Notice period with renting out a room

irishguy

Could anyone tell me if I told a tenant (I my own house) that they have to give one months notice before they move out and if they didnt give that notice would I be within my rights to keep the deposit?

makeorbrake

Notice period is a bit of a grey area in a rent-a-room scenario. However, the guideline is that the notice period given by either party would be equal to the time period they pay for. ie. if they pay weekly, then each party to give 1 weeks notice; if they pay monthly, then each party to give 1 months notice. As the 'landlord' (for want of a better word), there could be circumstances that would justify immediate vacation of the room/property.

I guess that if you added your own 'agreement' on top of what is generally assumed, then you could specify 1 month (even if they do pay weekly) - and have the 'tenant' sign it.

Hope this helps.

djimi

You can only withold the deposit (or part thereof) to cover rent arrears and to repair any damage beyond what would be considered normal wear and tear. You do not have the right to withold the deposit for any other reason.

You can try and charge the tenant for another week/months rent (which may or may not equal the value of the deposit), but it is a seperate thing.

Jo King

makeorbrake wrote: »

Notice period is a bit of a grey area in a rent-a-room scenario. However, the guideline is that the notice period given by either party would be equal to the time period they pay for. ie. if they pay weekly, then each party to give 1 weeks notice; if they pay monthly, then each party to give 1 months notice.

What guideline? The relationship is entirely a matter of contract i.e. what was agreed between the parties either expressly or by implication. The worst that can happen to the owner is that he gets sued for the money in the District Court. That is most unlikely as people who don't give sufficient notice are usually too mean to pay for a court case.

HardyEustace

djimi wrote: »

You can only withold the deposit (or part thereof) to cover rent arrears and to repair any damage beyond what would be considered normal wear and tear. You do not have the right to withold the deposit for any other reason.

You can try and charge the tenant for another week/months rent (which may or may not equal the value of the deposit), but it is a separate thing.

I get rent on a monthly basis. If someone moved out giving me less than a months notice then I'd deduct the outstanding rental time from their deposit. I think that's fair.

djimi

HardyEustace wrote: »

I get rent on a monthly basis. If someone moved out giving me less than a months notice then I'd deduct the outstanding rental time from their deposit. I think that's fair.

You might think its fair but strictly speaking its not legal! By rights you should be giving them back their deposit and settling whatever penalty costs you wish to charge as a seperate matter.

The_Conductor

djimi wrote: »

You can only withold the deposit (or part thereof) to cover rent arrears and to repair any damage beyond what would be considered normal wear and tear. You do not have the right to withold the deposit for any other reason.

You can try and charge the tenant for another week/months rent (which may or may not equal the value of the deposit), but it is a seperate thing.

This is only the case where there is a 'tenant' who is covered by tenancy law. When you take a room in someone's house- you are *not* a tenant, you are simply living there under licence. You have no recourse to the PRTB for dispute resolution- and you have none of the rights a tenant would normally have.

Strictly speaking there is no enforceable notice period on the part of either party in an owner occuppied rent-a-room arrangement- it is up to the two parties to come to an arrangement between themselves.

Legally the person renting the room is not a tenant- and the owner occupier is not a landlord.

Regarding keeping the deposit- two wrongs don't make a right- the right thing to do would be to return it.

HardyEustace

djimi wrote: »

You might think its fair but strictly speaking its not legal! By rights you should be giving them back their deposit and settling whatever penalty costs you wish to charge as a seperate matter.

That's a very valid point. However, I guess that in the same way, I wouldn't tell someone that they had to leave without giving them a months notice. I would expect the same courtesy in return.

However, life doesn't always work that!

And in the same way, that if you're a professional landlord, so you also have to accept that you're not going to have 100% occupancy the whole time. And sometimes it's actually good to have a break of a week or two where you can repaint the room or do any necessary diy works and just give yourself a bit of a break before someone new moves in.

Jo King

djimi wrote: »

You might think its fair but strictly speaking its not legal! By rights you should be giving them back their deposit and settling whatever penalty costs you wish to charge as a seperate matter.

What is not legal? It all depends on the initial contract. None of this is governed by the RTA. It is perfectly legal to offset a debt. If you owe someone money and they owe you money it is perfectly legal to just pay the balance. Happens in business all of the time. It is reasonable for the o/p to want a months notice. He may have to alter holiday plans, organise workers etc. In pre RTA times the notice only started from the next rent due date. A person on monthly rent had to give a months notice from the next rent due date. If they gave notice a months notice the day after a rent due date it was effectively two months notice. If they left after a month the whole deposit would be forfeit.

makeorbrake

Jo King wrote: »

What guideline?

The following taken from citizensinformation.ie here
This also means that private tenants living in your home are living under a licensee agreement not a tenancy agreement and are really only entitled to reasonable notice if you choose to terminate the agreement.
As I said, its a bit of a grey area - as it's 'reasonable notice' thats outlined. However, some years back, Threshold interpreted this as the notice period to reflect the time period for which the tenant paid (ie. weekly, monthly, etc). Unless of course, the two parties had signed an agreement over and above this.

Jo King wrote: »

what was agreed between the parties either expressly or by implication.

Sure - agreed. I have been doing the rent a room thing for 5 years now - and have only withheld deposit once. This was in an instance where I was given no notice whatsoever. Therefore, I was not given the opportunity to find a replacement and was out of pocket as a result.

Jo King

That "guideline " does not have the force of law, nor is based on any quoted law. The licencee has the same status as a guest in a hotel. The licencee is resident in a private home. He would have the rights based on his contract with the owner. In the absence of a written contract the matter will be done by implication as to the presumed intent of the parties. It is a matter of guesswork where the line can be drawn. If there is a fundamental breach by one part the other would obviously entitled to terminate straight away. If not, It is "the officious bystander test".

makeorbrake

Jo King wrote: »

That "guideline " does not have the force of law, nor is based on any quoted law. The licencee has the same status as a guest in a hotel. The licencee is resident in a private home. He would have the rights based on his contract with the owner. In the absence of a written contract the matter will be done by implication as to the presumed intent of the parties. It is a matter of guesswork where the line can be drawn. If there is a fundamental breach by one part the other would obviously entitled to terminate straight away. If not, It is "the officious bystander test".

Sure - we're on the same page mate.