Landlord wants me to sign a lease

movingtotheuk

Being living in 4 bed house in Dublin the last 2.5 months.

Landlord sends email around to me on Friday asking me to sign lease from 1st of January onwards (he wants all 4 of us on lease). Also the rent is going up 25 Euro (based on what i don't know!).

Anyway there is not a sign i will be staying in this house for all 12 months of next year. Can anyone tell me what happens when i break the lease???

Swampy

If you haven't signed a lease, you have no rights. A lease will protect both you and the landlord.

movingtotheuk

Swampy wrote: »

If you haven't signed a lease, you have no rights. A lease will protect both you and the landlord.

I hear that - i am more wondering what will happen when i break 12 month lease??? What is the worst that could happen?

Paulw

movingtotheuk wrote: »

I hear that - i am more wondering what will happen when i break 12 month lease??? What is the worst that could happen?

Worst that can happen is that you don't give notification as per the lease, the landlord takes you to court, wins the case, and you have to pay for the full 12 months.

Or, you don't sign the lease, and on 1st Jan, he kicks you out with 5 days notice (or less), and he rents the property to someone else, who will sign the lease.

movingtotheuk

Paulw wrote: »

Worst that can happen is that you don't give notification as per the lease, the landlord takes you to court, wins the case, and you have to pay for the full 12 months.

Or, you don't sign the lease, and on 1st Jan, he kicks you out with 5 days notice (or less), and he rents the property to someone else, who will sign the lease.

So i can move out once i give him proper notification? I actually don't want to move out but we all hate each other! Hopefully I'll get a new place by January 1st.

paky

movingtotheuk wrote: »

So i can move out once i give him proper notification? I actually don't want to move out but we all hate each other! Hopefully I'll get a new place by January 1st.

if he kicks you out he has to give you one month notice. if you havent been living there for over 6 months he can terminate your tenancy within 6 months. i wouldnt pay an increase in rent in any property. thats a bloody disgrace

not even wrong

Swampy wrote: »

If you haven't signed a lease, you have no rights.

This is completely and utterly wrong. You have plenty of rights if you don't have a lease.

movingtotheuk wrote:

I hear that - i am more wondering what will happen when i break 12 month lease??? What is the worst that could happen?

If you break the 12-month lease you will have to either find a replacement for yourself or lose your deposit. Realistically residential landlords won't ever pursue a tenant for the remainder of the 12 months rent.

You have no obligation to sign the lease and if you're already planning on moving out before the 12 months are up you'd be mad to sign.

bugler

It sounds as though you are currently a licensee residing with other named tenants in the property. This probably suits you if you are thinking short-term in nature. Just be aware you don't have the rights (or the obligations) that apply to a tenant.

If you sign up to a lease you will inherit these rights and obligations. If you break the lease you will lose any deposit paid to the landlord (this point may be an interesting one, have you already paid a "deposit" to another tenant, or previous tenant?)

If you sign the lease then you would be free to assign it to someone else down the line should you want to leave early. Presuming you find someone, they can take over. You can read more about assigning a lease on the PRTB/Threshold sites.

odds_on

not even wrong wrote: »

This is completely and utterly wrong. You have plenty of rights if you don't have a [written] lease.If you break the 12-month lease you will have to either find a replacement for yourself or lose your deposit. Realistically residential landlords won't ever pursue a tenant for the remainder of the 12 months rent.

You have no obligation to sign the lease and if you're already planning on moving out before the 12 months are up you'd be mad to sign.

A tenancy lease is legal if there has been an offer to rent and acceptance of that offer. Acceptance of that offer would be payment of rent. If you have not signed a lease but have paid rent then you have either a Periodic lease or a Part 4 lease. There is little difference between the two types of leases and they are both have the full backing of the Residential tenancy laws as set out in the RTA 2004.

It is more likely to be a Part 4 lease unless there was some verbal agreement to the contrary.

Under a Part 4 lease the landlord can ask you to leave (giving the Notice of Termination in the prescribed manner) any time within the first 6 months of occupation - after that, he is restricted to a few limited conditions before he can get you to leave and must give you 28 days notice in the prescribed manner.

With a Periodic lease both landlord or tenant can give "a rent period's notice" (if rent is paid monthly, then one month's notice) without giving a reason. This is because a Periodic lease runs from the start of a rent period to the end of that rent period; at the end of a rent period, a now period starts and so the cycle continues. A Periodic lease usually runs from month to month (if rent is paid monthly).

If you feel that you may not stay for a full year, then you are better not signing a Fixed Term lease though you can get out of a Fixed term by assigning the lease to someone else but you then have the trouble of finding that person otherwise the landlord can charge you for his reasonable expenses in so doing. If you fail to find someone then you are liable for the rent and the LL may keep your deposit.

Furthermore if you and your mates sign a lease for the whole house (i.e. each of you do not sign a lease for a bedroom and shared facilities) then you are all jointly and severally liable for all debts. If one person does not pay then the others are liable for the payment.

If you each sign separate leases, each person for his/her bedroom in the house and the use of shared facilities, then the tenancies do not come under the jurisdiction of the PRTB and if there is a problem you cannot make a claim with the PRTB.

ResearchWill

bugler wrote: »

It sounds as though you are currently a licensee residing with other named tenants in the property. This probably suits you if you are thinking short-term in nature. Just be aware you don't have the rights (or the obligations) that apply to a tenant.

If you sign up to a lease you will inherit these rights and obligations. If you break the lease you will lose any deposit paid to the landlord (this point may be an interesting one, have you already paid a "deposit" to another tenant, or previous tenant?)

If you sign the lease then you would be free to assign it to someone else down the line should you want to leave early. Presuming you find someone, they can take over. You can read more about assigning a lease on the PRTB/Threshold sites.

It's great to know you have no rights even though the law says different. Also good to know you inherit rights when you sign a lease.

odds_on

bugler wrote: »

It sounds as though you are currently a licensee residing with other named tenants in the property. This probably suits you if you are thinking short-term in nature. Just be aware you don't have the rights (or the obligations) that apply to a tenant.

If you sign up to a lease you will inherit these rights and obligations. If you break the lease you will lose any deposit paid to the landlord (this point may be an interesting one, have you already paid a "deposit" to another tenant, or previous tenant?)

If you sign the lease then you would be free to assign it to someone else down the line should you want to leave early. Presuming you find someone, they can take over. You can read more about assigning a lease on the PRTB/Threshold sites.

You are only a licensee if you are living in the same house/apartment with the landlord (or a member of his family), have a bedroom and sharing facilities such as kitchen and living-room.

If neither the landlord nor one of his family live in the dwelling and sharing facilities, then you are a tenant with all the rights afforded by the RTA 2004, unless there are multiple occupants and each one has his own lease for a bedroom and sharing facilities (See my previous post, above).

bugler

odds_on wrote: »

You are only a licensee if you are living in the same house/apartment with the landlord (or a member of his family), have a bedroom and sharing facilities such as kitchen and living-room.

If neither the landlord nor one of his family live in the dwelling and sharing facilities, then you are a tenant with all the rights afforded by the RTA 2004, unless there are multiple occupants and each one has his own lease for a bedroom and sharing facilities (See my previous post, above).

The explanatory notes from the PRTB do not back up your claims. They have no mention of having to share with the landlord or his family, or sharing facilities. What is your source for these assertions?

http://public.prtb.ie/DownloadDocs/Licensees.pdf

What is a Licensee in Private Rented Accommodation?

A licensee residing in a private rented dwelling is living there at the invitation of the tenant as the arrangement enabling a licensee to live in rented accommodation is made with the tenant and not with the landlord. The tenant may already be well established in the dwelling and may take in a licensee because another tenant or licensee has moved out, or the tenant can no longer afford the rent. Alternatively, the tenant may be just entering into a tenancy with the landlord whereby the landlord has indicated that the tenant may admit a certain number of persons to share the dwelling with the tenant. Essentially therefore, in the private rented sector someone is a licensee if living with the person with whom he/she made the letting arrangement.

In these circumstances the Residential Tenancies Act will apply to the tenant’s occupation of the tenancy and will thus have certain impacts for the licensee. While there may be any combination of multiple occupants in such cases, e.g. 3 tenants and 2 licensees; for the 2004 Act to be relevant where there is a licensee, there must always be at least one tenant.

Licensing arrangements in private rented dwellings are often confused with sub-lettings and assignments. The difference is that when a tenant assigns or sublets their rental accommodation, they no longer live in it whereas a licensee shares the accommodation with the tenant.

How is a Licensee different to a Tenant?

Licensees in private rented accommodation are not tenants as there has been no tenancy entered into by them with the landlord. While the tenant is under a statutory obligation to inform the landlord of the identity of any person resident in (rather than just visiting) the dwelling, the landlord will not be in a position to accept or veto the individual concerned in the way that he/she could with a prospective tenant.
Licensees are not bound by the tenancy obligations that apply to tenants and equally do not have the rights that apply to tenants.

Assuming this is the scenario the OP faces (he has moved in with the tenant or tenants) then he does not have tenant rights because he is not a tenant.

I think this issue has been confused because the most common type of license arises where an owner-occupier rents out rooms, but this is not the only scenario in which a license applies.

odds_on

For all intents and purposes, the "tenant" who rents to a licensee is the licensee's landlord.

A licensee must be living with and sharing facilities with a person to whom the licensee pays rent.

bugler

odds_on wrote: »

For all intents and purposes, the "tenant" who rents to a licensee is the licensee's landlord.

You have back-tracked. Again, what is your source for the claim above? You seem very sure, yet seem to have nothing from the RTA or the PRTB, or Threshold? What is your foundation for turning a tenant into a landlord in one swoop?

The explanatory guide from the PRTB is quite clear. Did you read it? It would appear to poke holes in your latest claim throughout.

PRTB wrote:

Licensees in private rented accommodation are not tenants as there has been no tenancy entered into by them with the landlord.

Licensees are not bound by the tenancy obligations that apply to tenants and equally do not have the rights that apply to tenants.

Any money that a licensee pays to the tenant as a deposit is a personal payment to the tenant and is not a deposit with the meaning of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004

The tenant does not become a quasi-landlord by taking in a licensee. If you have anything from any authority that says otherwise please post it up.