not abuse the right of access or harass the tenant; the tenant in turn shall not unreasonably withhold consent (sec 34-18-26(b),(c)).
• A lease cannot waive the duty: under sec 34-18-17 a waiver-of-rights term is prohibited and deliberate use can cost up to three months periodic rent plus fees.
• A genuine emergency or an impracticable situation allows entry without advance notice.
• If the tenant is absent in excess of seven (7) days, the landlord may enter as reasonably necessary to protect the property.

• Personal delivery to the tenant.
• Posting on the door, alone or combined with email.
• Email or text where the lease permits electronic notice.
• Certified mail for a documented record when the two-day timing allows.

• Giving less than two days notice, or writing 48 hours when the statute is written in days.
• Relying on a lease clause that shortens the notice – a waiver-of-rights term is prohibited and deliberate use can cost up to three months periodic rent plus fees (sec 34-18-17).
• Citing sec 34-18-26 for the remedy: that section is the duty only and ends at (d) with no remedy; the over-entry remedy is sec 34-18-28.
• Confusing the ouster remedy (sec 34-18-34, three months rent or threefold damages) with an ordinary over-entry, which belongs to sec 34-18-28.
• Entering at unreasonable times or repeatedly, or keeping no dated copy to prove the two days notice was given.

• Treat two (2) days as a floor a lease cannot lower, and count two full days before entry.
• State the sec 34-18-26(a) purpose, the time window, and the persons entering on the notice.
• Offer a clear way to reschedule so the tenant has an alternative to refusing.
• Keep every signed notice on file for the life of the tenancy as your sec 34-18-28 compliance record.

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.