lease up, rolling rent

Cookie_Monster

Just got off the phone with the landlord.
Our lease expires at the end of the month, I was talking to him about renewal etc.
He is happy to let the lease simply roll forward, requiring us to give only 30 days notification if we wish to vacate.

Now he's a decent guy, we've never had any problems nor with to cause any. I'm just wondering the potential implications of this if anything were to happen or if we decided to move out etc Does the lack of a lease leave us exposed in any way?

convert

The lack of a lease means that you enter a Part 4 tenancy which probably gives you more rights than if you actually had a lease.

This is from the PRTB wetbiste:

Security of tenure is based on 4-year cycles from the date Part 4 of the Act comes into force (i.e. 1st September 2004).

The landlord can terminate without specifying grounds during the first 6 months, but once a tenancy has lasted 6 months, the landlord will be able to terminate that tenancy (known as a “Part 4 tenancy”) during the following 31/2 years only if any of the following apply;


the tenant does not comply with the obligations of the tenancy
the dwelling is no longer suited to the occupants accommodation needs (e.g. overcrowded)
the landlord intends to sell the dwelling in the next 3 months
the landlord requires the dwelling for own or family member occupation
the landlord intends to refurbish the dwelling
the landlord intends to change the business use of the dwelling.

The grounds for recovery of possession listed above are subject to certain procedures to prevent their abuse.

At the end of the 4 years, a new tenancy will commence and the cycle begins again on the same basis as outlined above. The following are other key features of Part 4 tenancies:

• Tenants may opt to continue in occupation after a fixed term tenancy that has lasted 6 months or more expires, but they must notify the landlord of an intention to remain, between one and three months before the fixed term lease is due to expire.

• Where a tenancy is assigned to a new tenant (i.e. transferred with the landlord’s consent), a new tenancy cycle will commence.

Where a tenancy is sub-let (i.e. tenant moves out and becomes landlord to a new sub-tenant with the landlord’s consent), the sub-tenancy will be deemed to have commenced on the same date as the head-tenancy out of which it was created, and the cycle will continue. Further detail relating to sub-tenants is contained in the Schedule to the Act.

In the case of multiple occupants, the cycle will run with the earliest tenant and Part 4 protection will, therefore, last less than 4 years for those who join in at a later stage. Multiple occupant tenancies will continue for the full four years so long as there is at least one person who is a


tenant of the Part 4 tenancy in occupation (not necessarily one of the original tenants).
• Licensees (i.e. additional occupants brought in by a resident tenant who are not tenants themselves) may request the landlord to become tenant and the landlord may not unreasonably withhold written consent.
• The tenant will be free to terminate the tenancy at any time, subject to any fixed term lease or agreement.

You would, of course, be required to give adequate notice if you wished to move out. The notice required is available on the prtb website.

Cookie_Monster

ah, cool.

thanks for that

D3PO

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Just got off the phone with the landlord.
Our lease expires at the end of the month, I was talking to him about renewal etc.
He is happy to let the lease simply roll forward, requiring us to give only 30 days notification if we wish to vacate.

Now he's a decent guy, we've never had any problems nor with to cause any. I'm just wondering the potential implications of this if anything were to happen or if we decided to move out etc Does the lack of a lease leave us exposed in any way?

his word isnt worth the paper its written on. Rolling = part 4. You have some extra protections but so does he.

I envisage the day when you give 30 days notice and he clams hes keeping depoit as you havent given the right notive under Part 4.

Whats wrong with getting a new lease with a 30 day break clause that can be invoked at any time ? If I were you this would be my preferred option.

Cookie_Monster

D3PO wrote: »

Whats wrong with getting a new lease with a 30 day break clause that can be invoked at any time ? If I were you this would be my preferred option.

Yeah could do that. The likelihood of getting a big extremely cheap house at short notice in the new year is the main reason. Don't want to have a long term lease if can be helped as the opportunity to move will be limited time wise and a once off. Though with the break clause it kind of removes the issue.

I envisage the day when you give 30 days notice and he clams hes keeping depoit as you havent given the right notive under Part 4.

Well its between 1-3 months isn't it, in which case we need 31 days notice minimum.

convert

Minimum amount of notice which must be given:

Notice that Landlords must give:
Less than 6 months - 28 days notice required
6 or more months but less than 1 year - 35 days
1 year or more but less than 2 years - 42 days
2 years or more but less than 3 years - 56 days
3 years or more but less than 4 years - 84 days
4 or more years - 112 days

The period of notice that the tenant must give for the same periods are as follows:
28 days
35 days
42 days
56 days
56 days
56 days

soruce: prtb website

Victor

Have you asked for a rent reduction?

Consider writing to him saying you would like to continue renting for the moment and agree to his suggestion that if you do leave, you would be required to give 30 days notice.

OS119

convert wrote: »

Minimum amount of notice which must be given:...

anyone know what's the rationalé for the disparity between the notice periods for tenants and landords?

seems a bit odd that as the rental periods increase the tenant must give more and more notice but the LL's just plateau at about 60% of the tenants after year 2...

Mary Hairy

OS119 wrote: »

anyone know what's the rationalé for the disparity between the notice periods for tenants and landords?

seems a bit odd that as the rental periods increase the tenant must give more and more notice but the LL's just plateau at about 60% of the tenants after year 2...

It is the other way round. The poster above has mixed up the notice periods for landlords and tenants.

convert

Mary Hairy wrote: »

It is the other way round. The poster above has mixed up the notice periods for landlords and tenants.

:eek:

Note to self: do not try to multi task again when posting on boards.ie!

Sorry for the confusion