Landlord er.. suing me

substr

I took out a 6 month lease on an apartment at the start of may and left the apartment at the end of july. When I moved in I paid the landlord a deposit of 1 months rent which she still has. I didnt sign the lease in front of a solicitor it was just a piece of paper she had with her signature and mine so I dont think its legally binding? Now she is apparently 'suing' me for breaking the lease - and still not refunding my deposit. Just wondering can she actually do this and where do I stand from a legal point of view.
Thanks!

Seraphina

unless the lease had terms or conditions on it, i dont think she has the legal substance to sue you. im not sure an oral contract would hold up in court tbh. and if it does, it shouldn't...

cdebru

an oral contract wouldn't be worth the paper its written on

Andrew Duffy

It's a lease, you signed it, so you agreed to pay the landlord a fixed fee for six month's accomodation. You were presumably paying in monthly installments, so the landlord is entitled to sue you for the remainder of the rent. If the property is re-let they are likely only to seek (and get) the difference between what they are getting and what you should have paid for those months.

midget lord

have a look on the "threshold" website. Im not too sure of the url. It will give you details on what a "contract" should contain and how it becomes binding etc. It will also give you details on where you stand.

From what i know, if she still has that lease you wont get your deposit back. That contract seems to have been signed, hence, it is legally binding.

Sleipnir

Is anybody living in that apartment now?
Drop around and ring the bell.

Did the lardlord give you a rent book? Did you get receipts for the rent you paid?

Paddy20

Did she give you a rent book with all your rental/tenant terms & conditions inside the front cover ?...

If she collected the rent personally, she is supposed to record all rent payments and sign it.

If you paid that way, and you did not get an official rent book/written terms & conditions. Then she AFAIK has no chance.

Why did you leave so quickly ?.. was the flat 'Sub-standard' i.e. unfit for human habitation.

substr

No Paddy20 no rentbook or anything of the sort
I paid every month by bank transfer but never got any receipts.
[edit] the place was unfit to be a leper colony - never mind human habitation [/edit]

Sleipnir

Well, then she ain't a registered landlady.
Which means she ain't paying tax on her rental income.
Tell her that if she wished to pursue you legally, you had better report her to the
revenue so everything is above board.
If she doesn't want you to do that, she can give you back your deposit as a gesture of goodwill.

substr

Sleipnir wrote:

If she doesn't want you to do that, she can give you back your deposit as a gesture of goodwill.

I actually thought about this, of the tables have turned!
First Im gonna check is she a registered landlady though

Sleipnir

substr wrote:

I actually thought about this, of the tables have turned!
First Im gonna check is she a registered landlady though

To check that, call your local authority and ask to be put through to the Register of Private Rented Dwellings.

IF she is not registered, her 'lease' is worth SFA as far as I know.



EDIT> Just to clarify, not every place would have a rent book, it's either a lease OR a rent book so just because you don't have one doesn't mean you're landlord isn't registered.
They do still need to be registered anyway whether they use a rent book or lease.

substr

lol as soon as I mentioned rent allowance and the private rented dwellings act to them, they rang me asking to meet them on saturday to discuss giving my deposit back less any damages done. ahahahahahahahaha
I think Ill report them for tax evasion afterwards anyway just for annoying me

yom 1

substr wrote:

I think Ill report them for tax evasion afterwards anyway just for annoying me

All you have to do to get them back is apply for your rent relief on private accommodation tax credits. You get this through a From Rent 1.

Now it says you need the PPS number of the landlord on it. So you (after you get your deposit back ) tell them that you are applying for it so you need a receipt of how much rent you paid, their PPS number and the period covered by this rent. If (and it sounds like) they are cowboys they will not want to give you this so tell them they can just give you a cheque for the ammount of tax credits.

For a single person under 55 it is €254

if they wont give you either (money or receipt) just send in the form and let the revenue deal with it either way you will get the relief (provided of course you paid over more than the €254. (well as far as i remember)

substr

yom 1 wrote:

For a single person under 55 it is €254

if they wont give you either (money or receipt) just send in the form and let the revenue deal with it either way you will get the relief (provided of course you paid over more than the €254. (well as far as i remember)

Thanks!
Is that €254 per month? The rent was €900 per month, where would I obtain this RENT1 form?

The Brigadier

No it is 245 per year....

Well, it beats a kick in the arse......


You won't need their PPS number for the claim though, the tax office can find all of that out themselves..

substr

http://www.revenue.ie/pdf/rent1e.pdf

I printed this form and am going to show them it on saturday. I just found out they are definetly not registered landlords. Im going to demand by deposit back in full and also the rent relief otherwise that form gets submitted. :cool:

Paddy20

substr wrote:

lol as soon as I mentioned rent allowance and the private rented dwellings act to them, they rang me asking to meet them on saturday to discuss giving my deposit back less any damages done. ahahahahahahahaha
I think Ill report them for tax evasion afterwards anyway just for annoying me

You mention "Rent Allowance". Are or were you receiving this from your local Health Board:- Community Welfare Officer.

If the property is "Unfit for human habitation". Then they are not allowed to rent it. You could report them to the Environmental Health Officers attached to your local Health Board, who have the power to condemn the property.

Go get em, cowboy Ireland has far too many Rip-Off Landlords commiting criminal imprisonable offences, and it is getting worse.

Good luck.

N.B. You could also threaten them with the Small Claims Court, where for less than €10 you can take a case.

substr

Just wondering can anyone answer these questions for me before tomorrow:
1. Is what she is doing really a criminal offence? Or is there just a standard fine?
2. If a landlord hasn't registered a property with the housing authority, is a lease still binding?

Thank you

grumpytrousers

Is what she is doing really a criminal offence? Or is there just a standard fine?

if you mean 'withholding the deposit' without reason then yes. On the other hand, you unilaterally decided you wanted to get out of a lease that you weren't coerced into signing. I've no time for cowboy tax-dodging landlords either, but your reliance on these provisions of law (designed to stop people ripping others off) just 'cos you want to welsh out of a deal YOU made, strikes me as a mite disingenuous.

If a landlord hasn't registered a property with the housing authority, is a lease still binding?

I would have thought so. While the landlord isn't coming out of this smelling of roses, neither are you. The landlord will get stuck for tax on the rent payable. You may well get stuck for the rent payable...

Sleipnir

"Failure to register your rental property can result in prosecution and penalties up to £1,000 plus £100 for each day that the offence continues."

The lease bit is trickier but i would just play the "If you push me, I'll push back" card.
She has a lot more to lose by demanding you comply with the terms of the lease. Expecially if it is decided that it's not legally binding.

grumpytrousers

Also, regarding the 'legality' of the lease and whether it's binding...by you carting your ass and possessions into the property and living there, isn't there an implication that you were 'happy' with the terms?

I don't mean to sound harsh, but if you push this to court or whatever, they'll chuck all this at you as well. Face it, you're relying (after the event) on

a) lease not being witnessed and a
b) property not being registered

as justification for you to break the terms of a lease...

Both of these things could have been checked by you before you moved in, and the argument could be made that you're as much of a chancer as the landlord. I'm not saying you are but others paid to piss you off may well say such a thing!!!

Sleipnir

ah but that depends on what was in the lease. It must have specifics in it such as the name of the landlord, address of the accomdation, T's & C's etc so it might not have been legally binding in the first place.

grumpytrousers

name of the landlord, address of the accomdation, T's & C's etc so it might not have been legally binding in the first place.

True. But you're in sticky wicket land if that's all you have to rely on mind - i.e. praying to God that there's a typo on the Lease.

This isn't a movie where the case will come to a dramatic end because a clever lawyer (played by oooh - Tobey Maguire) and his hard-done-by client will have their way due to their eleventh our discovery that Drimnagh was spelt incorrectly on the feckin' lease, you know!!!

More likely what would happen is that all the facts would be looked at, and a judge will consider all the facts. Which i shan't reheat, but which we're all well versed in...

If our friend who has decided to vacate his lease 4 months early feels he can afford to take the chance of having to pay it all, then he should go for shopping her to the revenue.

He should also go see a solicitor - you can be damned sure his landlord has done!

Paddy20

Do a "Google search" on Peter Rachman. The Landlord in the UK who was imprisoned and has become a legend, so much that "Rachmanism" is listed in the Dictionaries as an example of bad Landlordism. He eventually died in prison.

Do not think that because he was in England that Landlords in ROI are not subject to the same responsibilities and penalties.

As we are now members of the E.U. We have access to the - European Court of Human Rights.

Anyway, Rachman was made an example of by the Judge, and he was the first of very many who were subsequently imprisoned.

In Ireland we are not overly fond of Landlords. So they have plenty to be concerned about ?..

lifebook

How to deal with a dodgy landlords using 15 easy rules

1. Tenant is always right.

2. If you sign anything, a signature is legally binding.

3. Check your notice period, If lease doesnt say non-refundable then you are entitled to your deposit back. This is because it is up to her to make the lease iron clad. That is why solictors are sometimes involved. They have a standard "ironclad" lease that they all use.

4. In the even that the tenant is wrong see rule no 1

5. If she doesnt want to play ball, Call local county council and ask for land registry department. They will tell you if the property is registered for rental use.

6. If its not tell them you would like to report an unregistered landlord (€1800 fine......nice)

7. Go to local inspector of taxes and report an undeclared income

8. Tell her you are doing all this, Will give her the S**ts

9. Do not lose your temper in anyway. Always be pleasant.

10. File for no claims court.

11. When you get there tell them its not the money and if you win you will donate the money to a charity of the courts choosing (Worked a charm, Just didnt want an old landlord keeping my cash)

12. NEVER give up, put a reminder in your phone to call her every second day.


13. Go to her work place if you know it.

14. When you win and you WILL win, put her name in her local paper.

15. If at any stage you feel you are doing something wrong see rule No. 1

lifebook

Also, Myra at Thresh Hold is an absolute belter.


Give her a call

Paddy20

Substr,

Well, how did it go ?... :eek:

substr

Well they said they are perfectly above board and have been paying 42% tax on all the rent I paid them. They said they have no problem if I submit the form RENT 1 to revenue and will ring me with their PPS number on monday. I'm really confused now because the local housing authority said the apartment wasn't registered to be let out. They didn't refund my deposit because they said it was 'in lieu of the month of august'. So on monday I'm gonna double check if the apartment is registered and if not, report them to the housing authority for not being registered and then report them to the revenue commissioners for an undeclared income.
Thanks for all your help everyone but this is not over yet!

RicardoSmith

Paddy20 wrote:

Do a "Google search" on Peter Rachman. The Landlord in the UK who was imprisoned and has become a legend, so much that "Rachmanism" is listed in the Dictionaries as an example of bad Landlordism. He eventually died in prison.

Do not think that because he was in England that Landlords in ROI are not subject to the same responsibilities and penalties.

As we are now members of the E.U. We have access to the - European Court of Human Rights.

Anyway, Rachman was made an example of by the Judge, and he was the first of very many who were subsequently imprisoned.

In Ireland we are not overly fond of Landlords. So they have plenty to be concerned about ?..

Great example of telling half a story. He was imprisioned because he ran brothels. He also was a bit of crook and and a property shark who used to force people out of their homes so he could buy them cheap.

substr didn't have a problem with the landlord until he decided to break the agreement he had made.

Paddy20

RicardoSmith,

Ahem, What agreement did 'substr' make with the landlord in question, have you seen it, as far as I am aware he has no agreement ?.. or maybe you know better ?...

In relation to Rachmanism. Are you trying to state that we have no brothels in Ireland,or that we do not have property sharks who force people out of their homes.

If that is what you think. I suggest you take off the rose tinted glasses and look at how so called respectable 'Banks' happily re-possess at the drop of a hat.

The Irish property market is totally corrupt, and the blatant exploitation of innocent young tenants by unscrupulous landlords, financed by Banks and other Commercial mortgage brokers is at an all time high, even in rural backwaters such as my very own Donegal.

There will be a backlash, and the sooner the better.

Victor

substr wrote:

I didnt sign the lease in front of a solicitor it was just a piece of paper she had with her signature and mine so I dont think its legally binding?

You don't need to have a solicitor present.

What else was on the piece of paper she had you sign?

RicardoSmith

Paddy20 wrote:

RicardoSmith,
Ahem, What agreement did 'substr' make with the landlord in question, have you seen it, as far as I am aware he has no agreement ?.. or maybe you know better ?...

He said signed a 6 month lease.

Paddy20 wrote:

In relation to Rachmanism. Are you trying to state that we have no brothels in Ireland,or that we do not have property sharks who force people out of their homes.

I'm saying its nothing to do with this thread. All landlords are not evil, they don't all have brothels.

Paddy20 wrote:

If that is what you think. I suggest you take off the rose tinted glasses and look at how so called respectable 'Banks' happily re-possess at the drop of a hat.

What have the banks got to do with this thread? N o t h i ng.

Paddy20 wrote:

The Irish property market is totally corrupt, and the blatant exploitation of innocent young tenants by unscrupulous landlords, financed by Banks and other Commercial mortgage brokers is at an all time high, even in rural backwaters such as my very own Donegal.

There will be a backlash, and the sooner the better.

Totally corrupt. So there no honest law abiding people in the property market? Theres no decent landlords? There will be a backlash. What does that mean? In fact landlords are people, and have rights too. Many aren't aware as they should be of the regulations, just as the tenants aren't either. But that doesn't make them dishonest or corrupt. Stupid maybe. But then tenants are guilty of that too.

substr is trying to get out of an agreement he made. I'm not passing judgement on the legality of the agreement. The landlord is looking to cover the costs incurred of the tenant leaving. Its a simply business. Its possible that the landlord has a mortgage to cover, and other costs. If substr had handled it better, like found a tenant to replace himself, its likely the landlord wouldn't have had a problem with him leaving earlier, once it wasn't going to cost money. But by breaking an agreement, then getting all heavy, trying to threaten the landlord is no way to handle this.

But claming that all landlords are evil isn't helping him one iota. IMO.

Paddy20

I acknowledge that the details relating to the contents of the so-called lease that he signed are somewhat vague.

So, in this instance. Let's just agree to disagree.

In relation to landlordism. My opinion of people who make money in this manner is pretty clear.

OK :cool:

RicardoSmith

Paddy20 wrote:

...
In relation to landlordism. My opinion of people who make money in this manner is pretty clear....

There are good and bad landlords, and there are good and bad tenants. I might as well say all tenants are the sum of the earth, robbing gits. It would be as logical as what you are saying.

substr

Guys I'll post more info on this when I have time.
I've found out through the housing authority (Private Rented Dwellings Register) and through the revenue office that
a) They are definetly not registered and
b) They are definetly not paying income tax on the apartment
So I reporteed them to the authority and the revenue commissioners. Now I'm wondering is the lease they wrote out still legally binding if they aren't registered and aren't paying tax? Because if it's not, I'm entitled to my deposit back and am willing to go to the small claims court in order to claim it. Thanks

grumpytrousers

For Gods Sakes, you are NOT entitled to your deposit back, you broke terms of an agreement. The witnessing of it is probably irrelevant. What you are (understandably) trying to do is exercise some leverage in that you get your deposit back in return for not shopping 'em to the revenue.

There are two separate relationships here

a) you and your landlord
b) your landlord and the revenue.

The fact that your landlord isn't registered doesn't alter the fact that you reneged on the lease. And the revenue won't care. And it's nothing to do with them anyway. The significant fact that you walked out after x weeks rather than 6 months matters not a whit to the Revenue. They'll add your landlord to their..um..mailing list and that's the beginning and end of their involvement.

The relationship between you and your landlord remains the same - they hold your deposit and you still owe them money. Now that you seem to have shot your bolt on the 'shopping them' issue - you've shot the hostage - they have nothing to lose in suing you for the money you owe them. The lease can not be made 'unbinding' due to some fact or other coming to light subsequent to the signing that doesn't have a major effect on the terms of the lease itself. There was no mention, i would think, of the landlord paying on Tax on the property in the lease, so the fact that you know know that they don't doesn't significantly alter the terms...

In other words - if you accept a lease at face value and sign it. And the landlord signs it, and you move in, then the lease has pretty much done its job. You've got a place to stay for 6 months - guaranteed, and the landlord has a contract with you that guarantees them income for 6 months. The lease is merely a thing between you and the landlord. What they do with the money is none of your business - in the same way that how you make your money (for paying 'em with) is none of their business. (unless you're running a knocking shop in their flat!!! )

I'm not sure how wise it was to go nuclear on this one so early...as I say, you've now shot your bolt and have possibly pissed off your landlord. You have no way of pulling back now...I'm not having a pop at local council efficiency, but to be honest, I'd want more than phone confirmation on my side before i did what you did...

RicardoSmith

I very curious to know what happens with this. Keep us updated.

substr

grumpy, ignoring the fact they are cheating tax with the revenue, legally they aren't ALLOWED to lease that apartment out to me. So if I did bring them to the small claims court, I don't think that lease would hold. It would be like me selling drugs, and then trying to bring someone to court for not paying me - do you see what I'm getting at?

vorbis

might not be as clear cut as that substr. Legally they could be allowed rent out that apartment wheras they're in trouble for not declaring tax. Drug dealing is just straight out illegal. It could be as grumpy views it, two separate issues under the law. Your lease agreement and their obligations to the Revenue Commissioners.

Also if the place was such a dump why did you move in there in the first place?

grumpytrousers

substr wrote:

grumpy, ignoring the fact they are cheating tax with the revenue, legally they aren't ALLOWED to lease that apartment out to me. So if I did bring them to the small claims court, I don't think that lease would hold. It would be like me selling drugs, and then trying to bring someone to court for not paying me - do you see what I'm getting at?

Lookit - best of luck to you. The dye is cast in this matter now anyway and what happens. I just think you may be a bit naive in what you've done...

While some would say that right/wrong is a black and white issue, I can assure you that (as vorbis says) there is right, there is wrong and there is 'way off the scale wrong'. While what they're doing may be wrong, it's not drug dealing/child prostitution and they're not gonna have *that* heavy a book thrown at them.

FWIW, I've no time for people who rent out dumps to people who need the accomodation, much less those who cheat the taxman, but the last two landlords I've rented from were both diamonds - new furniture when needed, speedy repairs for household appliances when necessary, but both cash in hand jobbies...

The other thing that crossed my mind is that potentially if your landlord is a 'professional' landlord, it's possible that the property isn't registered in their name. God only knows - it could be a company partnership, a few mates together....whatever - and thus any names etc you've quoted to the revenue might not have brought up the right records.

Also - and i hate to say this - if this does go to court, the fact that you shopped 'em will now be mentioned and inasmuch as court proceedings will be between you and the landlord, will certainly show you for having been 'morally' in the wrong. i.e. people don't tend to rat their landlords unless they've a reason. Yours was they were withholding the deposit and the reason for that was...you guessed it, broke the terms of the lease.

Case for the plaintiff rests, judge...

Again - best of luck. Tread carefully!

RicardoSmith

Someone mentioned the small claims court. Would a case like this go to that court?

Sleipnir

grumpytrousers wrote:

The other thing that crossed my mind is that potentially if your landlord is a 'professional' landlord, it's possible that the property isn't registered in their name. God only knows - it could be a company partnership, a few mates together....whatever - and thus any names etc you've quoted to the revenue might not have brought up the right records.

They search for the property address, not the landlord name. So it doesn't matter who it is registered to.

substr

The other thing that crossed my mind is that potentially if your landlord is a 'professional' landlord, it's possible that the property isn't registered in their name. God only knows - it could be a company partnership, a few mates together....whatever - and thus any names etc you've quoted to the revenue might not have brought up the right records.

Wrong.

Sleipnir wrote:

They search for the property address, not the landlord name. So it doesn't matter who it is registered to.

Exactly - was just going to point this out. Both the housing authority and the revenue wanted the address of the apartment.

but the last two landlords I've rented from were both diamonds - new furniture when needed, speedy repairs for household appliances when necessary, but both cash in hand jobbies

What you do in your own time is you business. But I feel this is more widespread than our 2 cases. There's a reason tax/paye in this country is so high and I feel its somehow related to the hundreds/thousands/god knows how many people cheating the system, forcing tax rates up for the regular joe like me.

Also - and i hate to say this - if this does go to court, the fact that you shopped 'em will now be mentioned and inasmuch as court proceedings will be between you and the landlord, will certainly show you for having been 'morally' in the wrong.

Wrong again - (do you ever get tired of being wrong) - Neither the housing authority nor the revenue asked for my name/address/any details at all. They said it's all completely anonymous.

And now my personal opinion on this:

While what they're doing may be wrong, it's not drug dealing/child prostitution and they're not gonna have *that* heavy a book thrown at them

A crime is a crime. Just because the victim is an entire state rather than an individual in the case of rape/murder etc, doesn't make it any more/less of a crime.

grumpytrousers

Wrong again - (do you ever get tired of being wrong) - Neither the housing authority nor the revenue asked for my name/address/any details at all. They said it's all completely anonymous.

Fair enough. But if this goes to court as a civil matter and you're under oath and asked did you inform the revenue, will you perjure yourself?

Remember, as somebody 'round here said "A crime is a crime. Just because the victim is an entire state rather than an individual in the case of rape/murder etc, doesn't make it any more/less of a crime."

That's all I'm gonna say on this matter. As for 'never tiring of being wrong', that's rather subjective an analysis - you did come here and ask for advice and opinions. If my appraisal of your situation don't happen to coincide with your own, then I'm sorry; the threads of wholehearted approval of everything you ever say or do are down the corridor, third door on the left...

Again, best of luck

grumpy

Paddy20

Substr,

Re: The Small Claims Court ?..

You would need to do a check with the Clerk of the Court at your nearest District Court about whether you can claim for your deposit through the Small Claims Court. Just to be sure, or do a check online.

RicardoSmith,

I consider 'Landlordism' as immoral. You are trying to defend the indefensible. Under our Constitution everyone has a right to a roof over their head. Simply because our little Countries Local Authorities and corrupt Politico's have failed our citizens miserably, leaves the door open for scum to charge €900 per Month for a flea pit that is unfit for human habitation. Cop on for heavens sake.

RicardoSmith

Paddy20 wrote:

...
I consider 'Landlordism' as immoral. You are trying to defend the indefensible. Under our Constitution everyone has a right to a roof over their head. Simply because our little Countries Local Authorities and corrupt Politico's have failed our citizens miserably, leaves the door open for scum to charge €900 per Month for a flea pit that is unfit for human habitation. Cop on for heavens sake.

If you don't like it use local authority housing.

So renting property, or land is immoral? I suppose capitalisim is too. What would you suggest as an alternative, ban all rental property and replace it with....?

Paddy20

Reasonably priced housing for all. With Government mortgage schemes for all.
Capitalism has a very ugly side, and 'Landlordism' is one that I would make illegal.

Except for local authorities. With the responsibility for providing EU standard high quality housing at a rent according to means.

grumpytrousers

Paddy20 wrote:

Reasonably priced housing for all. With Government mortgage schemes for all.
Capitalism has a very ugly side, and 'Landlordism' is one that I would make illegal.

Except for local authorities. With the responsibility for providing EU standard high quality housing at a rent according to means.

Capitalism has indeed an ugly side - the major weakness of capitalism is that it fails to take account of the pure naked selfish greed (called unlimited wants by economists!) which unfortunately is part of what we are as humans.

Socialism, on the other hand works at lot better. Except for the fact that it fails to take account of the...um....same...um...unlimited wants....

Is there a name for this paradox?

RicardoSmith

Does the govt not provide housing though the local authorities?
Why should the govt be obligated to help you buy property?
Name one place in the world were Socialism works?
Capitalism not pretty but it works no?
Landlordism is unavoidable in a capitalist system, no?

Victor

Paddy20 wrote:

Under our Constitution everyone has a right to a roof over their head.

Are you sure? Can you point out the Article this is contained in?

There is definitely a right to private property, which landlords can rely on.

Regarding the legality of the non-registration, I imagine it is an offence to not register (when renting out), not that it is an offence to rent out without being registered. Subtle but real difference. The contract is tainted, not void.* If it was the other way around, landlords could chuck out tenents by simply not renewing their registration.

* By comparision to the drug analogy, a pharmaceutical company can sell cocaine, but not to you.

Paddy20

No, I can not point out the Article in the Constitution at the moment, as I am quoting from memory. Although I well remember when I first read the ROI Constitution that paragraph had a dramatic effect on me.

Even so, in law Local Authorities are obligated to provide housing to homeless people. Starting with them paying for emergency B&B and then with a Rent Allowance along with the local Health Boards for more permanent flat's/bedsit's until a proper Local Authority property becomes available suitable according to the persons needs and circumstances.

Naturally, they do not like this fact, and tend to deny that people "Have the constitutional right to a roof over their head" but under pressure they generally comply with their legal responsibilities.

We always have a shortage of Local Authority housing, and waiting lists tend to be extremely long. Thereby leaving the door open for exploitation by private landlords.

This situation has arisen not because of a lack of money to build new housing, but IMO because of the "I'm alright jack and to hell with you" - mentality of a lot of civil servants who are only waiting to take early retirement.

The public/local authority housing situation is improving, but it has taken far too long due I believe, to a lack of Political will.