Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Eviction for Anti-Social Behaviour

  • 20-07-2015 11:51am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 43


    Hi all, Me and 3 others moved into a house in Galway at the end of May as we had all got jobs working in Galway until next January. We each payed a deposit of 300 on the house and rent is 1200 a month. To date we have payed 600 rent each and all payments we're made on time (early in fact).

    The problem arose a few weeks ago where we received a text message from our landlord regarding noise issues. We received this text at the weekend when all members of the house were gone back home and the house was empty. We were very confused as at no point had we ever made noise in the house and we were rarely up late at night. We assumed that this was a mistake and disregarded the message thinking there would be no more on the issue.

    Last week however we returned home from work on Friday 17th July to find four letters, addressed to each of the tenants. These were eviction notices. Each letter stated, "Following repeated complaints from the estate management company regarding Anti-social Behavior I have no choice but to terminate the tenancy." "Please make sure you have vacated the premises by 18:00 Friday 24th July".

    Naturally we were shocked. We decided to take action. We rang our landlord and attempted to discuss the matter but he refused to discuss it. He insisted that we were gone that's that and hung up the phone.

    We then decided to contact the estate management company which our landlord claimed had received numerous complaints regarding anti-social behavior in the house. The estate management company confirmed to us that there were no complaints made about the house whatsoever.

    We have not received any further contact from the landlord and we are unable to get in contact with him. We are now 100% confident in assuming that the landlord is evicting us by Friday 24th July so that he can rent out the house for the Galway Race Week starting Monday 27th July to make some fast cash.

    Does anyone have any advice on what actions to take to prevent him from doing this?

    Many Thanks


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,580 ✭✭✭✭TheDriver


    Contact threshold regarding this?


  • Site Banned Posts: 777 ✭✭✭Youngblood.III


    PTRB...did he register the tenancy? Make a complaint to them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 750 ✭✭✭Ashbx


    Get onto the PRTB and file a compliant or even just ask what your next plan of action should be. Out of decency (and to keep him sweet!), I would get in contact with your landlord and tell him you were in contact with the letting agent who confirmed that THEY didn't receive any complaints (some of the complaints might have been made directly to the landlord).

    Definitely seems a little unfair but unfortunately, landlords who have had tenants for less than 6 months can end the lease and don't have to have a reason (after 6 months, you must be in breach of your contract for them to end it) so I do think he is entitled to kick you out if he wants (so unfair, I know!). However, im pretty sure he has to give you more than a weeks notice - not sure how long exactly!


  • Registered Users Posts: 43 kinanoman


    We are planning to visit the local Threshold office today. Regarding PTRB, I checked the Published Tenancy Register (updated 18th July 2015) and the house is not registered. We have attempted to contact the landlord numerous times but to no avail. Usually the minimum notice period for termination of tenancy is 28 days. However in cases of serious anti-social behavior this notice period can be reduced to just 7. Would the landlord not need proof of this "anti-social behavior" or can he just kick us out and say we were behaving anti-socially?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    Ashbx wrote: »
    landlords who have had tenants for less than 6 months can end the lease and don't have to have a reason

    I'm fairly sure that's not true. Presumably the landlord and tenants signed a contract which described the duration of the lease and the reasons when it could be ended early. It's true that you get extra legal protection after six months but I don't think you have none to start off with.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,223 ✭✭✭Michael D Not Higgins


    markpb wrote: »
    I'm fairly sure that's not true. Presumably the landlord and tenants signed a contract which described the duration of the lease and the reasons when it could be ended early. It's true that you get extra legal protection after six months but I don't think you have none to start off with.

    It's true in the case of periodic leases. The OP doesn't seem to have specified if they have a fixed term or periodic lease.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,096 ✭✭✭✭the groutch


    Sounds like he's using this as an excuse to get you out, as serious antisocial behaviour is the only grounds for giving less than 28 days notice.

    If you do stay into next week, don't be surprised if he drops it completely.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,223 ✭✭✭Michael D Not Higgins


    OP you must file a complaint with the PRTB asap. Whether he has registered or not with them doesn't matter.

    I'm taking it at face value that you are not being anti-social or causing a nuisance, therefore the eviction notice is invalid. You haven't clarified your lease situation yet so he may be able to terminate the lease in the case of a periodic tenancy with 28 days notice.

    He has refused to engage with you so you must make the complaint to the PRTB. Ignoring the issue will not be looked at favourably in their eyes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,137 ✭✭✭✭TheDoc


    Did you get the correspondence from the management company in writing?

    If not, get it. Inform them you require confirmation that no complaints have been made regarding noise or anti social behavior.

    That's probably all you need in fairness considering that the landlord appears to have explicitly stated he was taking this action based on complaints received to the management company.

    When you have your threshold meeting make sure to outline that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43 kinanoman


    We have verbally agreed to stay for 8 months yet in terms of contracts we have a periodic lease paying every month. We have a rent book signed by the landlord each month in which we pay.
    I know that in the first 6 months he has the right to terminate the contract without giving a reason yet he still legally must give us notice. The issue is that we haven't received the 28 days notice which we should have a right to.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 43 kinanoman


    TheDoc wrote: »
    Did you get the correspondence from the management company in writing?

    If not, get it. Inform them you require confirmation that no complaints have been made regarding noise or anti social behavior.

    That's probably all you need in fairness considering that the landlord appears to have explicitly stated he was taking this action based on complaints received to the management company.

    When you have your threshold meeting make sure to outline that.

    Yes we plan to get that confirmation in writing from the estate management company. We will then present it to the Threshold Office and see what they can do with it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,223 ✭✭✭Michael D Not Higgins


    kinanoman wrote: »
    We have verbally agreed to stay for 8 months yet in terms of contracts we have a periodic lease paying every month. We have a rent book signed by the landlord each month in which we pay.
    I know that in the first 6 months he has the right to terminate the contract without giving a reason yet he still legally must give us notice. The issue is that we haven't received the 28 days notice which we should have a right to.

    Sounds like he knows he can get rid of you and wants you gone sooner by inventing the noise complaints. You do have a case here, although if you want to stay longer than Friday you need to open that dispute.

    The next thing you should do is inform the landlord you have opened the dispute and see if you can resolve things outside of the PRTB. You can retract a dispute at a later date. You can then come to an arrangement where you can get enough notice to find alternative accommodation and get your deposit back. If that doesn't work you have the dispute to fall back on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43 kinanoman


    After looking into the "7-day Notice" area of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 I have found the following..

    67.—(1)
    This section applies where the tenancy is being terminated by the landlord by reason of the failure of the tenant to comply with any of the obligations of the tenancy.

    (2) Where this section applies the period of notice to be given by the notice of termination is—

    (a) 7 days, if the tenancy is being terminated by reason of behaviour of the tenant that is—

    (i) behaviour falling within paragraph (a) or (b) of the definition of “behave in a way that is anti-social” in section 17 (1), or

    (ii) threatening to the fabric of the dwelling or the property containing the dwelling,

    or

    (b) 28 days, if the tenancy is being terminated—

    (i) for any other reason (but not a failure to pay an amount of rent due), or

    (ii) for failure to pay an amount of rent due and the condition specified in subsection (3) is satisfied,

    regardless of the duration of the tenancy.

    The landlord is evicting us on the basis outlined above in 67. (2)(a)(i)



    The definition of “behave in a way that is anti-social” in section 17 (1) is outlined below.


    17.—(1)

    “behave in a way that is anti-social” means—

    (a) engage in behaviour that constitutes the commission of an offence, being an offence the commission of which is reasonably likely to affect directly the well-being or welfare of others,

    (b) engage in behaviour that causes or could cause fear, danger, injury, damage or loss to any person living, working or otherwise lawfully in the dwelling concerned or its vicinity and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, includes violence, intimidation, coercion, harassment or obstruction of, or threats to, any such person, or

    (c) engage, persistently, in behaviour that prevents or interferes with the peaceful occupation—

    (i) by any other person residing in the dwelling concerned, of that dwelling,

    (ii) by any person residing in any other dwelling contained in the property containing the dwelling concerned, of that other dwelling, or

    (iii) by any person residing in a dwelling (“neighbourhood dwelling”) in the vicinity of the dwelling or the property containing the dwelling concerned, of that neighbourhood dwelling.


    Although his claims regarding noise fit the Anti-social definition in part (c)(iii) above. The statement in 67. (2)(a)(i) explicitly states "behaviour falling within paragraph (a) or (b)". Since he has claimed we have behaved antisocially through the means of part (c) the 7-day notice outlined in 67. (2)(a)(i) still does not apply to us. We should still have the right to 28 days notice.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    kinanoman wrote: »
    We are planning to visit the local Threshold office today. Regarding PTRB, I checked the Published Tenancy Register (updated 18th July 2015) and the house is not registered. We have attempted to contact the landlord numerous times but to no avail. Usually the minimum notice period for termination of tenancy is 28 days. However in cases of serious anti-social behavior this notice period can be reduced to just 7. Would the landlord not need proof of this "anti-social behavior" or can he just kick us out and say we were behaving anti-socially?

    It looks like this cowboy not only wants ye out so he can charge people thousands for race week he will most likely also keep your deposits!

    Contact the PRTB and open a dispute with them immediately as the Landlord has refused to discus the issue with you.

    Sit tight and do not move out within the 7 days! ye should behave as if ye have 28 days notice that ye are entitled to!

    Because he is trying to evict on using anti social behaviour as grounds then yes he must have evidence of sustained anti social behaviour!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 312 ✭✭Gasherbraun


    The right to terminate with seven days notice for anti social behavior is rarely used since it requires very serious circumstances to be applicable. Typically this would be actual violence ( or serious threat of violence) to a person or activities likely to cause serious damage to the property or surrounding property. Normally there is Garda involvement in the issues and they are often involved in the eviction process.

    Where it applies is subjective but just a scan of the PRTB tribunal reports for anti social behaviour give an idea

    Normal noise issues would not count as grounds for a seven day eviction.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    So, OP, what happened?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    Could well be under pressure to sell from the bank and is inventing a BS reason to get you out.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭uberwolf


    doesn't need a bs reason if selling though? Can serve notice on that basis?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,395 ✭✭✭✭mikemac1


    The landlord wants ye out for race week OP

    Sit tight and take the advice in the thread ^^^


  • Registered Users Posts: 8 Espbraids


    Just stay put and refuse point blank to move until you have sorted it out. Do not let people bully you. Bailiffs have no powers whatsoever. Never let them in and never give them your name. Always answer the door to them by taking your keys out with you and shutting the door behind you, take a phone outside recording a video. Instruct them that they are being recorded. Do not be rude just inform them that Gardai have been called provisionally and that the conversation as of now is being recorded. That is all you have to worry about, it's the landlord's issue to pay legal fees to get you out, not yours, it's as simple as that.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Ha amateur landlord will get his balls handed to him in these situations. The 7 day notice is for exceptional cases only and there is a high burden of proof required. Where that evidence is not proved it will be an illegal eviction. Hope OP went to the Prtb.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43 kinanoman


    Hey lads! Sorry for the delay! Well the good news is that thanks to all ye're help we are still in the house and enjoying raceweek! We sent him a number of formal letters outlining how he had issued us an invalid notice of termination. After the first formal letter we received a short brief response "I am allowing you to leave and say ye left by choice, the alternative could be very bad for your careers". We could see no possible reasoning behind his statement regarding our careers and we assume he was just trying to "scare" us with this threat-like statement. We then sent him a second formal letter outlining to him that we are taking the case to the PRTB. A day later he replied and told us to pay rent as usual by the Saturday and mentioned nothing about the eviction etc. So we got in contact with threshold and they told us to pay our rent as usual or else we would be in breach of our agreement. They told us by paying him we would still have the edge on him in the case as we hadn't done anything wrong. So we reluctantly payed up for the next month on the Friday and low and behold he never showed up to evict us.

    Yesterday however, we received 4 more eviction notices. These each outline that we have 28 days to vacate the property. 28 days is valid notice for termination, yet there are elements required in an eviction notice to make it valid. He has stated that we must be vacated by 18:00 on the termination date. This alone makes the termination invalid as the landlord must give the tenant the full 24 hours on the termination date to vacate the premises. Also he hasn't stated that any issue as to the validity of the notice or the right of the landlord to serve it must be referred to the PRTB with 28 days of receipt of the notice. This statement must also be contained in the notice.

    We are not really worried about the notice as we know its invalid and we don't plan to alert him of this until after 20 days at least, but the chances of ever getting our deposit back are looking rather slim.
    Should we leave after 28 days and go looking for our deposit or should we stay?

    Its also clear to us that even though he hasn't made the money from raceweek, he now wants to evict us so that he can get college students in for September who will stay until June. Whereas we are only there until January, and the chances of him finding students to rent from January until June are very slim.


  • Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭Magicmatilda


    Have you opened the casse with the PRTB?

    OPen it now as you have noe been served 2 invalid eviction notices.

    I would plan on moving on the date set out as long as you have not paid rent for longer.

    If he refuses to return the deposit then you have the case open anyway


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,453 ✭✭✭✭DrPhilG


    Can the landlord not be in bother for not registering it?

    What other reasons for not registering it would he have other than trying to get away with crap like this, and maybe a tax dodge?

    I'd be looking for somewhere else asap just to get away from him, but I'd also be looking to sink him for being a prick!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭Sniipe


    Any case with the guards? This landlord is trying to blacken your name with outright lies about anti-social behaviour... and in writing!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,223 ✭✭✭Michael D Not Higgins


    Sniipe wrote: »
    Any case with the guards? This landlord is trying to blacken your name with outright lies about anti-social behaviour... and in writing!

    Even if there were a case of libel, that's a civil matter. Nothing to do with the Garda.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,134 ✭✭✭Lux23


    Open a case with the PRTB and he won't be able to get you out for months. I wouldn't let him away with it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 194 ✭✭Ardeehey


    If you'd prefer to get your deposits back rather than have a protracted battle with this guy you can always open the case with the PTRB but tell him if he sorts you guys out with what is owed to you before you move out...that you would close the case and part ways.

    Personally unless the house was the greatest place to live of all time I would prefer to move if I got my money. Down the line when he won't get stuff fixed or is constantly badgering you with this and that it's just not worth the hassle.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,363 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    You might as well begin the process of searching for an alternative place to live, as long term its a dysfunctional arrangement and you don't need the hassle.

    However, keep the case going with the PRTB and maybe show a solicitor the letters you have received, those veiled threats are the sort of thing he should made to regret.

    Oh, and when you see the place eventually coming back on the market, make it a bit of a hobby to warn people off it. Having it empty for a year will make him think twice about harassing people again.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,186 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Fair dues OP you have done your homework on your rights.
    But you should still look for place to move to.

    Also if you haven't opened case with PRTB then do so now because you aint going to get deposit back off this guy without a fight.

    Also since he hasn't registered with PRTB then I think you should let revenue know.
    This guy deserves getting his ass handed to him.

    It is a while since I heard his type of threatening behaviour being used by landlords and this guy sounds as dump as ditchwater what with actually putting something threatening in writing and the way he thought he could get an eviction in a few days.

    He actually reminds me of some landlords years ago who thought dropping by with a big mate of theirs to act the heavy was a good way to force people out.

    And as someone else said you could also make it a hobby of yours to make sure word spreads not to move in their.

    I am not allowed discuss …



  • Registered Users Posts: 301 ✭✭Eimee90


    I would hold the messages threatening your careers as well.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,256 ✭✭✭Ronin247


    I would not move. Fight him every inch of the way, if you go looking for a 5 month rental now, you will find it very hard. Who will rent to you, with the potential to rent to students for the whole school year? If you string him past August/September he will probably back off.

    Chances of getting your deposit back are slim to none, so I would think very carefully before paying the last months rent as well!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,949 ✭✭✭✭IvyTheTerrible


    Ronin247 wrote: »
    I would not move. Fight him every inch of the way, if you go looking for a 5 month rental now, you will find it very hard. Who will rent to you, with the potential to rent to students for the whole school year? If you string him past August/September he will probably back off.

    Chances of getting your deposit back are slim to none, so I would think very carefully before paying the last months rent as well!!
    That's really bad advice. If he withholds rent, he's in breach of the lease.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,096 ✭✭✭✭the groutch


    yeah, can't believe there are still people that advocate not paying the last months rent.

    in relation to the deposit, make sure to take lots of photos before you leave, it will strengthen your case if he tries to make spurious deductions from it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,929 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    This thread highlights exactly the problem with renting in this country.

    Despite the fact that the OP and his housemates have done nothing wrong, they are being threatened with eviction by this cowboy landlord and indeed threats of his claims being forwarded to their employers.

    While the OP is by all accounts entirely in the right here with the law on his side, the way the thread has moved from "open a case and dispute this" to "get your deposits and go.. it's not worth the hassle down the line" shows just how weak the position legitimate tenants really are in if they get the wrong sort of landlord.
    In this case they will probably now have to forgo their deposits and come up with more cash for a new place (plus the associated moving expenses, utility charges etc) and not be able to provide a reference from their current tenancy - and why? Because their landlord thinks he can make a quick buck by forcing them out for no reason. In the meantime of course the OP and his housemates have to keep paying this guy so they aren't breaching the rules themselves - in effect rewarding the landlord for his behaviour!

    Don't get me wrong, there are of course bad tenants out there too, but the balance of power in most "normal" circumstances is entirely with the landlord - regardless of what the legislation might be.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,223 ✭✭✭Michael D Not Higgins


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    the way the thread has moved from "open a case and dispute this" to "get your deposits and go.. it's not worth the hassle down the line" shows just how weak the position legitimate tenants really are in if they get the wrong sort of landlord.

    I and others have suggested both approaches, failing a successful resolution outside of the PRTB, you have the open dispute to fall back on.

    No one wants a protracted case, but the tenants are actually in a very strong position. They can stay put while any case is pending, and should the landlord try anything in the meantime, they can tack it onto the dispute.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,929 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    I and others have suggested both approaches, failing a successful resolution outside of the PRTB, you have the open dispute to fall back on.

    No one wants a protracted case, but the tenants are actually in a very strong position. They can stay put while any case is pending, and should the landlord try anything in the meantime, they can tack it onto the dispute.

    Which is all well and good as long as nothing else goes wrong - but if the washing machine dies or something else needs fixing/replacing, I can't imagine this landlord being in too much of a hurry to sort it out.

    Adding it to the list isn't much good when you can't wash your clothes in the meantime.

    I actually DO agree though that taking a case is the correct option but my point is that the reality is often very different for many tenants (and indeed landlords). Besides, have they changed the law as to make PRTB legally enforceable yet? Wasn't there a massive thread here before where a guy took a case and went through the red tape with them only to have the LL ignore it anyway?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,223 ✭✭✭Michael D Not Higgins


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    Which is all well and good as long as nothing else goes wrong - but if the washing machine dies or something else needs fixing/replacing, I can't imagine this landlord being in too much of a hurry to sort it out.

    Adding it to the list isn't much good when you can't wash your clothes in the meantime.

    I actually DO agree though that taking a case is the correct option but my point is that the reality is often very different for many tenants (and indeed landlords). Besides, have they changed the law as to make PRTB legally enforceable yet? Wasn't there a massive thread here before where a guy took a case and went through the red tape with them only to have the LL ignore it anyway?

    I know it's inconvenient, but you can get the washing machine fixed yourself or go to a laundrette and add it to the dispute. You'd get a multiple of your outlay back in a fine imposed by the PRTB.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 540 ✭✭✭GreatDefector


    I know it's inconvenient, but you can get the washing machine fixed yourself or go to a laundrette and add it to the dispute. You'd get a multiple of your outlay back in a fine imposed by the PRTB.

    When you get it back....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    Which is all well and good as long as nothing else goes wrong - but if the washing machine dies or something else needs fixing/replacing, I can't imagine this landlord being in too much of a hurry to sort it out.

    Adding it to the list isn't much good when you can't wash your clothes in the meantime.

    I actually DO agree though that taking a case is the correct option but my point is that the reality is often very different for many tenants (and indeed landlords). Besides, have they changed the law as to make PRTB legally enforceable yet? Wasn't there a massive thread here before where a guy took a case and went through the red tape with them only to have the LL ignore it anyway?

    There is also the risk of a cowboy like this prize donkey evicting people illegally and leaving them on the side of the road without access to their possessions, what can be done in such situations? Oh he can't do that and the Gardai will call to the house to get your stuff back(but they can do nothing if the Landlord is a P***k and does not turn up at the same time, he could then just dump everything in the garden on a wet day!) but he just has and the tenants don't have money or anything else to move into another place.

    It is very hard to take a case against a landlord from a homeless hostel!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    Withholding rent is illegal and any suggestions to do so are in breach of the forum charter

    Mod


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    The OP only needs the place until January. There are only so many broken washing machines that can happen in a short period. The biggest problem for the OP is that he doesn't have part 4 rights. If he can hold off until he gets them then he has little to worry about.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 312 ✭✭Gasherbraun


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    Besides, have they changed the law as to make PRTB legally enforceable yet? Wasn't there a massive thread here before where a guy took a case and went through the red tape with them only to have the LL ignore it anyway?

    No change in the law. The findings issued by a PRTB adjudicator needs ratification by the board itself and the Determination Order once issued can still only be enforced by the court.

    Enforcement can be pursued by the PRTB at their discretion although by far the most efficient route is the aggrieved party pursuing enforcement themselves.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    OP did ye make much noise when he had parties and played music till 3am?

    http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057471881/1/#post96479986


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 295 ✭✭Dr_Bill


    I can't for the life of me understand why LL's are entitled to retain deposits the first instance, they should all be held in a deposit protection scheme run by the PRTB, it would certainly help in circumstances like these.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,986 ✭✭✭Noo


    Dr_Bill wrote:
    I can't for the life of me understand why LL's are entitled to retain deposits the first instance, they should all be held in a deposit protection scheme run by the PRTB, it would certainly help in circumstances like these.


    Exactly. Thats what they do here in australia, deposits are given to the rental authority, landlords never touch or have access to it. Once you move out you apply to have it returned, it'll be returned quickly if the LL hasnt put in a claim for any part of it. If they do claim then theyve to prove to the rental authority what for and the tenant can argue it...all done through the rental authorithy. Works well. Crazy its not done in Ireland.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭Taboola


    Dr_Bill wrote: »
    I can't for the life of me understand why LL's are entitled to retain deposits the first instance, they should all be held in a deposit protection scheme run by the PRTB, it would certainly help in circumstances like these.

    I agree with you but don't see how this relates to the current issue.

    If you read the link foggy_lad posted you'll see that they were in-fact playing music at 3am and since they all go home at weekends it's safe to assume this happened on weekdays which is bang out of order.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,134 ✭✭✭Lux23


    Taboola wrote: »
    I agree with you but don't see how this relates to the current issue.

    If you read the link foggy_lad posted you'll see that they were in-fact playing music at 3am and since they all go home at weekends it's safe to assume this happened on weekdays which is bang out of order.

    That isn't anti-social behaviour, I have played music all night and no-one else would hear it.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,169 ✭✭✭ComfortKid


    Lux23 wrote:
    That isn't anti-social behaviour, I have played music all night and no-one else would hear it.


    Obviously these guys had the music on loud enough for someone else to hear it. The OPs silence is deafening. I am convinced it's KittieIRL son.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭Flippyfloppy


    ComfortKid wrote: »
    Obviously these guys had the music on loud enough for someone else to hear it. The OPs silence is deafening. I am convinced it's KittieIRL son.

    In fairness that kittie person could be a troll for all we know.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement