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

"Illegal evictions"

Options

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    dats_right
    Registered Users Posts: 1,168 ✭✭✭dats_right


    Very one sided report. Nowhere does it metion the reasons for these supposed 'illegal evictions'. From my experience landlords don't evict tenants who don't cause trouble and pay rent. It is important to remember that tenants have duties and obligations too. Landlords very often have mortgages to pay from rents and if a tenant stops paying rent it is very difficult for the landlord just to sit back and allow this to continue. The Residential Tenancies Act is probably too pro-tenant in this regard and it is not surprising that landlords take matters into their own hands rather than wait several months for the PRTB to do anything.


  • Options
    #3
    Climate Expert
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,393 ✭✭✭Climate Expert


    Its pro-tenant because its somebodies home we are dealing with here. A person who kicks somebody out of their home illegally should go to jail.


  • Options
    #4
    Ste.phen
    Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭Ste.phen


    dats_right wrote: »
    Very one sided report. Nowhere does it metion the reasons for these supposed 'illegal evictions'. From my experience landlords don't evict tenants who don't cause trouble and pay rent. It is important to remember that tenants have duties and obligations too. Landlords very often have mortgages to pay from rents and if a tenant stops paying rent it is very difficult for the landlord just to sit back and allow this to continue. The Residential Tenancies Act is probably too pro-tenant in this regard and it is not surprising that landlords take matters into their own hands rather than wait several months for the PRTB to do anything.

    Sending a valid, legal notice of termination doesn't require any input from the PRTB as far as I know.
    Changing the locks on someone counts as illegal eviction, and rightly so IMHO


  • Options
    #5
    nadin278
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭nadin278


    Sometimes landlords do not have a choice.
    Excuse me, but when a tenant is complete disaster, does not pay rent, destroyes the place, and prtb will take months to resolve this problem, just because its pro tenant, while landlord is out of pocket...
    I think its ok to evict tenants like that, may be landlords have no choice...


  • Options
    #6
    Climate Expert
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,393 ✭✭✭Climate Expert


    nadin278 wrote: »
    Sometimes landlords do not have a choice.
    Excuse me, but when a tenant is complete disaster, does not pay rent, destroyes the place, and prtb will take months to resolve this problem, just because its pro tenant, while landlord is out of pocket...
    I think its ok to evict tenants like that, may be landlords have no choice...
    Thats the risk you take with this business.
    Don't like the risk then don't pretend to be a landlord. Its not just a free money service to pay your mortgage.

    If you can't afford to be months without rent, you can't afford to be a landlord.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,335 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    nadin278 wrote: »
    Excuse me, but when a tenant is complete disaster, does not pay rent, destroyes the place, and prtb will take months to resolve this problem, just because its pro tenant, while landlord is out of pocket...
    Such a tenant doesn't take months to evict. the problem is landlords procrastinate until it becomes a crisis.


  • Options
    #8
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,280 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Not always so- tenants can have all sorts of reasons or excuses (some valid, some not) for being late with their rent. Even after you allow things to slide for a few weeks, it can even now still take 6-7 months to get a PRTB hearing- at which stage an order to make a payment within a set period of time (15 days, 21 days, 2 months (whatever)) is made (in the intervening period the tenant still hasn't paid, and now owes a little under 8 grand)- and still has possession of your property. The PRTB will still assume that they are going to pay (why?) and if/when they don't its a case of you'll have to take a civil action against the tenant to recover the debt. Inevitably the tenant will either turn up in court and argue penury, or else not bother to turn up at all, at which stage an order will issue against them (good luck finding the tenant and then enforcing the order).

    Landlords have expenses and obligations too- and are providing a service (housing) on agreed terms (that the tenant will take reasonable care of the property and pay their agreed rent ontime).

    I was accused of being a Nazi for posting similar the above in that bizarre rambling After Hours thread - why, I don't know. Its not right-wing to suggest that if someone provides a service they have a reasonable expectation of recompense for provision of that service- simple as.

    While I do not condone illegal evictions- there are a startling number of tenants who are playing the system to get away without paying rent for protracted periods of time- which leads to frustration and in some cases severe financial hardship for some landlords.


  • Options
    #9
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,331 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    There is something wrong with a system that allows a tenant to forego paying rent for months but doesn't allow the Landlord to forego paying the mortgage on the property. I know a few people who moved house and rented out their original house; it would cause them hardship if they had to pay the two mortgages without the rent for a significant period of time.

    It's not like every landlord is a wealthy businessman who can afford the risk.


  • Options
    #10
    Ste.phen
    Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭Ste.phen


    i think you'll have a hard time getting sympathy for Buy-To-Let landlords in here.
    That said, if what smccarrick said is true, the system is definitely skewed too far towards the landlord in some ways (security of tenure, etc), and too far towards the tenant in others (non payment of rent).
    I'm genuinely surprised by that though, I thought the PRTB situation (hearing for non-payment) only arose if the landlord issued a (valid) eviction notice and the tenant decided to appeal it to the PRTB? Surely that's a rare ocurrance?


  • Options
    #11
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,280 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Igy wrote: »
    I'm genuinely surprised by that though, I thought the PRTB situation (hearing for non-payment) only arose if the landlord issued a (valid) eviction notice and the tenant decided to appeal it to the PRTB? Surely that's a rare ocurrance?

    No- its almost becoming a standard course of action- and if a tenant contacts threshold or their local Citizens Advice Bureau, is a course of action that is automatically suggested to them. The PRTB are getting snowed under in these (which is partially why the length of time to get a hearing is so long).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Climate Expert wrote: »
    If you can't afford to be months without rent, you can't afford to be a landlord.
    There's a difference between not being able to afford a loss of rent, and not being taking for a fool.

    I don't condone illegal evictions, but at the same time, I don't condone non-payment of rent.


Advertisement