Query re eviction.

Buyingcar2012

A friend has asked me for advice. Long story but essentially they want to get rid of a problematic tenant, primarily due to rent arrears.

The tenant is there less than 6 months. He is aware of the procedure involved for this:
14 day warning letter for rent arrears, followed by
28 day Notice of Termination.

It has come to a stage that they want the tenant out as quick as possible and don't want to wait 42 days.

Can they just serve the 28 day Notice of Termination and not bother with the 14 day rent arrears(foregoing the possibility of getting those rent arrears)?


Essentially, what is the quickest way of getting them out?

nibtrix

If they don't follow the proper procedure it will be an illegal eviction and they're opening themselves up to a large fine from the prtb.

Buyingcar2012

nibtrix wrote: »

If they don't follow the proper procedure it will be an illegal eviction and they're opening themselves up to a large fine from the prtb.

I appreciate that hence the query. I thought that you did not have to give any reasons if tenancy within 6 months? So my reasoning was that you could simply serve a Notice of Termination and forego the extra 14 days needed to claim rent arrears.

Procrastastudy

He'd be much better getting proper legal advice - the cost of running a business.

tunedout

Procrastastudy wrote: »

He'd be much better getting proper legal advice - the cost of running a business.

He wouldn't necessarily be better off. In fact, he might be much worse off, €200 or €300 worse off to be told some piece of information that someone on boards could have told him for free.

djimi

Does the tenant have a fixed term lease? If they do then it doesnt matter how long they are there; if the lease is still valid then the 28 days notice does not apply and is not valid.

Threshold would be the best people to contact in order to get the exact and fully legal steps to follow (and it is absolutely vital that each and every step is followed to teh absolute letter), but basically he needs to write to the tenant notifying them of the issue and giving time (say 14 days as they have done) to resolve, then follow up with another letter, and only then can they start eviction proceedings.

Procrastastudy

tunedout wrote: »

He wouldn't necessarily be better off. In fact, he might be much worse off, €200 or €300 worse off to be told some piece of information that someone on boards could have told him for free.

Yep - and he might not. Very stupid to rely on randomers on the internet when it comes to situations like this. The information we have is second hand and doesn't seem to tell the whole story. Even if it did its better to get it checked.

djimi

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Yep - and he might not. Very stupid to rely on randomers on the internet when it comes to situations like this. The information we have is second hand and doesn't seem to tell the whole story. Even if it did its better to get it checked.

Agree 100%. Any information on here should only ever be taken as a guide and nothing more. Many good posters on here know their stuff and can answer questions, but it in no way constitutes legal advice, and its up to the person asking the question to verify any information before acting upon it, especially in a legal situation (which most things that come up on here are).

Procrastastudy

djimi wrote: »

Agree 100%. Any information on here should only ever be taken as a guide and nothing more. Many good posters on here know their stuff and can answer questions, but it in no way constitutes legal advice, and its up to the person asking the question to verify any information before acting upon it, especially in a legal situation (which most things that come up on here are).

And just to add - I'm in no way attempting to be derogatory to posters - its good to have a guide on what to ask when you're with someone charging by the hour.

Buyingcar2012

Procrastastudy wrote: »

And just to add - I'm in no way attempting to be derogatory to posters - its good to have a guide on what to ask when you're with someone charging by the hour.

Yeah. I'm just using here as a guide as I figured somebody must have been through this before. I've researched a bit myself and I'm still not sure if you can just serve a Notice of Termination.

djimi

Buyingcar2012 wrote: »

Yeah. I'm just using here as a guide as I figured somebody must have been through this before. I've researched a bit myself and I'm still not sure if you can just serve a Notice of Termination.

Again it comes down to the type of lease. If they have a fixed term lease then the notice given is almost certainly not valid (the full eviction process has not been followed and you cannot just give notice to vacate during a fixed term leae).

If however the tenant does not have a fixed term lease then the 28 days notice period is perfectly valid provided they have been in the property for less than 6 months (in the first 6 months the landlord can serve 28 days notice to vacate without reason, provided the tenant does not have a fixed term lease).

Milk & Honey

djimi wrote: »

Again it comes down to the type of lease. If they have a fixed term lease then the notice given is almost certainly not valid (the full eviction process has not been followed and you cannot just give notice to vacate during a fixed term lease).

.

A tenant can be given notice to quit during a fixed term lease if she is in breach of condition.

Wicklowandy

But notice of arrears of rent would still have to given

Milk & Honey

Wicklowandy wrote: »

But notice of arrears of rent would still have to given

Notice of rent arrears and breach of condition have to be given.

djimi

Milk & Honey wrote: »

A tenant can be given notice to quit during a fixed term lease if she is in breach of condition.

This would basically constitute an eviction, which would be a lot more complex than just giving notice to vacate.

Milk & Honey

djimi wrote: »

This would basically constitute an eviction, which would be a lot more complex than just giving notice to vacate.

What is more complex about it?

Agent J

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html

Notice period drops to 7 days if there is serious anti social behaviour going on.
I don't know if that's applicable.

You have to be very careful with evictions. You need to go by the book otherwise you are extremely vunerable.

Milk & Honey

Agent J wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html

Notice period drops to 7 days if there is serious anti social behaviour going on.
I don't know if that's applicable.

You have to be very careful with evictions. You need to go by the book otherwise you are extremely vunerable.

Giving notice is not an eviction. It is the start of a process that may lead to an eviction. If the person who gets the notice actually leaves there will be no eviction.

whippet

i've been through this process recently ... you will have to issue a 14 day notice for payment of arrears, should you not recieve the arrears in full on the 14th day you can then issue the 28 day termination notice. Be careful of your wording etc .. the PRTB site has some templates.

Be mindful that the 28 day notice to quit really is only that and if the tenants decide not to either pay up or leave you are snookered ... you will have to go down the route that is the PRTB shambles.

All stacked in the favour of the tenant and while the long drawn out process goes on you will receive no rent.

odds_on

whippet wrote: »

i've been through this process recently ... you will have to issue a 14 day notice for payment of arrears, should you not recieve the arrears in full on the 14th day you can then issue the 28 day termination notice. Be careful of your wording etc .. the PRTB site has some templates.

Be mindful that the 28 day notice to quit really is only that and if the tenants decide not to either pay up or leave you are snookered ... you will have to go down the route that is the PRTB shambles.

All stacked in the favour of the tenant and while the long drawn out process goes on you will receive no rent.

And your basis of this statement?

Actually, claims with the PRTB can be broken down in two ways:
winners per claim and winners per reason in a claim.

Many claims have more than one reason (for example, rent arrears + damage in excess of normal wear and tear + cleaning costs).
The tenant wins approx 50% of claims (landlords 47%) while the landlord wins more reasons in a claim at 57% (tenants 40%).
The remaining %ages are made up of third parties, no awards either way and a few lesser parties)

Buyingcar2012

odds_on wrote: »

And your basis of this statement?

Actually, claims with the PRTB can be broken down in two ways:
winners per claim and winners per reason in a claim.

Many claims have more than one reason (for example, rent arrears + damage in excess of normal wear and tear + cleaning costs).
The tenant wins approx 50% of claims (landlords 47%) while the landlord wins more reasons in a claim at 57% (tenants 40%).
The remaining %ages are made up of third parties, no awards either way and a few lesser parties)

If the landlord hasnt registered with PRTB, does that mean that the Act doesn't apply ie you cannot get the benefit of the reliefs under it?

Milk & Honey

odds_on wrote: »

And your basis of this statement?

Actually, claims with the PRTB can be broken down in two ways:
winners per claim and winners per reason in a claim.

Many claims have more than one reason (for example, rent arrears + damage in excess of normal wear and tear + cleaning costs).
The tenant wins approx 50% of claims (landlords 47%) while the landlord wins more reasons in a claim at 57% (tenants 40%).
The remaining %ages are made up of third parties, no awards either way and a few lesser parties)

A win for the landlord is not a win because of delay and lack of enforcement.

djimi

Buyingcar2012 wrote: »

If the landlord hasnt registered with PRTB, does that mean that the Act doesn't apply ie you cannot get the benefit of the reliefs under it?

A tenant is always covered by the tenancy act, PRTB etc regardless of whether or not the landlord has registered the tenancy. The landlord however cannot avail of the PRTB if they are not registered, and are also liable for a fairly hefty fine for not registering the tenancy.

whippet

odds_on wrote: »

And your basis of this statement?

My basis is that when the tenant refuses to pay or quit .. the Landlord (who funds the quango) has to raise a dispute and go through the process all the while not receiving a penny in rent or having access to their property.

If the PRTB rules in favour of the landlord nothing is enforceable by the PRTB and the landlord will then have to go down the traditional legal route. All the while the tenant still remains in situ without having to pay a penny.

Also, should a landlord not follow the process to the Nth degree they are walking on a tightrope where not only will they not receive rent but are leaving themselves open to massive compensation.

I know as I had to deal with it .. I had a tenant who would not move regardless of what was ruled by the PRTB ... it was outside reasons as to why he eventually left - I did not recieve a penny in rent for 4 months, house was trashed and property that wasn't taken was broken. I have no comeback however if I hadn't followed the procedure to the most ridiculous of detail that tenant was waiting to pounce with a 'improper eviction' charge against me.

The PRTB offers only protection to tenants and make the assumption that all landlords are from the Famine times and want to see tenants chewing grass on the side of the road.

djimi

I agree that in cases like the one described above the law does seem to overly protect tenants even when they are blatently in the wrong.

I think part of the problem is not the process but the speed in which it operates. If we are going to have a system in place like the PRTB then there should not be months of waiting; the case should be heard in no more than a matter of weeks and the resolution should be swift. In a case like above the landlord is being massively hurt financially while the tenant remains in the house laughing at them. In a case where a deposit has been unlawfully witheld the tenant most likely cannot move on as they rely on their deposit money being returned. Its just a horribly slow system.