Is it possible to terminate a fixed term lease?

Jamie1980

Hi there,

Long time reader first time poster.

I have a tenant in situ in my apartment for the past 5 months.

I agreed in good faith a 1 year fixed term tenancy with them as I was moving to Canada for the foreseeable future.

Unfortunately due to circumstances beyond my control I have had to move back to Ireland and I am ideally looking to move back in to my apartment.

I was wondering would anybody on here know if I have any legal rights to terminate the lease with the tenants, I would be more than happy to give the tenants 28 or 42 days notice to give them ample time to find a suitable place.

I would be interested to see if anybody knows of any legal grounds I have as I have a funny feeling if I just ask the tenants to move out the answer will be no as they seem to really like it there.

From speaking to the PRTB they are leading me to believe that I am at the mercy of what the tenants decide which seems a little bit strange given the circumstances.

Any help or advice you can shed on the matter would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

Jamie

Motorist

Jamie1980 wrote: »

Hi there,

Long time reader first time poster.

I have a tenant in situ in my apartment for the past 5 months.

I agreed in good faith a 1 year fixed term tenancy with them as I was moving to Canada for the foreseeable future.

Unfortunately due to circumstances beyond my control I have had to move back to Ireland and I am ideally looking to move back in to my apartment.

I was wondering would anybody on here know if I have any legal rights to terminate the lease with the tenants, I would be more than happy to give the tenants 28 or 42 days notice to give them ample time to find a suitable place.

I would be interested to see if anybody knows of any legal grounds I have as I have a funny feeling if I just ask the tenants to move out the answer will be no as they seem to really like it there.

From speaking to the PRTB they are leading me to believe that I am at the mercy of what the tenants decide which seems a little bit strange given the circumstances.

Any help or advice you can shed on the matter would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

Jamie

Not really, they moved in (and have been paying you rent for the past 5 months) on the agreement and expectation that they would be there for at least one year.

Jamie1980

Hi Motorist,

Many thanks for your prompt response.

When you say not really, does this imply a definitive no or is there some angle I can exploit.

As I mentioned before I signed the contract in good faith and hadn't intended on needing the apartment back for quite some time but now basically I have to look at renting another place in town that will be substantially worse than my own place as when I deduct the "landlord" costs of running my place the net amount I receive isn't actually a whole lot and unfortunately living with the parents isn't an option as they live to far from Dublin to realistically commute

I was hoping there might be some angle than I am the principle owner there would be some clause like that for me to get back in

Anyway thanks for your advice

Jamie

El Weirdo

Jamie1980 wrote: »

As I mentioned before I signed the contract in good faith...

As did your tenants.

You can ask them, but if they disagree there isn't really much you can do about the situation except wait until the fixed term is up.

Marcusm

Offer them an incentive as your return presumably means you won't renew the lease at the end of the term. Sounds like they'll have to move in month 12; for cash incentive, perhaps they'll move in month 7 or 8.

messrs

Unfortunatly they signed a 1 year lease in good faith so are entitled to stay there until the year is up. You could ask them and see what they say but they are not obliged to move out.
did you have any clause in the lease allowing you to end it early for any sort of unforseen circumstances?

seamus

Jamie1980 wrote: »

I was hoping there might be some angle than I am the principle owner there would be some clause like that for me to get back in

Well, here's the thing. Even if there was such an angle that the tenants would be obliged to move out, they would still be entitled to pursue you in court for breach of your fixed term lease agreement as the lease forms a civil contract.

Unless there are provisions in the lease for early termination, then you have no way to ask or force them to leave until the fixed term is up.

As others have said, let your tenants know that you will not be renewing the lease when the fixed term is up and that you would be interested in moving back in as soon as you can. They may just start looking around and leave as soon as they find somewhere, or they may take a cash incentive to leave early.
In the meantime, maybe you could see if a friend would put up with you for a few months until the lease is up.

Jamie1980

Thank you all very much for all your advice.

Unfortunately I didn't put in any early termination clauses as I didn't envisage this situation arising, silly me will know in future to allow for every eventuality

As I mentioned I don't think they will move out as it is a very nice place and they seem to be really happy in there and to be honest it is under rented as I was more concerned with getting good tenants in who would look after the place as I left all my furniture etc in their so wanted somebody who would treat it like their home and not some typical renters who seem to have little regard for others property, so I don't see why they would move out just to accommodate me but maybe they are more kind and understanding than I am giving them credit for

The only other alternative would be to frustrate them but I suppose that is very murky water to be going down with the PRTB around and I wouldn't like it done to me if I was a tenant so it really isn't a runner to be fair to them

In terms of offering them an incentive to move out early what sort of figure would you deem fair from your experience? As obviously I want to keep it as low as possible but would be interested to hear what you guys (plural) think is reasonable as naturally enough I would probably set it to low being the landord

Thanks

Jamie

messrs

Jamie1980 wrote: »

Thank you all very much for all your advice.

Unfortunately I didn't put in any early termination clauses as I didn't envisage this situation arising, silly me will know in future to allow for every eventuality

As I mentioned I don't think they will move out as it is a very nice place and they seem to be really happy in there and to be honest it is under rented as I was more concerned with getting good tenants in who would look after the place as I left all my furniture etc in their so wanted somebody who would treat it like their home and not some typical renters who seem to have little regard for others property, so I don't see why they would move out just to accommodate me but maybe they are more kind and understanding than I am giving them credit for

The only other alternative would be to frustrate them but I suppose that is very murky water to be going down with the PRTB around and I wouldn't like it done to me if I was a tenant so it really isn't a runner to be fair to them

In terms of offering them an incentive to move out early what sort of figure would you deem fair from your experience? As obviously I want to keep it as low as possible but would be interested to hear what you guys (plural) think is reasonable as naturally enough I would probably set it to low being the landord

Thanks

Jamie

Hi Jamie

I wouldnt go offering any sort of cash incentive just yet, that would be my last resort - maybe try to have a chat with them first, be open and honest with them and see how it goes, you never know, they might just be okay with it. Secondly and i know you dismissed that idea in your own post but def do not frustrate them into moving out, as you said you left all your furniture there ect and want the place to be left in good condition but if you were to make things awkard for them, then they in return could leave things awkard for you.
Is there a spare room in your place - could you move in there and maybe live with them for the remainder of the lease?
Do you have any mates with a empty room in their house that could put you up for a few months rather than having to go down the route of leasing a place yourself as you will prob have to sign a 1 year lease in most places. i know you said you couldnt move into your parents as its to far to commute - but have you measured the costs if you were to rent in dub for the remaining term against staying with your folks and driving to work every day - would your rent really be that much cheaper than your petrol?

seamus

Jamie1980 wrote: »

As I mentioned I don't think they will move out as it is a very nice place and they seem to be really happy in there and to be honest it is under rented as I was more concerned with getting good tenants in who would look after the place as I left all my furniture etc in their so wanted somebody who would treat it like their home and not some typical renters who seem to have little regard for others property, so I don't see why they would move out just to accommodate me but maybe they are more kind and understanding than I am giving them credit for

It's not uncommon for tenants to sign up for a one-year lease to "test the water" with an apartment, so to speak. If they like the apartment, they sign up for a longer lease, if they don't, they move on without penalty.

Particularly people from countries used to renting are expecting long leases - five, ten years or more. They don't plan to be moving apartment every two years. So if you let them know very early on that the lease will not be renewed, then most likely they will start looking around for another fixed lease elsewhere immediately. It would make no sense for them to finish out the lease if they're not going to be able to stay there. Better to move sooner and get settled elsewhere quickly.

So I wouldn't be surprised if they offer to start looking around straight away. Since you won't be penalising them for leaving the lease early, they can move as soon as they find a suitable place. It's not about them being good people, it just makes sense.

The only other alternative would be to frustrate them but I suppose that is very murky water to be going down with the PRTB around and I wouldn't like it done to me if I was a tenant so it really isn't a runner to be fair to them

Just remember that the entire situation is really your problem, not theirs. So it's not right to give them grief or otherwise cause hassle for them; it's not their fault you're coming home early.

In terms of offering them an incentive to move out early what sort of figure would you deem fair from your experience?

As messrs says, don't offer any kind of incentive straight up, keep it as a bargaining chip if they don't feel like moving yet.

The amount you offer would obviously be one that's logical. Work out how much it would cost you if you had to rent elsewhere while they run out the clock on the lease. So if they rent for €900 and renting elsewhere will cost you €1100/month, then over six months it will "cost" you €1200 to rent elsewhere. So this is your ceiling on what you can offer them as an incentive to move early.

messrs wrote: »

Is there a spare room in your place - could you move in there and maybe live with them for the remainder of the lease?

You wouldn't be able to just move into the spare room without their consent. The lease would give them full and exclusive right to the property for the term of the lease.

cgarrad

Definitely read that a landlord wanting to move back to his own property was allowable.

Not sure if its in this country though :rolleyes:

Ring threshold and pretend to be the tenant ;)

messrs

Sorry didnt actually mean he could just move in if there was a spare room - what i meant was if there was a spare room could he ask them if he could move into it for the remaining lease. Just thought it might b a solution of sorts, he would be in his own place and the tenants would still be staying there

Jamie1980

Hi,

Messrs - yes I would agree about the cash incentive as being a last resort. My apartment is a two bedroom apartment and I let it under the understanding that two people would be sharing the whole place. I was quite particular on that point with the agent as although it could technically accommodate four people I wanted as few people in it as possible to keep the wear and tear to a minimum. H

messrs

Jamie1980 wrote: »

Hi,

Messrs - yes I would agree about the cash incentive as being a last resort. My apartment is a two bedroom apartment and I let it under the understanding that two people would be sharing the whole place. I was quite particular on that point with the agent as although it could technically accommodate four people I wanted as few people in it as possible to keep the wear and tear to a minimum. H

so is there any possibility you could move back into the other room - split the rent and bills so at least they would be saving? Also did you make it clear it would only be a 1 year lease or were you planning on staying away longer if things had worked out for you? As previous poster said, if they know 100% percent it wont be renewed for another year they might be happy to end the lease early and look for something more long term. Also have you decided if you are going to approach them directly or wil you get your letting agent to do it?

El Weirdo

cgarrad wrote: »

Definitely read that a landlord wanting to move back to his own property was allowable.

Not when there is a fixed-term lease in place.

If it was a Part 4 tenancy, then that would be an option.

gibo_ie

You need to try to work it out with the tenant unufortunately as this is a fixed term, but they are under no obligation to move (This is coming from a landlord with quite a few houses!!)

From : http://public.prtb.ie/DownloadDocs/Termination%20of%20FT.doc

Fixed Term Tenancies
A landlord can only terminate a fixed term tenancy where there the tenant has been in breach of his or her obligations. Accordingly, a landlord cannot rely on the provisions of Section 34, to terminate a fixed term tenancy during the fixed term. Following the expiration of the fixed term period however, if the tenant has exercised his rights under Part 4, to extend his tenure for the remainder of the Part 4 tenancy of 4 years, the landlord can from then on, rely on the provisions of Section 34.

Similarly, a tenant can only terminate a fixed term tenancy where there the landlord has been in breach of his or her obligations. In addition however, where the landlord has refused consent to an assignment or sub-let, the tenant can also terminate the tenancy, in accordance with Section 186.

Jamie1980

Hi,

@ Messrs - yes I would agree about the cash incentive as being a last resort. My apartment is a two bedroom apartment and I let it under the understanding that two people would be sharing the whole place. I was quite particular on that point with the agent as although it could technically accommodate four people I wanted as few people in it as possible to keep the wear and tear to a minimum. However it transpired that a third person came along after the agreement was signed and they were only supposed to stay a couple (i.e. 2 or 3 months) according to the tenants so I agreed to that as I didn't want to be seen as unreasonable however that person is still in situ well past the agreed time as I was in the apartment yesterday (with their permission) and say all the persons belongings so it doesn't look like they are going anywhere so this could be a bargaining tool for me potentially?

Unfortunately the folks is a non runner they live miles away I would be looking at least a 4 to 5 hour round trip each day which isn't a runner in my view

@ seamus

Thanks yeah I will give them a call today and just what their reaction is hopefully they will see it like you and just move on

@ cgarrad

I have tried that and apparently as it is a fixed term tenancy I am goosed and at the tenants mercy, I was of the same view as you in thinking that because it is your principle residence you could move back in under certain circumstances but from speaking to various people and looking around on the internet it seems that is not the case

Anyway many thanks for everybody's help really is appreciated will give the tenants a call and see what their thought on the matter are

Best Jamie

Jamie1980

@ messrs - I suppose there is a possibility of me moving in to the spare room, it wouldn't be ideal as I have seen the place and they don't keep the place how I would like it kept so there could be issues there as living with strangers isn't easy if you are very different but really it would get me out of my predictament so I would do it if they were agreeable to it

I never dealt with them to be honest I got an agent to do it on my behalf but they didn't know my circumstances as I didn't tell my agent my circumstances either so as far as I am concerned they only think they are renting it for one year.

I was thinking of phoning myself and explaining the situation to them and see what they have to say I think it would be better to come from me than the agent in this case

odds_on

A bit late coming in here with this but:

A fixed term lease cannot be broken by either tenant or landlord as the lease is a contract for a defined fixed period of time. However, under certain extenuating circumstances a fixed term lease may be broken:

1. A tenant or landlord may serve a Notice of Termination (which must be in the prescribed manner) if the other party is in breach of the terms and conditions of the lease. However, the offending party has to be given a reasonable time to remedy the matter. The notice period is 28 days or 7 days where behaviour of the offending party poses an imminent danger of death or serious injury or imminent danger to the fabric of the dwelling or the property containing the dwelling.

2. Tenants may be served with a Notice of Termination for anti-social behaviour - 28 days for non serious behaviour and 7 days for serious offences.

3. If a tenant just wishes to leave (maybe for personal reasons such as getting a job in another part of the country or he has lost his job and can no longer afford the rent), he cannot break the lease. However, the law allows him to “assign” the lease to another person who then takes over the remaining part of the lease. The tenant should first seek permission from the landlord and should he not allow the assignment, the tenant is free to leave at the end of the notice period. Seldom will the landlord refuse the request and it is up to the tenant to find someone that is acceptable to the landlord (after the landlord’s vetting checks). If the tenant fails to find an “assignee”, or if the landlord has to find the assignee, the tenant is liable for the landlord’s reasonable expenses in so doing and may also be liable for the rent up to the expiry of the lease.

4. Sometimes there is a clause in the lease, known as a break clause which defines a time at which a landlord or tenant may break the lease. This allows a tenant (or landlord) to break the lease at that particular time, often at the six month period (or at the time that the lease states) for whatever reason, following a Notice of Termination.

5. A fixed term lease may be broken by mutual agreement between the landlord and tenant. However, there should be some form of written agreement to this effect, stating any terms that may be included.

6. A landlord can offer (but without harassment to the tenant) to “buy-out” the lease from the tenant by offering the tenant some form of consideration (usually by offering a “cash incentive”). However, the tenant is not obliged to sell his remaining part of the lease. In a buy-out situation, the tenant has the upper hand and any terms of the buy-out can be set by him and to his distinct advantage. Any form of buy-out should be a written agreement stating the exact terms of the buy-out.

Calhoun

Jamie1980 wrote: »

@ messrs - I suppose there is a possibility of me moving in to the spare room, it wouldn't be ideal as I have seen the place and they don't keep the place how I would like it kept so there could be issues there as living with strangers isn't easy if you are very different but really it would get me out of my predictament so I would do it if they were agreeable to it

I never dealt with them to be honest I got an agent to do it on my behalf but they didn't know my circumstances as I didn't tell my agent my circumstances either so as far as I am concerned they only think they are renting it for one year.

I was thinking of phoning myself and explaining the situation to them and see what they have to say I think it would be better to come from me than the agent in this case

How do you know what the place is like if you havent dealt with them?

If i was you i wouldnt be going down the route of looking to stay with them, especially as its not kept the way you like. Right now this is your property but it is their home and if it was my i would not be comfortable with someone living with me. Remember you rented on the basis that 2 people stay, so they are probably a couple (considering the spare room).

Jamie1980

Thanks for the info odds on

@ Calhoun I was in the place yesterday as a contractor had to carry out work on the place so I got the agent to ok access from the tenants and I let the contractor in as the tenants were at work so that is how I saw how it was being kept

Yeah I would agree it wouldnt be the best situation living with them but I suppose it's a case of needs must so although not ideal it is an option I may have to consider if they were agreeable to it of course

xper

Jamie1980 wrote: »

...From speaking to the PRTB they are leading me to believe that I am at the mercy of what the tenants decide which seems a little bit strange given the circumstances....

...When you say not really, does this imply a definitive no or is there some angle I can exploit....

...As I mentioned before I signed the contract in good faith ...

...wanted somebody who would treat it like their home and not some typical renters who seem to have little regard for others property...

... My apartment is a two bedroom apartment and I let it under the understanding that two people would be sharing the whole place. I was quite particular on that point with the agent ...

...I have tried that and apparently as it is a fixed term tenancy I am goosed and at the tenants mercy, I was of the same view as you in thinking that because it is your principle residence you could move back in under certain circumstances but from speaking to various people and looking around on the internet it seems that is not the case

While I do note that, at the end of the day, you appear to be concluding to go about this in an above board manner and there are many less scrupulous individuals out there who would be giving their tenants a very hard time in this situation, I do find your phrasing and expressed attitude towards tenants through this thread curious at times. This may be your property but it is their home. You entered into a binding business arrangement that has to be seen out, 'understandings' and 'angles' don't come into it.

Graces7

xper wrote: »

While I do note that, at the end of the day, you appear to be concluding to go about this in an above board manner and there are many less scrupulous individuals out there who would be giving their tenants a very hard time in this situation, I do find your phrasing and expressed attitude towards tenants through this thread curious at times. This may be your property but it is their home. You entered into a binding business arrangement that has to be seen out, 'understandings' and 'angles' don't come into it.

Sadly this happens all too often in Ireland. Tenants are conveniences to make money on the property. We had this done to us last year. An eviction letter in much the same circumstances.

never had a night's sleep after that until we left.

Whatever you do now OP is going to be grossly unprofessional and damaging to the good folk you signed an agreement with. And now you expect them to go along with you and leave their home?

Sneaking in in these circumstances also!

Why not simply rent somewhere else yourself?

Amateur landlords...

petethebrick

Jamie1980 wrote: »

@ messrs - I suppose there is a possibility of me moving in to the spare room, it wouldn't be ideal as I have seen the place and they don't keep the place how I would like it kept so there could be issues there as living with strangers isn't easy if you are very different but really it would get me out of my predictament so I would do it if they were agreeable to it

I would guess that it would be much much less ideal for your tenants Would be cheeky to even suggest this.
What would your stance be if your tenants decided to break the lease when you were in Canada and left you with no rental income - would you have been accomodating to their changed circumstances???? I seriously doubt it

Jamie1980

@ xper - I think you may be reading a bit too much in to the language I used at the end of the day I am now aware that tenants are entitled to stay there so if that is what they choose then I have every intention of honouring the agreement. I have spoken to the tenants and explained the situation and asked them to have a think about it and I have said that I would allow them ample time to find another place if they agreed. Ultimately the tenants are actually in breach of the lease with the number of occupants so when I point this out to them they may have no choice but to move out as they may not be able to afford the place with the agreed number of tenants allowed in the place, ideally I would like to agree something with them but I have been more than accommodating with them over their "guest" staying there which has gone well beyond the time period they initially mentioned.

@ graces7 - I find your comments rude and misguided and your input is simply unhelpful and unconstructive.

I have no intention nor can I evict them I am trying to come up with an amiable solution for both parties and if this can't be done then I will have no choice but to look elsewhere.

I don't expect them to move out in fact I expect them most likely to say no as previously mentioned the property even though I say so myself is absolutely lovely and it is under-rented by about 15% which was completely my choosing obviously as I wanted the right tenants so they are on a very good deal and most likely wont replace what they have now for the same money.

Also I don't want to be tarred with the "bad" landlord tag I have been very good to my tenants whenever there was a request for items or things to be done it was done promptly and without question even though some of the things I provided them was probably above and beyond what I would be obliged to do for them. Unfortunately it has just turned out that my circumstances have changed and I would like to move back in, I personally don't see the big deal in asking them and if they say no then so be it

The renting elsewhere isn't preferable as previously mentioned in my posts by the time I pay service charge, tax etc on the rent I receive I would have to rent somewhere well below the standard of my existing home which obviously I ideally don't want to have to do but it may be my only option

I am not sure what the sneaking in comments relates to, I certainly didn't sneak in to the apartment if that is what you are referring to I was in there with a contractor with the knowledge of the tenants

Anyway I would rather you not respond to this thread if you have nothing insightful or helpful to add

Thank you for those who have provided constructive advice and information

Jamie1980

@ petethebrick - if the tenants wanted to break the lease then believe it or not I would simply have said fine on the basis that the deposit they gave would be used to cover any "down time" the apartment wasn't rented for. As it happened to me when I left Canada I lost my deposit which was 6 weeks rent so I know how it feels and I wouldn't like to do it to somebody else I asked the landlord if he could refund me the difference between the down time on the apartment and the 6 weeks but he wouldnt

Luckily for me if that did happen it wouldn't be a big deal as it literally took less than one week to rent the place the last time as there was a lot of demand for it 12 parties saw it over the 5 days it was with the agent. I could have had it rented sooner but I was choosy in who I wanted in the place.

So basically the tenants more of less could break the lease at very little or no cost to them.

I would consider myself a pretty reasonable person and would always try to accommodate as best I can like in the instance with their extra guest they only told me about him post contracts being signed even though they were well warned by the agent about it so in this instance I believe they have abused my good will in the length of time he has stayed and I believe if they get their way he will stay for the whole tenancy but they knew they wouldn't get the place if he was mentioned from the outset so they have been more than economical with their information too

Graces7

Jamie1980 wrote: »

@ xper - I think you may be reading a bit too much in to the language I used at the end of the day I am now aware that tenants are entitled to stay there so if that is what they choose then I have every intention of honouring the agreement. I have spoken to the tenants and explained the situation and asked them to have a think about it and I have said that I would allow them ample time to find another place if they agreed. Ultimately the tenants are actually in breach of the lease with the number of occupants so when I point this out to them they may have no choice but to move out as they may not be able to afford the place with the agreed number of tenants allowed in the place, ideally I would like to agree something with them but I have been more than accommodating with them over their "guest" staying there which has gone well beyond the time period they initially mentioned.

graces7 - I find your comments rude and misguided and your input is simply unhelpful and unconstructive.

I have no intention nor can I evict them I am trying to come up with an amiable solution for both parties and if this can't be done then I will have no choice but to look elsewhere.

I don't expect them to move out in fact I expect them most likely to say no as previously mentioned the property even though I say so myself is absolutely lovely and it is under-rented by about 15% which was completely my choosing obviously as I wanted the right tenants so they are on a very good deal and most likely wont replace what they have now for the same money.

Also I don't want to be tarred with the "bad" landlord tag I have been very good to my tenants whenever there was a request for items or things to be done it was done promptly and without question even though some of the things I provided them was probably above and beyond what I would be obliged to do for them. Unfortunately it has just turned out that my circumstances have changed and I would like to move back in, I personally don't see the big deal in asking them and if they say no then so be it

The renting elsewhere isn't preferable as previously mentioned in my posts by the time I pay service charge, tax etc on the rent I receive I would have to rent somewhere well below the standard of my existing home which obviously I ideally don't want to have to do but it may be my only option

I am not sure what the sneaking in comments relates to, I certainly didn't sneak in to the apartment if that is what you are referring to I was in there with a contractor with the knowledge of the tenants

Anyway I would rather you not respond to this thread if you have nothing insightful or helpful to add

Thank you for those who have provided constructive advice and information

WHy does that not surprise me or upset me... Your posts are the most discourteous and inconsiderate mailings seen here in a long while. REALLY!

In fact my posts are truly insiightful ; simply unacceptable to you because they support the tenants.

The only ones this is unfortunate for is your tenants.

You sir are what used to be called..... And a very bad landlord.

Calhoun

Jamie1980 wrote: »

@ xper - I think you may be reading a bit too much in to the language I used at the end of the day I am now aware that tenants are entitled to stay there so if that is what they choose then I have every intention of honouring the agreement. I have spoken to the tenants and explained the situation and asked them to have a think about it and I have said that I would allow them ample time to find another place if they agreed. Ultimately the tenants are actually in breach of the lease with the number of occupants so when I point this out to them they may have no choice but to move out as they may not be able to afford the place with the agreed number of tenants allowed in the place, ideally I would like to agree something with them but I have been more than accommodating with them over their "guest" staying there which has gone well beyond the time period they initially mentioned.

@ graces7 - I find your comments rude and misguided and your input is simply unhelpful and unconstructive.

I have no intention nor can I evict them I am trying to come up with an amiable solution for both parties and if this can't be done then I will have no choice but to look elsewhere.

I don't expect them to move out in fact I expect them most likely to say no as previously mentioned the property even though I say so myself is absolutely lovely and it is under-rented by about 15% which was completely my choosing obviously as I wanted the right tenants so they are on a very good deal and most likely wont replace what they have now for the same money.

Also I don't want to be tarred with the "bad" landlord tag I have been very good to my tenants whenever there was a request for items or things to be done it was done promptly and without question even though some of the things I provided them was probably above and beyond what I would be obliged to do for them. Unfortunately it has just turned out that my circumstances have changed and I would like to move back in, I personally don't see the big deal in asking them and if they say no then so be it

Sorry i dont agree as the tone of your posting and the underhanded sneaking, lets call a spade a spade you used an appointment to fix something as an excuse to review the state of the place and to find dirt on how to get rid of your problem or in your words your angle (see point in bold). This all leads me to believe you are a bad landlord and will use any angle to be rid of them.

I seriously hope you get some sense and just try and rent somewhere for a couple of months, i know your circumstances changed but thats your problem. How you expect to ignore the contract you signed (you are trying to weasle your way around it) and/or move your way into someones home setup is unreal.

The_Conductor

Graces7 wrote: »

[/B]

Why not simply rent somewhere else yourself?

Because you cannot offset renting somewhere against rental income from the first property- i.e. you pay tax at the full whack on the original property- and get no cognisance of this when you have to go and rent somewhere else yourself....... Its increasingly a problem for people who have to let their property due to work moving (or whatever)- while they may get tenants for their own property- even if the gross rent is exactly the same that they're getting for their house- they can't use it to rent somewhere else........

No need to be so aggressive and antagonistic towards the guy- he does seem to be doing his best to accommodate everyone, and was trying to clarify what the situation was- rather than go in all guns blazing, which is a damn sight better than making all sorts of presumptions and ending up with everyone fighting with one another.

The_Conductor

Calhoun wrote: »

Sorry i dont agree as the tone of your posting and the underhanded sneaking, lets call a spade a spade you used an appointment to fix something as an excuse to review the state of the place and to find dirt on how to get rid of your problem or in your words your angle (see point in bold). This all leads me to believe you are a bad landlord and will use any angle to be rid of them.

I seriously hope you get some sense and just try and rent somewhere for a couple of months, i know your circumstances changed but thats your problem. How you expect to ignore the contract you signed (you are trying to weasle your way around it) and/or move your way into someones home setup is unreal.

In all fairness- the guy did come on here to ask advice- and has been given advice. There is no need to be so confrontational with him- its not that hard to impart information to him without jumping down his throat.

If you disagree with what he says (or indeed anyone else)- refute it factually- without personalising your posts- this is not the wild wild west- if you want to post in this forum- we do have rules (the forum charter) please read it and comply with it.

Victor

Jamie1980 wrote: »

Anyway I would rather you not respond to this thread if you have nothing insightful or helpful to add

Hi Jamie,

Welcome to boards.ie.

I haven't read this thread in detail, but I can sense some friction. Can I ask you and the other posters in this thread to be conscious of other peoples' feelings when posting.

Victor
Moderator

Jamie1980

@ graces7 - I think its best we don't communicate anymore on this subject as you clearly have a very different viewpoint from mine which you are entitled too but it doesn't mean you are right either. I didn't try and personalise anything with you other than stating I felt your comments were rude and unnecessary all I was doing was looking for advice.


@ calhoun - the appointment to fix the TV's was actually requested by the tenants and not by me, the company who were coming out only call out between 9am and 5pm and the tenants were told this. The tenants told the agent they could not be there between those hours due to work commitments and requested that the agent be there to let them in and supervise. As I was around I told the agent I would go there and let the contractor in and wait until he had finished as the agent was looking for a fee to do this as it was not part of their job, I did this as a favour to the tenants as I was at a loose end so I was happy enough to oblige and it was actually the tenants duty to be there not mine. The tenants were informed that it would be me letting the contractor in so it was 100% above board.

Anyway in my contract with the tenants I have a clause that allows myself or an agent to inspect the property once a month with 24 hours notice, which I have never invoked by the way. So contrary to what you may think there was no sneaking around on my part as the contractor had to go in to the two bedrooms and the sitting room so I could basically see the whole place anyway, just in case you enquire the whole place is open plan baring the bedrooms hence I could see everywhere without sneaking around as you put it.

I don’t see your problem with my point in bold I have explained how the tenants went about getting the additional person in and what was agreed so I am well within my rights to request him to move out as are the tenants well within their rights to stay there if they so choose but if they want to do so they can stay there as a couple as per what was agreed on the contract.

I don't like the way you cast aspersions without knowing me or having ever dealt with me, you are entitled to your opinion but I will respectively disagree with you and I think my tenants would too as I have been nothing but helpful to them and have delivered upon all requested they made even though some of them as I mentioned previously were IMO beyond what was necessary but that doesn't bother me once I have the right people in the place

@ Victor (moderator) - I am not in anyway trying to cause any hassle at all as you will see from my posts if you read them. I was just looking for some insightful advice which I did get from several generous posters but as usual some people felt the need to butt in and tar me with a certain brush and in my opinion it has been unfounded, unnecessary and plainly rude and I make no apologies in saying this. If they have nothing useful to contribute why contribute at all?

Calhoun

Jamie, my apoligies read to much into what you were saying, i retract what i was saying.

Jamie1980

@ Calhoun - no problem at all I accept and appreciate your apology, no harm done.

toexpress

Jamie, look at www.threshold.ie you are entitled to terminate the lease if you require the property for occupation by yourself or any member of yourself.

Do not be misled by the PRTB they are tenant focussed and really they are a quango without a direction. I understand there are some major changes happening there. But take it from me, I am an experienced landlord, you are completely within your rights to write to them and state they are to surrender vacant possession of the property. The length of the notice you are required under the Tenancies Act 2004 is dictated by how long they have had occupation and you will find all of these details on www.threshold.ie

Milk & Honey

The tenants are in breach of a condition of the lease. A notice should be said giving them a reasonable time such as 10 days to remedy the breach. Warn the tenants that failure to remedy the breach will result in a Notice of Termination. If the breach is not remedied in time issue the Notice of Termination.
The right to terminate on grounds that the landlord requires the property for his own use only applies where there is no fixed term agreement in place. The PRTB do not provide advice so the comment about the PRTB is irrelevant.

toexpress

From the Threshold Website

Part 4 Tenancy
One of the major changes introduced on the 1st of September 2004 is the concept of the tenant gaining the right to remain in occupation after a six-month probationary period. After the initial six months, the tenant may remain in occupation for a period up to 3 and a half years. The tenancy becomes known as a Part 4 Tenancy. The landlord may terminate the tenancy during this period on specified grounds only and these are outlined below.

Terminating a Tenancy
Terminating within the first six months.
If a tenancy is terminated within the first six months, not due to any fault on the tenant and there is no fixed-term lease, the landlord must serve notice to quit of at least 28 days. The landlord does not have to provide a reason for terminating the tenancy.

Landlord terminating a Part 4 tenancy
The notice period required to terminate a Part 4 tenancy is regulated by the length of the tenancy. The period required can be found in the following table:

Notice Period
Duration of Tenancy
28 days
Less than 6 months
35 days
6 months or more but less than 1 year
42 days
1 year or more but less than 2 years
56 days
2 years or more but less than 3 years
84 days
3 years or more but less than 4 years
112 days
4 or more years

The landlord must provide a reason for terminating the tenancy.

Grounds for terminating a Part 4 tenancy
A landlord may terminate a Part 4 tenancy but only on the grounds specified below:
Where the tenant has not complied with their obligations, the tenant has been notified of the breach and has not righted the breach.
Where the dwelling is no longer suitable to the needs of the tenant.
Where the landlord is selling the property.
Where the landlord requires the dwelling for his own occupation or for a member of his family to occupy.
Where the landlord intends to substantially refurbish or renovate the dwelling and planning permission has been obtained, if necessary.
Where the landlord intends to change the use of the dwelling and planning permission has been obtained, if necessary.

The landlord may terminate a Part 4 tenancy with 7 days notice on the grounds of the tenants’ anti-social behaviour. The landlord may terminate with 28 days notice where the tenant is in default. If the default is non-payment of rent, the landlord must notify the tenant in writing that the rent is owing and give them 14 days to pay the rent prior to serving 28 days notice to quit.

The_Conductor

Thankyou toexpress

The OP is not dealing with a Part 4 tenancy- as has been pointed out, he is dealing with a Fixed Term Lease- which is an entirely different thing.

toexpress

smccarrick wrote: »

Thankyou toexpress

The OP is not dealing with a Part 4 tenancy- as has been pointed out, he is dealing with a Fixed Term Lease- which is an entirely different thing.

Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.

Milk & Honey

toexpress wrote: »

Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.

The tenancy may be part 4 but the tenant enjoys greater security under the lease than under Part 4 therefore the provisions allowing a landlord to terminate the tenancy to use the dwelling himself do not apply. You should read the whole act and not just extracts.


From Part 4 RTA

Greater security of tenure not affected.

26.—Nothing in this Part operates to derogate from any rights the tenant enjoys for the time being (by reason of the tenancy concerned) that are more beneficial for the tenant than those created by this Part.

The_Conductor

toexpress wrote: »

Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.

A tenant is 'entitled' to a Part 4 tenancy- however a landlord is not entitled to convert a fixed term lease into a Part 4 tenancy in order to access the provisions of a Part 4 tenancy and effect an eviction.

A fixed term lease grants far greater security of tenure to a tenant than does a Part 4 lease.

The OP needs to dig out a copy of the lease and familiarise themselves exactly with the terms and articles as outlined in the lease.

The lease as it stands- is a Fixed Term Lease- I don't understand why you and others are trying to insinuate that the terms governing a Part 4 tenancy somehow trump this- they don't.

odds_on

toexpress wrote: »

Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.

toexpress, you are correct in that a tenant of six months or more acquires the rights of a Part 4 tenancy, however, not to the point where it overrides the Fixed Term Agreement.

Part 4 tenancies were introduced to give a tenant more security of tenure than previously existed (prior to 2004). A fixed term agreement is nore secure than a Part 4; hence Fixed term tenancies exist and are the most common type of agreement. This is especially so for a first agreement.

After 6 months of a fixed term agreement, the tenant is entitled to remain in the property for a further four years (at the end of the fixed term). However, at the end of a fixed term, the landlord has the obligation to renew the tenancy if the tenant wishes - either with another fixed term (probably for another year) agreement and the tenant can thus feel very secure for another 12 months.
If on the other hand, the tenant opts for a Part 4 lease (which under the RTA 2004 the landlord cannot refuse if he is continuing with the same tenant), the tenant is much less secure in his tenancy because there are 6 grounds under which the landlord can terminate a Part 4 lease. Under a fixed term lease the landlord has really no options to terminate a lease (save for a tenant's breach of obligations and even then he must give the tenant time to remedy that breach, which, if he does, the landlord cannot terminate the lease).

If, as I correctly understand what you say, that

I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months

then why would the RTA 2004 have section 195 dealing with overholding of a fixed term tenancy which can only occur after the end of the fixed term - usually one year.

In further notes on Part 4 tenancies (RTA 2002) it states:

The first cycle of these tenancies is called a ‘‘Part 4 tenancy’’ and
each subsequent one is called a ‘‘further Part 4 tenancy’’ in the Act. The tenant will be free to terminate at any time, subject to any fixed
term agreement.

I think this is self explanatory.

Furthermore,

Section 31 construes a series of continuous separate fixed term tenancies as continuous occupation for the purposes of qualifying for
a Part 4 tenancy.

Thus, a fixed term lease followed by a fixed term lease does not really become a Part 4 tenancy as the tenant must adhere to the terms and conditions of the fiuxed term lease and not the conditions as laid down in the RTA 2004 for a Part 4 lease.

There are plenty more example if you care to read the RTA itself. and not refer to either Threshold nor Citizens Information who give a brief overview of certain parts of the Act but often fail to distinguish when it applies to a Fixed Term lease or a Part 4 lease.

xper

Jamie1980 wrote: »

@ xper - I think you may be reading a bit too much in to the language I used at the end of the day I am now aware that tenants are entitled to stay there so if that is what they choose then I have every intention of honouring the agreement.

Fair enough. I hesitated to post my message as I fully appreciated you have not actually acted incorrectly at any point in this matter - there are far worse cases littered through this forum. Having seen the more strident views expressed in follow up to my own post, I regret having raised the matter here but your phrases which I highlighted did allow me to make a general point about a bug bear of mine, namely the frequency with which landlords in Ireland demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the basic legalities and responsibilities of the business they are involved in. ...

Exhibit A:

toexpress wrote: »

...But take it from me, I am an experienced landlord, you are completely within your rights to write to them and state they are to surrender vacant possession of the property. ...

Milk & Honey wrote: »

The tenants are in breach of a condition of the lease. A notice should be said giving them a reasonable time such as 10 days to remedy the breach. .

It depends what the lease actual says about who may or may not occupy the property. The OP has only mentioned an 'understanding' which, if its not in writing, is all too easy to dispute (at least sufficiently long that the fixed term will be up anyway before any adjudication was arrived at).
On the other hand, for all we know, the house guest may well be overstaying the welcome extended to him by the tenants and they might only be too glad to get shot of him of foot of a notification of breach of the lease terms. Which wouldn't get the property back for the OP though!

Graces7

Jamie1980 wrote: »

@ graces7 - I think its best we don't communicate anymore on this subject as you clearly have a very different viewpoint from mine which you are entitled too but it doesn't mean you are right either. I didn't try and personalise anything with you other than stating I felt your comments were rude and unnecessary all I was doing was looking for advice.


@ calhoun - the appointment to fix the TV's was actually requested by the tenants and not by me, the company who were coming out only call out between 9am and 5pm and the tenants were told this. The tenants told the agent they could not be there between those hours due to work commitments and requested that the agent be there to let them in and supervise. As I was around I told the agent I would go there and let the contractor in and wait until he had finished as the agent was looking for a fee to do this as it was not part of their job, I did this as a favour to the tenants as I was at a loose end so I was happy enough to oblige and it was actually the tenants duty to be there not mine. The tenants were informed that it would be me letting the contractor in so it was 100% above board.

Anyway in my contract with the tenants I have a clause that allows myself or an agent to inspect the property once a month with 24 hours notice, which I have never invoked by the way. So contrary to what you may think there was no sneaking around on my part as the contractor had to go in to the two bedrooms and the sitting room so I could basically see the whole place anyway, just in case you enquire the whole place is open plan baring the bedrooms hence I could see everywhere without sneaking around as you put it.

I don’t see your problem with my point in bold I have explained how the tenants went about getting the additional person in and what was agreed so I am well within my rights to request him to move out as are the tenants well within their rights to stay there if they so choose but if they want to do so they can stay there as a couple as per what was agreed on the contract.

I don't like the way you cast aspersions without knowing me or having ever dealt with me, you are entitled to your opinion but I will respectively disagree with you and I think my tenants would too as I have been nothing but helpful to them and have delivered upon all requested they made even though some of them as I mentioned previously were IMO beyond what was necessary but that doesn't bother me once I have the right people in the place

@ Victor (moderator) - I am not in anyway trying to cause any hassle at all as you will see from my posts if you read them. I was just looking for some insightful advice which I did get from several generous posters but as usual some people felt the need to butt in and tar me with a certain brush and in my opinion it has been unfounded, unnecessary and plainly rude and I make no apologies in saying this. If they have nothing useful to contribute why contribute at all?

nb This is an open forum, not a private list! With a wide variety of people and experience. Many of us are tenants with varying experiences of diffcult landlords such as yourself.

So you cannot realistically order someone not to participate in any given thread.

So your definition of what is "useful" is really not appropriate or "useful" here. Maybe you need a forum for landlords not this more general one?

As you say you have an agent, one wonders why the post here as they must have told you the same as we have done?

We do not make the laws and we cannot change them or manipulate them as you seem to be trying to do.

Stating an opinion different to yours is not being confrontational. Period. The only person being rude here is your good self.. Even when the law has clearly been told to you you have continued to pursue a course which will more than inconvenience your paying tenants.

Having had this done to us we are of course deeply concerned. For your tenants. Maybe you cannot envisage their situation?

Many of us can. And have suffered at the hands of landlords too often to watch this happening without protesting.

Even to approach the tenants about this is unprofessional and dubious in terms of honouring the lease, as if they are decent people they will be concerned. But of course you know that! The word dishonourble is an old fashioned one but then I am very ,very old now and can use it.

Graces7

OP. my sister in Canada is intrigued reading this; small wonder she says that you came back,,, If you tried this there where they have serious tenancy laws, the tenants would sue you very successfully for even mentioning it to them. No delay. no problem.

The_Conductor

Graces7 wrote: »

OP. my sister in Canada is intrigued reading this; small wonder she says that you came back,,, If you tried this there where they have serious tenancy laws, the tenants would sue you very successfully for even mentioning it to them. No delay. no problem.

Graces- please stick to topic being discussed. The guy came on seeking advice- before undertaking any action- which is a damn sight better than we hear of all the time (even in this forum). Its fair enough to point out the rules and Irish law as it pertains- it is not on to be personally abusive towards him, and/or use your own limited contacts with the Gardai and or other organisations to make all manner of derogatory comments about them. We all have bad experiences from time to time- I could write volumes, but I don't, its not pertinent, and its also not fair to use my own experiences in an attempt to tarnish the reputation of others.

I seriously suggest that you read the forum charter if you wish to continue posting in this forum.

Regards,

SMcCarrick

Jamie1980

@ toexpress, milk&honey, odds_on, xper and smccarrick

Thanks for all your further input as mentioned I have spoken to the tenants so they are due to come back to me today with their thoughts on the matter.

@ graces7 - I really don't know how you are allowed to post here, I am aware your opinion differs to mine and I actually have no problem with that but the manner and tone of your posts are IMO exceptionally rude and crass showing a distinct lack of class.

The reason I said it would be better off you not posting in the thread is that you were adding nothing useful unless you think rude comments are useful. I am aware you are free to post where you like but if everybody did what you have done in this forum the forum would be a disaster and just revert to one big slagging match between posters.

So in future for the benefit of all I would kindly suggest like other posters have if you have nothing useful to post please refrain from posting rude comments unless you are here purely to try and wind people up. I just came looking for advice / information not abuse from people and in fairness pretty much all the posters bar you have been extremely helpful and forth coming with information.

I wouldn't consider myself a landlord like some people on here who have multiple properties I am just a guy who had to rent out his principle residence due to work commitments abroad and unfortunately due to family tragedy I have had to return home a lot sooner than I had anticipated but yet I am a bad landlord for asking my tenants would there be any possibility I could move back in to my apartment as it would be a lot more cost effective than using the rent money to rent a far inferior property. I personally don't see the harm in asking as they can always say no and if that makes me a bad landlord then so be it.

Anyway please don't feel the need to retort to this passage however if you feel the need to have the last word then by all means post away but rest assured this will be the last time I read or respond to your posts in this thread. I only wrote it to try and shed a small bit more light on why I am doing what I am doing and may be then you may be a little bit more understanding of my situation.

Victor

Graces7 wrote: »

Sneaking in in these circumstances also!

Why not simply rent somewhere else yourself?

Amateur landlords...

Please stick to the facts as stated.

Graces7 wrote: »

WHy does that not surprise me or upset me... Your posts are the most discourteous and inconsiderate mailings seen here in a long while. REALLY!

"The lady doth protest too much." comes to mind. If you have a problem with a post, please report it.

toexpress wrote: »

Jamie, look at www.threshold.ie you are entitled to terminate the lease if you require the property for occupation by yourself or any member of yourself.

Please stick to the facts as stated. This is not a Part 4 (only) lease.

Graces7 wrote: »

nb This is an open forum, not a private list! With a wide variety of people and experience. Many of us are tenants with varying experiences of diffcult landlords such as yourself.

So you cannot realistically order someone not to participate in any given thread.

However, I can both order it and enforce it if necessary. Please desist from both the tone and content of your posts.

Victor

Jamie1980 wrote: »

Ultimately the tenants are actually in breach of the lease with the number of occupants so when I point this out to them they may have no choice but to move out as they may not be able to afford the place with the agreed number of tenants allowed in the place

It may be difficult to rely on this as a breach, especially given that you initially agreed to it. You will need to give them time to remedy the situation.

misschoo

toexpress wrote: »

Do not be misled by the PRTB they are tenant focussed and really they are a quango without a direction. I understand there are some major changes happening there. But take it from me, I am an experienced landlord, you are completely within your rights to write to them and state they are to surrender vacant possession of the property. The length of the notice you are required under the Tenancies Act 2004 is dictated by how long they have had occupation and you will find all of these details on www.threshold.ie

It annoys me so much that everything is so much tenant focused - yes I appreciate that there are bad landlords out there but there are bad tenants out there abusing good landlords! I'm sick of everyone automatically assuming that landlords are bad! There are alot of good unfortunate people out there that have had to let their homes out when they didn't want to!

odds_on

IMHO, much of the fault for not winning a dispute resolution is lack of evidence on the part of the landlord. In many instances they know they are right and hence don't prepare themselves properly with evidence.

Again, IMO, many landlords do not do a detailed entry inventory and therefore any claim for damages above normal wear and tear are disallowed because there is no proof of the condition of the property, its furnishings, fixtures and fittings, walls, floors, windows etc at the start of the tenancy.