RA problem tenant - advice please

curadh

Hi everyone, I took on a tenant last september in receipt of rent allowance. From the start I gave them the benefit of the doubt, move in day arrived and they showed up with no deposit, however I went ahead through sheer desperation of having to meet the mortgage which was way behind. Rent started coming through 2 months after, which is supposed to be supplemented. To this day the rent has not been paid fully once, at Christmas Im informed they threatened two neighbours one morning over being 'in their way'. Then they had a huge party where two windows got smashed and on passing by this evening there looks to be graffiti on the walls inside.
I rang the tenants and asked them what was happening with the windows as its easy to see they have been smashed from the inside. I am told they can't afford to get them fixed and it doesnt bother them anyway cos they have the heat up.
I know I must serve an eviction notice immediately, however that will give them 28 days to further destroy the place, and me with no deposit. Can I do anything else to get them out. I feel like a real soft touch, under a lot of pressure from elsewhere at the moment and could really do without this. Worst part is Im pretty sure Im powerless, just have to wait for them to get out and then try to pull the cash from somewhere to do it up again. Any advice?:)

seriouslysweet

You can totally get those out. Once the rent is late a month's notice is enough. Can you get others for the mortgage? Even by dropping it a little perhaps?

edellc

Just to point out not all RA tenants are like this and whether your tenant is RA or not it is unacceptable to behave in such a manner.
I feel very strongly that mentioning in your title that they are RA tenants is completely wrong as it is giving the wrong impression of people who are in need of state assistance

Max Power1

edellc wrote: »

Just to point out not all RA tenants are like this and whether your tenant is RA or not it is unacceptable to behave in such a manner.
I feel very strongly that mentioning in your title that they are RA tenants is completely wrong as it is giving the wrong impression of people who are in need of state assistance

Its a factual statement. Are we censoring the truth in order to be PC now?:rolleyes:

not even wrong

In the case of serious anti-social behaviour you are entitled to terminate their tenancy with 7 days notice. If you're going to go this way I'd make sure that the neighbours who were threatened will back you up though -- they might not want to get involved any further. Did they report the threats to the police?

curadh

thanks for the replies. I dont think the neighbours would want to testify to what happened. So not sure how else that would work. Dont want a fight to be honest, as they are the unreasonable uneducated type..trying to be pc there..will try to hand deliver the notice and hope for the best. Who knows maybe they wont trash the place... and Id like to point out edellc that it is relevant saying that they are RA tenants as people need to know the truth. I wouldnt take one again unless there was a substantial deposit upfront.

supersaintpats

This was a tough experience for a property owner, especially in these tight times. There's always a case that is extreme, and I don't think that this justifies the initial description of the problem tenants as RA tenants. They are just bad tenants.

Blackjack

Max Power1 wrote: »

Its a factual statement. Are we censoring the truth in order to be PC now?:rolleyes:

+1

MistyCheese

edellc wrote: »

Just to point out not all RA tenants are like this and whether your tenant is RA or not it is unacceptable to behave in such a manner.
I feel very strongly that mentioning in your title that they are RA tenants is completely wrong as it is giving the wrong impression of people who are in need of state assistance

Unfortunately "Rent Allowance tenant ruined my house!!!!1!" is more interesting than "Tenant, who happens to be in reciept of Rent Supplement, paid rent in full and on time and left me a Christmas card."

senordingdong

First things first, ring and tell them you are coming for an inspection, (which you are legally entitled to do) get a full assessment on the damage.

Then tell them that you are pursuing legal action against them.
That ought to get them out soon enough.

In regards to the damage done, if they didn't pay a deposit, you're going to have to take that on the chin.

Penguino

curadh wrote: »

Hi everyone, I took on a tenant last september in receipt of rent allowance. From the start I gave them the benefit of the doubt, move in day arrived and they showed up with no deposit, however I went ahead through sheer desperation of having to meet the mortgage which was way behind. Rent started coming through 2 months after, which is supposed to be supplemented. To this day the rent has not been paid fully once, at Christmas Im informed they threatened two neighbours one morning over being 'in their way'. Then they had a huge party where two windows got smashed and on passing by this evening there looks to be graffiti on the walls inside.
I rang the tenants and asked them what was happening with the windows as its easy to see they have been smashed from the inside. I am told they can't afford to get them fixed and it doesnt bother them anyway cos they have the heat up.
I know I must serve an eviction notice immediately, however that will give them 28 days to further destroy the place, and me with no deposit. Can I do anything else to get them out. I feel like a real soft touch, under a lot of pressure from elsewhere at the moment and could really do without this. Worst part is Im pretty sure Im powerless, just have to wait for them to get out and then try to pull the cash from somewhere to do it up again. Any advice?:)

Have you registered with the PRTB, if so they should be able to give you some advise www.prtb.ie

Elle Collins

curadh wrote: »

..and Id like to point out edellc that it is relevant saying that they are RA tenants as people need to know the truth. I wouldnt take one again unless there was a substantial deposit upfront.

If you're just interested in telling the truth then, should you ever find yourself in this situation with a private rental tenant, I'm assuming we can expect a thread titled: 'Private rental problem tenant - advice please' :rolleyes:

curadh

Listen the fact of the matter is the problem is with a tenant in receipt of rent allowance. This is relevant to the following points Ive already made - 1.They are supposed to supplement the government payments, which they haven't. 2.They couldnt get a deposit together on move in after telling me they could, however at that stage the payments had been set up with my consent that they were tenants at the address. 3. Any damages a rent allowance tenant causes there will be serious question marks over whether they can cover them and more than likely pursuing them following tenancy will be a complete waste of time money energy and highly stressful.

Therefore I hope this thread is of use to people considering a rent allowance tenant. Its a pity the government cannot supply deposits or be accountable for these peoples damages but unfortunately landlords would probably abuse the deposits.

ztoical

curadh wrote: »

Listen the fact of the matter is the problem is with a tenant in receipt of rent allowance. This is relevant to the following points Ive already made - 1.They are supposed to supplement the government payments, which they haven't.

It is illegal for RA tenants to top up their rent. Yes alot do but they are not supposed to. When you filled out the forums for RA allowance did you put down the real rent as per the lease or the max rent as per RA allowance? If it was the later then you broke the law.

curadh wrote: »

2.They couldnt get a deposit together on move in after telling me they could, however at that stage the payments had been set up with my consent that they were tenants at the address.

That was your choice to let them move in without paying a deposit and I'm sorry OP your going to have to live with the mistake and learn from it. The very same could and has happened with private tenants.

curadh wrote: »

3. Any damages a rent allowance tenant causes there will be serious question marks over whether they can cover them and more than likely pursuing them following tenancy will be a complete waste of time money energy and highly stressful.

That is what a deposit is for and again you made the choice to let them move in without paying a deposit. The fact that they are RA tenants is neither here nor there, just look at this forum plenty of non-RA tenants casuing damage and running off and the LL not being able to pursue them. Some people are scum but we shouldnt be painting everyone with the same brush.

curadh wrote: »

Therefore I hope this thread is of use to people considering a rent allowance tenant. Its a pity the government cannot supply deposits or be accountable for these peoples damages but unfortunately landlords would probably abuse the deposits.

'these people'? Hope your refering to your tenants and not RA tenants in general.

senordingdong

ztoical wrote: »

It is illegal for RA tenants to top up their rent. Yes alot do but they are not supposed to. When you filled out the forums for RA allowance did you put down the real rent as per the lease or the max rent as per RA allowance? If it was the later then you broke the law.

Really?
I claimed RA for a while and filled out the full rent rate on the form.
The CWO told me that she would not grant me the full rate of my rent but would give x and I would have to make up the rest.

ztoical

senordingdong wrote: »

Really?
I claimed RA for a while and filled out the full rent rate on the form.
The CWO told me that she would not grant me the full rate of my rent but would give x and I would have to make up the rest.

It seems to very patchy across the country as to what is followed but the offical stance is tenants aren't allowed to top up. Been a few threads on here and the welfare forum from LL being asked by tenants to not put the full rent amount on the forum and tenants wanting to top up the rent and being told they can't and others not having any issues.

senordingdong

Why would the LL not want the full rate put on the form?

cailinoBAC

Don’t the tenants have to pay €26 a week (I think this is increased to €28 a week in the budget – that is €8 less a month that comes from the SW).

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/OperationalGuidelines/pages/swa_rent.aspx

3.1 Standard Assessment
Rent Supplement is normally calculated to ensure that a person, after the payment of rent, has an income equal to the rate of SWA appropriate to their family circumstances less a minimum contribution, currently € 24, which recipients are required to pay from their own resources. Many recipients pay more than € 24 because recipients are also required, subject to income disregards, to contribute any additional assessable means that they have over and above the appropriate basic SWA rate towards their accommodation costs.

I think that is from last year
Don’t want to hijack the thread, but I think it is relevant that they are rent allowance. Nobody takes in other tenants without a deposit and rent is paid a month in advance. However with RA they often don’t have deposit and rent is paid in arrears. People who are new to renting are not always aware of this and by the time they know, they feel they can’t back out. I have tenants that moved in in August. They paid half a deposit and promised to pay the rest over a few weeks. I eventually got it but it took some time. Waited a few months to get the rent as it had to be set up. Then the next month I didn’t get anything. The house was broken into apparently and the money was taken. (Yes, I was very sceptical, no forced entry etc. but there were other break ins in the area, I think the door was just left open). Also, why they had the cash in the house instead of lodging it directly to my bank account is beyond me. Again, with non RA this would be standing order and wouldn’t happen. So I don’t know if I’m ever going to receive that money, they don’t feel any responsibility for it (asked me to take that month’s rent from the deposit). I’m trying to be firm but also understanding, but I’m stressing far more than I should be over it. On top of that I haven’t received much of the top up, though they promised to lodge it weekly to my bank account, it’s like drawing blood from a stone, so the arrears are slowly building up.
Yes, there are other bad tenants, but if I end up looking for new tenants and the only people looking are RA, I think I will insist on deposit and month’s rent in advance (or basically 2 month’s deposit if that’s how I have to word it). I mean, as RA isn’t being paid directly, if somebody just upped and left they could collect the RA and simply not pass it on. And if I couldn’t find anybody to do that, I’d probably just leave the house empty, it’s not worth the stress. I mean, the current tenants, after the robbery, they basically tried to blame me, that the reason they didn’t have the cash was that there was no alarm (even though they knew that moving in) and that if I didn’t put in an alarm they would move out. I actually felt relieved when I heard that, I was just happy that I might be able to get rid of them without having to go through any eviction process, I didn’t even care that I wouldn’t get any of the arrears. But they stopped talking about that soon afterwards, even though I said I couldn’t afford to put in the alarm until they’d paid some more of the arrears.

Fulltimemammy

edellc wrote: »

Just to point out not all RA tenants are like this and whether your tenant is RA or not it is unacceptable to behave in such a manner.
I feel very strongly that mentioning in your title that they are RA tenants is completely wrong as it is giving the wrong impression of people who are in need of state assistance

I Totally Agree With Your Comment Im Trying To Find A Place For Myself And My Baby And Im Starting To Notice A Pattern Of 'Rent allowance not accepted' And I Know Its Due To People Being Un-Reliable And Untrustworthy But Not Everyone Is Like That And The Only Way I Can Afford A Place Of My Own Is With The Help Of state assistance.
Theres A Hell Of Alot Of People Trying To Con The State But They're Are Also A Hell Of Alot Who Arent And Im Starting To Lose Hope Of Finding Anywhere Because Of This But Its Nice To See That There Are Still Some People Who Know That We're Not All The Same.

echosound

I've been a private tenant mostly, and have also been in the position where I had to apply for rent supplement through losing my job, thus becoming a "RA tenant".

The mistake you made was not insisting on a deposit upfront - no matter if the tenant is a private one or a RA one, you should be insisting on a deposit, and tough luck to them if they can't provide one, don't take them on. As you've unfortunately found out, if tenants are awful and cause damage to your property, you've zero chance to recoup even some of the cost of damages.

Also - while it is nice to be accommodating in accepting rent late or whatever, you should also be firm that you expect the rent in a timely fashion no matter what delays the person is personally experiencing - be that a private tenant who's wages are delayed, or who was hit with unexpected bills, or a RA tenant who has their rent payment delayed.

Even if they are RA tenants, I'd insist on the rent being paid via standing order - most people have bank accounts nowadays, and they can just as easily put the money in there and transfer it to the LL's account as they can in handing the cash over directly.

I'm sorry you have had this bad experience, and they do sound like nightmare tenants. I hope you can manage to get them out of your property soon and get it repaired and rented again to reliable tenants. I've seen some properties absolutely trashed by private tenants too, BTW, it's down to people just being decent or not, not whether they are private or RA.

It's not really fair to tar every RA tenant with the same brush - FWIW, when I had to go looking for accommodation as a RA tenant, I had the full deposit and a month's rent saved up/borrowed myself and knew I'd have to take the hit until I could get sorted out with payment and get back out of debt.

And as mistycheese said tongue in cheek - I was that RA tenant who paid their rent in full, on time, and exchanged Christmas cards and a small gift with my LL so I hope that LLs reading this thread won't be totally put off RA tenants - there are some reliable decent honest ones out there, same as any private tenant, especially nowadays with so many hardworking honest people finding themselves let go from their jobs and having to apply for rent supplement in order to keep a roof over their heads.

senordingdong

echosound wrote: »

Even if they are RA tenants, I'd insist on the rent being paid via standing order - most people have bank accounts nowadays, and they can just as easily put the money in there and transfer it to the LL's account as they can in handing the cash over directly.
.

Ofcourse, RA is given in the form of a cheque, which the recipient has to lodge.
It's not cash into the hand as so many believe.

Furthermore, did the LL say that he had been accepting the rent as cash into the hand?

yankinlk

curadh wrote: »

Listen the fact of the matter is the problem is with a tenant in receipt of rent allowance. This is relevant to the following points Ive already made - 1.They are supposed to supplement the government payments, which they haven't. 2.They couldnt get a deposit together on move in after telling me they could, however at that stage the payments had been set up with my consent that they were tenants at the address. 3. Any damages a rent allowance tenant causes there will be serious question marks over whether they can cover them and more than likely pursuing them following tenancy will be a complete waste of time money energy and highly stressful.

Therefore I hope this thread is of use to people considering a rent allowance tenant. Its a pity the government cannot supply deposits or be accountable for these peoples damages but unfortunately landlords would probably abuse the deposits.

Listen OP but it is NOT relevant. Your attitude is poor - you are trying to blame the tenants for your mistakes - when really it is your bad landlording that is causing the entire problem.

1. You let them move in without a deposit. Did you ever wonder why they didnt have a deposit? They obviously lost it at the last house they lived in from damage. By not having a deposit you will find it very hard to encourage them to leave before 28 days. With a deposit you could offer to give some deposit back if they repair or maintain the property. With your attitude, im guessing they will probably do more damage on the way out.

2. You took in tenants without first months rent - again blaming the "system" of RA cash coming 1 or 2 months behind. That again is just YOU being a soft touch. Tenants are fully aware, deposit and first months rent for keys or no keys. Any landlord that grants them less is a soft touch - and the tenants attitude will sometimes (not always) take advantage of that.

3. You were stressed from owing money on the property and took the first tenant that came up. Did you do everything you could to get a BETTER tenant? Did you advertise enough? Did you LOWER the rent (that always brings them in fast!).

I hope you get out of this situation OK and learn from YOUR mistakes.

BostonB

Most RA run in arrears of one month and can often be a few months late in setting. I would just avoid a system that operates like that. its just asking for trouble.

ricman

Even ra tenants are supposed to pay a large deposit,you should have house fully insured ,including public liability.
I KNOW a landlord ,house was damaged by ra tenant, the insurance company paid for all the repairs.it was over 5k in repairs .there s bad private tenants out there too,and theres perfectly good ra tenants too.

senordingdong

BostonB wrote: »

Most RA run in arrears of one month and can often be a few months late in setting. I would just avoid a system that operates like that. its just asking for trouble.

Hardly.
It comes on the last week of the month.
No one has any excuse for falling that far behind.

BostonB

senordingdong wrote: »

Hardly.
It comes on the last week of the month.
No one has any excuse for falling that far behind.

1 month in arrears. Should be 1 month in advance same as other tenants. I know there were delays of up to 5 months in some areas before tenants got their first payment, backdated, but thats not the point. For the tenant and LL thats unworkable.

delllat

BostonB wrote: »

1 month in arrears. Should be 1 month in advance same as other tenants. I know there were delays of up to 5 months in some areas before tenants got their first payment, backdated, but thats not the point. For the tenant and LL thats unworkable.

if the tenant wasnt allowed the keys for 5 months until he had rent and a deposit it would cut out a lot of this crap

the CWO would soon get sick of a crazy homeless tenant coming in 5 days a week roaring and shouting and give them a cheque just to go away #

landlords handing over keys and properties without rent or deposits are just asking for trouble

BostonB

delllat wrote: »

...landlords handing over keys and properties without rent or deposits are just asking for trouble

Ditto Agents doing this then walking away leaving a mess behind them.

Fol20

yankinlk wrote: »

Listen OP but it is NOT relevant. Your attitude is poor - you are trying to blame the tenants for your mistakes - when really it is your bad landlording that is causing the entire problem.

1. You let them move in without a deposit. Did you ever wonder why they didnt have a deposit? They obviously lost it at the last house they lived in from damage. By not having a deposit you will find it very hard to encourage them to leave before 28 days. With a deposit you could offer to give some deposit back if they repair or maintain the property. With your attitude, im guessing they will probably do more damage on the way out.

2. You took in tenants without first months rent - again blaming the "system" of RA cash coming 1 or 2 months behind. That again is just YOU being a soft touch. Tenants are fully aware, deposit and first months rent for keys or no keys. Any landlord that grants them less is a soft touch - and the tenants attitude will sometimes (not always) take advantage of that.

3. You were stressed from owing money on the property and took the first tenant that came up. Did you do everything you could to get a BETTER tenant? Did you advertise enough? Did you LOWER the rent (that always brings them in fast!).

I hope you get out of this situation OK and learn from YOUR mistakes.

Wow just wow!!!
Your being very severe on this op even though i think he was very leniant and good to these tenants.Yes he made some mistakes as a LL but saying all of this is completely his fall is WRONG.
A lot of LL dont allow RA tenants and this LL was good enough to allow it.If i were him and they couldnt provide the money up front,i wouldnt have allowed them in but this LL was kind hearted and allowed it.

Fran79

I think RA is paid differently in different areas of the country.
I'm currently getting RA and I collect it weekly with my dole in the Post Office. I also have to pay my rent monthly in advance (and always have, although admittedly I was living here for a few months before I had to claim RA).

gossipgal08

I am a RA tennent. I get my rent paid in arrears. I moved house a few weeks ago, I paid rent and deposit up front. Rent is due this week and will be paid in full despite RA not having been sorted yet. Any where I live is my home and I treat it as such. Appart from bills I have gotten every penny of my deposit back

echosound

senordingdong wrote: »

Ofcourse, RA is given in the form of a cheque, which the recipient has to lodge.
It's not cash into the hand as so many believe.

Furthermore, did the LL say that he had been accepting the rent as cash into the hand?

When I got RA, I collected it at the post office, was handed the cash out same as many people do when collecting other SW payments. I guess there may be a few different systems depending on location, as Fran79 says.
Rather than hand this cash to the LL, we both agreed that it would be hassle free to pay via SO, so I just lodged the cash to my bank A/C and payment went from there.

If some RA payments are given in the form of a cheque which the recipient has to lodge anyway, then it would be even easier for them to set up a standing order to the LL.


I do agree with other posters that the current system of RA is causing unnecessary problems for both tenants and LLs alike with the delays in processing and the method of payment in arrears.

Rent should be paid in advance, and TBH it's up to the tenant to ensure it is, no matter if they are waiting on money (RA or private tenant alike) or not.

HermesHermione

Penguino wrote: »

Have you registered with the PRTB, if so they should be able to give you some advise www.prtb.ie

I do hope you were registered with PRTB as you will be fined if you did not, having said that, they are useless and will not help you in any beneficial way. Desperation helps Landlords make poor decisions when a months rent is proffered. You are in great danger of having your property trashed make no mistake about this. I am aware of two successful takebacks of rental property and neither of them were legal. One involved changing the locks when the tenants were out and placing all their goods in the garden and the second one, two big surly individuals arrived on the premises indicating that they were related to the owner and had to stay there in the sittingroom. Going the legal route is stark and a lonely place to travel. I have every sympathy for you and wish you good luck. There are as many bad tenants as landlords but I do feel there should be a register of both however that might come about.

yankinlk

Fol20 wrote: »

Wow just wow!!!
Your being very severe on this op even though i think he was very leniant and good to these tenants.Yes he made some mistakes as a LL but saying all of this is completely his fall is WRONG.
A lot of LL dont allow RA tenants and this LL was good enough to allow it.If i were him and they couldnt provide the money up front,i wouldnt have allowed them in but this LL was kind hearted and allowed it.

I don't see your point. If not the ops fault then whose fault is it?

I didn't say he was at fault for accepting RA, I said that the tenant being RA was not relevant. He could have rented to anyone, not requiring deposit and first months rent is like inviting a squatter in to your home. Getting annoyed about the result after is just silly. Learn and move on. 28 days and hopefully new tenant.

senordingdong

BostonB wrote: »

1 month in arrears. Should be 1 month in advance same as other tenants. I know there were delays of up to 5 months in some areas before tenants got their first payment, backdated, but thats not the point. For the tenant and LL thats unworkable.

Why do people assume the RA recipients sit around in arrears shrugging their shoulders saying 'can't pay, cheque hasn't come'.
I expect they would do what I did which was pay the rent on time and then lodge the cheque upon receipt.

BostonB

Dunno because that wasn't what I said.

Many tenants can't cover the rent without the cheque. That was my point.

senordingdong

BostonB wrote: »

Dunno because that wasn't what I said.

Many tenants can't cover the rent without the cheque. That was my point.

I'll bet many can, but many don't want to take the hit on other luxuries.

I saved my jobseekers in order to pay the rent, and then re-emburse myself with the cheque when it arrived.

Also, one can't claim RA unless they've been living in the abode they're claiming for, for atleast six months.
So how is it that tenants are newly moving into a premises and paying by RA?

BostonB

Where does it say thats a condition.

senordingdong

BostonB wrote: »

Where does it say thats a condition.

On the application.


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/supplementary_welfare_schemes/rent_supplement.html

BostonB

All that says is you must be renting to apply. Its says nothing about it having to the be the "same abode"

senordingdong wrote: »

...one can't claim RA unless they've been living in the abode they're claiming for, for atleast six months....

It seems to say it can be a different "abode"

You can combine time living in more than one rented accommodation

So you can leave one place where you weren't claiming, and move into a new place, and start claiming there.

Thats my reading of it. I've seen people do it.

senordingdong

Well if that's the case, then the people I was referring to, should already have their Ra sorted, so they have no excuse to turn up empty handed on the first day of their new lease.

Furthermore, and this just out of curiosity, it also says that you have to be able to prove you could afford the rent at the beginning of your tenancy. If someone is starting a new tenancy in this situation, then surely they don't meet the criteria.

Doom

edellc wrote: »

Just to point out not all RA tenants are like this and whether your tenant is RA or not it is unacceptable to behave in such a manner.
I feel very strongly that mentioning in your title that they are RA tenants is completely wrong as it is giving the wrong impression of people who are in need of state assistance

Wrong....I was willing to consider RA when I was letting out my house, when they rang, I said I would take their details and get back to them. At least 90% of RA calls hung up phone before I even finished the call! Most are leeches, and will always be leeches.

Another guy I know, his RA tenant starting making demands for rooms to be painted different colours and wanted more furniture, and this house was very nice anyway...they always seem to be the ones who make unreasonable demands and cause most problems to LL..imo

BostonB

senordingdong wrote: »

Well if that's the case, then the people I was referring to, should already have their Ra sorted, so they have no excuse to turn up empty handed on the first day of their new lease.

Furthermore, and this just out of curiosity, it also says that you have to be able to prove you could afford the rent at the beginning of your tenancy. If someone is starting a new tenancy in this situation, then surely they don't meet the criteria.

Looks like that. Perhaps theres a delay when switching payment to a new LL

pawrick

I believe that the fact the person was in receipt of RA is irrelevent to this case. The tennent is taking you for a ride simple as that and you have made it easy for them.

Fair enough RA tennents can be a bit more work in general due to the fact they are claiming but that doesn't mean the person should be considered sub human since they claim RA.

Fol20

pawrick wrote: »

I believe that the fact the person was in receipt of RA is irrelevent to this case. The tennent is taking you for a ride simple as that and you have made it easy for them.

Fair enough RA tennents can be a bit more work in general due to the fact they are claiming but that doesn't mean the person should be considered sub human since they claim RA.

No one is saying RA people are sub human although it does influence the way money is received.
Tbh honest i wouldnt want a RA for the very reason it creates more hassle for the LL.
Flamers dont hate please:o

Fran79

senordingdong wrote: »

Furthermore, and this just out of curiosity, it also says that you have to be able to prove you could afford the rent at the beginning of your tenancy. If someone is starting a new tenancy in this situation, then surely they don't meet the criteria.

Just to clear up the above...

to get RA you either have to have been living in the house for at least 6 months and have been able to pay the rent from your own means OR be on the local housing list. See below link about half way down page.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Schemes/SupplementaryWelfareAllowance/Pages/RentSupplement.aspx

senordingdong

Fran79 wrote: »

Just to clear up the above...

to get RA you either have to have been living in the house for at least 6 months and have been able to pay the rent from your own means OR be on the local housing list. See below link about half way down page.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Schemes/SupplementaryWelfareAllowance/Pages/RentSupplement.aspx

I thought it was both.

When I applied for RA I had to go to the local housing section in DCC HQ and have them fill out a page on the form.

Fran79

In most cases I believe it is both, but if you are moving into a new property then just being assessed by the local housing section as having a need is sufficient.

Noo

After reading all this I am getting a bit worried. I have been applying for FAS Work Placement Programmes across the country so I'll have to rent somewhere if i get a placement. The work doesnt pay but you still claim social welfare and can get rent allowance as far as i know. Ive never rented before (ive just finished college) and some of the comments here are saying you need to have rented 6 month prior etc. I have money saved for a deposit and rent in advance and have every intention of being a good honest tenant but would be planning to pay the rent with RA as i'll have no income.

There seem to be some landlords here and i was just wondering what their opinion would be of someone in my situation.

edellc

Doom wrote: »

Wrong....I was willing to consider RA when I was letting out my house, when they rang, I said I would take their details and get back to them. At least 90% of RA calls hung up phone before I even finished the call! Most are leeches, and will always be leeches.

Another guy I know, his RA tenant starting making demands for rooms to be painted different colours and wanted more furniture, and this house was very nice anyway...they always seem to be the ones who make unreasonable demands and cause most problems to LL..imo

NOT WRONG you had a bad experience with one tenant as did the guy you know to say all RA tenants are like that based on theses experiences is WRONG

You get good and bad everywhere if your closed minded and judge on circumstances thats your problem lets hope you never fall on bad times karma might well bite you in the b**

ABajaninCork

Noo wrote: »

After reading all this I am getting a bit worried. I have been applying for FAS Work Placement Programmes across the country so I'll have to rent somewhere if i get a placement. The work doesnt pay but you still claim social welfare and can get rent allowance as far as i know. Ive never rented before (ive just finished college) and some of the comments here are saying you need to have rented 6 month prior etc. I have money saved for a deposit and rent in advance and have every intention of being a good honest tenant but would be planning to pay the rent with RA as i'll have no income.

There seem to be some landlords here and i was just wondering what their opinion would be of someone in my situation.

You have to have been renting for at least 183 days (6 months) and be assessed as being in need of LA housing before you can apply for RA...

Some more info here:http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/supplementary_welfare_schemes/rent_supplement.html