Lease is up

Hey guys, we have a landlord who doesn't even know what furniture we have, doesn't realise we changed the locks (we had to change them to more secure locks when going away) and never, ever gets in touch, even when we contact him the odd time it's "be around next week". We pay for all repairs on the house ourselves. We just pay him rent every month and never hear from him. We don't bother him, he doesn't bother us. We like it this way, and it seems he does too.

However, the lease is up next month. We've lived here two years now and signed the lease last year and the year before. What would be the legal implications of not renewing the lease this year, but continuing to live here and pay rent as normal? Is that at the landlord's discretion? We prefer to keep him at arm's length (had too many intrusive landlords in the past) and it seems he himself is just happy to collect rent and not so keen to do his landlordy duties.

This arrangement suits us both but are there legal implications involved in staying a third year without a lease? Thanks.

pawnacide

There's actually very little need for a lease other than to set the rent and sort minor details like allowing pets etc. All tenancies beyond six months are covered by the 2004 tenancy act .. you'll find the act and a summary at ptrb.ie

But if he's that hands off and you're that good a tenant maybe you should contact hime re new lease and look for a reduction.. every other tenant in the country probably has.

My wife rented an apartment on fitz place 11 years ago and her siblings are still there with no lease.

djimi

Why on earth are you happy to pay for the repairs on the accomodation? Its the landlords responsibility, not yours, and one of the reasons you pay him rent is that it means you dont have to fix things yourself and at your own expense. If he is lazy/standoffish then thats a problem that you need to sort, but not by absolving him of his landlord reponsibilities.

If you want to stay in the place for the forseeable future than a fixed term lease gives you more security. You do not need to sign a fixed term if you do not want to, but under a part 4 there are certain criteria in which the landlord can ask you to leave, and these do not apply when you have have a fixed term lease.

pawnacide

I've never been a landlord but if landlords were to be as picky as tenants seem to be there'd be a lot less done by them.

If you read most leases there's things in them like tenants must keep appliances in good repair. Eg if there's a water softener in a house it must be used, washing machine filters must be emptied, wall marks and holes are not normal wear and tear, likewise with carpet stains and tears etc.

I mean seriously folks 'how do you break the flushing mechanism in a toilet. Pulling hoses out of showers is not actually that easy but surprisingly common.

The bed broke .. oh really .. it just broke all on its own.
The handle came off the washing machine .. funny that.

I'm with the OP.. rent the house and get on with it.

odds_on

If you do not sign a new fixed term lease, you will gain a Part 4 lease. This entitles you to remain in the house for up to 4 years in total, without signing another lease.
Again, on the plus side, given a change in personal circumstances, with a Part 4 lease you can give a Notice of Termination (with the correct notice period (maximum is 56 days) and leave, where as with a fixed term lease you must basically stay for the term of the lease (though there are ways to get out of it)

The downside of a Part 4 lease, the landlord can also issue a Notice of Termination (but only on certain grounds, the two most usual are if he wants the house for himself or if he wishes to sell the house - however he must give a notice period greater than the tenant and his maximum is 112 days.

You know the landlord best; but if he is happy with you just paying the rent on a regular basis, with no other major problems, the part 4 lease may be best for you.

Remember, a Fixed Term lease is the most secure type of tenancy as the landlord has great difficulty in terminating it and for a tenant it is also difficult but he can assign the lease to another person (the landlord does not have this type of option).

A Part 4 lease is less secure as the landlord can remove (evict) a tenant under a number of grounds; however, for the tenant it is a very simple process to get out of a Part 4 tenancy. However, a part 4 tenancy entitles a tenant to remain in the property for 4 years (after which he can have a "Further Part 4" lease where the notice periods begin again at 28 days, as per the RTA 2004 table of notice periods).

djimi

pawnacide wrote: »

I've never been a landlord but if landlords were to be as picky as tenants seem to be there'd be a lot less done by them.

If you read most leases there's things in them like tenants must keep appliances in good repair. Eg if there's a water softener in a house it must be used, washing machine filters must be emptied, wall marks and holes are not normal wear and tear, likewise with carpet stains and tears etc.

I mean seriously folks 'how do you break the flushing mechanism in a toilet. Pulling hoses out of showers is not actually that easy but surprisingly common.

The bed broke .. oh really .. it just broke all on its own.
The handle came off the washing machine .. funny that.

I'm with the OP.. rent the house and get on with it.

The motor packs in on the washing machine; would you be happy to buy a new machine out of your pocket. The water pump in our apartment broke a month after we moved in and needed something like €800 worth of repairs; should I have just gotten on with it an paid for it myself?

One of the reasons I am happy to rent is because it means that when something breaks I can ring the landlord and just get it sorted. Its probably the biggest advantage of being a tenant over being a homeowner. If I break something myself then obviously Ill fix it myself or at least accept that I am liable to pay for repairs, but there is a lot of things that can break through age/wear and tear, and I dont see why any tenant would be happy to repair these at their own expense.

pawnacide

djimi wrote: »

The motor packs in on the washing machine; would you be happy to buy a new machine out of your pocket. The water pump in our apartment broke a month after we moved in and needed something like €800 worth of repairs; should I have just gotten on with it an paid for it myself?

Of course not, but you'd be amazed at the different levels of 'wear and tear' between rented and owner occupied properties.

djimi

pawnacide wrote: »

Of course not, but you'd be amazed at the different levels of 'wear and tear' between rented and owner occupied properties.

I know what youre getting at, and where the damage is caused by the tenant I fully agree that they should be paying for it. To determine what is the fault of the tenant and what is wear and tear is up to the landlord. My initial point was that its ridiculous for a tenant to cover all repair costs when it is not their fault or responsibility, and your response of "rent the house and get on with it" doesnt make a lot of sense to me.

molders

Just to share some personal experiences (I'm a landlord); tenant called me one day to say that water was dripping through the ceiling in the down stairs living room, when I asked how bad it was, the reply was "ah its not too serious", anyway called over later that evening and the living room ceiling was stained brown with a constant drip coming from it. It turned out that the tenant had gotten a "friend" to tile the bathroom floor (no permission asked they just went and did it). The "tiler" had unsecured the sink from the wall to tile under the pedestal and stuck the sink back with silicon. In doing so he strained one of the water connections to the taps and the water in the ceiling was the result of the strained joint draining into the room below. It wasn't a lot of water but it had built up over time and destroyed the ceiling. I'd have plenty more such stories-toilets that just broke for instance(how do you just break the ceramic part of a toilet?) but as a landlord your expected to just resolve it.

Spiritofthekop

molders wrote: »

Just to share some personal experiences (I'm a landlord); tenant called me one day to say that water was dripping through the ceiling in the down stairs living room, when I asked how bad it was, the reply was "ah its not too serious", anyway called over later that evening and the living room ceiling was stained brown with a constant drip coming from it. It turned out that the tenant had gotten a "friend" to tile the bathroom floor (no permission asked they just went and did it). The "tiler" had unsecured the sink from the wall to tile under the pedestal and stuck the sink back with silicon. In doing so he strained one of the water connections to the taps and the water in the ceiling was the result of the strained joint draining into the room below. It wasn't a lot of water but it had built up over time and destroyed the ceiling. I'd have plenty more such stories-toilets that just broke for instance(how do you just break the ceramic part of a toilet?) but as a landlord your expected to just resolve it.

Yep thats what your going to get when you rent out to people its part and parcel of owning properties & being a landlord...a pain in the arse. Not for me....

Its why I would be happy to live within my means with one nice big family home and maybe a holiday home abroad in the sun for when i retire. Thats all.