PRTB Hearing

thesiren

Does anyone have any experience of a PRTB hearing as a tenant? I rented a property 3 years ago, it was the first time I rented a flat in Dublin and it was cash in hand - there was a signed contract and lease, but in order to get the flat in the first place I had to pay the first and last month's rent AND another month's rent as 'deposit'. I have signed proof of this. The lease was for one year, but once the year passed he said that I could just continue to rent on a 'month by month' basis. When I wanted to move out (because it was very expensive - 600 for a very small studio), I gave written notice of a month, but he refused to allow me to use the last month's rent that I had paid when I signed the lease, and kept my full deposit for 'wear and tear' (I am a bit of a neat freak and the only 'damage' to that flat was from when I killed 2 moths that had infested the apartment, so there was a slight mark on the wall).

I have since learned that a landlord can't keep your deposit as part of regular wear and tear, and they can only keep your deposit if you break the lease. Given that the year's signed lease was up and it was a month-by-month basis, and given that I kept the place spotless, I believe I'm legally entitled to get that deposit back. Lastly, he was not (and still is not) registered with the PRTB. So whoever is living there now has no rights either.

I've read a few forums in which landlords discuss the fact that PRTB hearings favour the tenants. Is this the case, and does anyone think I'm likely to get my deposit back?

D3PO

thesiren wrote: »

Does anyone have any experience of a PRTB hearing as a tenant? I rented a property 3 years ago, it was the first time I rented a flat in Dublin and it was cash in hand - there was a signed contract and lease, but in order to get the flat in the first place I had to pay the first and last month's rent AND another month's rent as 'deposit'. I have signed proof of this. The lease was for one year, but once the year passed he said that I could just continue to rent on a 'month by month' basis. When I wanted to move out (because it was very expensive - 600 for a very small studio), I gave written notice of a month, but he refused to allow me to use the last month's rent that I had paid when I signed the lease, and kept my full deposit for 'wear and tear' (I am a bit of a neat freak and the only 'damage' to that flat was from when I killed 2 moths that had infested the apartment, so there was a slight mark on the wall).

I have since learned that a landlord can't keep your deposit as part of regular wear and tear, and they can only keep your deposit if you break the lease. Given that the year's signed lease was up and it was a month-by-month basis, and given that I kept the place spotless, I believe I'm legally entitled to get that deposit back. Lastly, he was not (and still is not) registered with the PRTB. So whoever is living there now has no rights either.

I've read a few forums in which landlords discuss the fact that PRTB hearings favour the tenants. Is this the case, and does anyone think I'm likely to get my deposit back?

WRONG weather landlord is registered or not has no bearing on a tennants rights.

as for your deposit will you get it back. maybe may be not. Depends what proof you furnish at the hearing and what proof he furnishes.

If he goes in and jsut says he kept it for wear and tear then you will get it back. If he says he kept it for damage and has photos to back it up then he may win.

time will tell.

odds_on

D3PO wrote: »

WRONG weather landlord is registered or not has no bearing on a tennants rights.

as for your deposit will you get it back. maybe may be not. Depends what proof you furnish at the hearing and what proof he furnishes.

If he goes in and jsut says he kept it for wear and tear then you will get it back. If he says he kept it for damage and has photos to back it up then he may win.

time will tell.

Not necessarily, he will also have to prove the condition of the property at the beginning of the lease. If he does not have any proof - photos and preferably an entry inventory signed by the tenant, as confirming the condition of the property, then he will have difficulty in convincing the PRTB that the tenant has caused any damage.

Much of the reason that the PRTB is claimed to favour tenants is that landlords are assumed to be in business and therefore should know all the laws relating to that business; how to run the business and have all the paper work to that business.

Tenants on the other hand are considered as people who do not know all the laws and if there is any doubt, the benefit is given to the tenant.

D3PO

odds_on wrote: »

Not necessarily, he will also have to prove the condition of the property at the beginning of the lease. If he does not have any proof - photos and preferably an entry inventory signed by the tenant, as confirming the condition of the property, then he will have difficulty in convincing the PRTB that the tenant has caused any damage.

Much of the reason that the PRTB is claimed to favour tenants is that landlords are assumed to be in business and therefore should know all the laws relating to that business; how to run the business and have all the paper work to that business.

Tenants on the other hand are considered as people who do not know all the laws and if there is any doubt, the benefit is given to the tenant.

as you will see i said may win. Not will win. Point is the OP coming on here and looking for somebody to tell him what the PRTB will decide is ludacris.

Rasmus

The PRTB does not favour the tenants, they take documentation from both sides so they can get a clear picture of how best to rule on a case. The more prepared you are, the better.

As others have said, whether the LL is registered or not has no bearing on the rights of the tenant, it simply means that the LL cannot file a case against you, but you can still file a case against him/her.

I guess from the way you have described your story that you did not take an photos when you moved in. If you have any pictures at all of the walls you should submit them, along with all correspondence, emails, contracts etc that back up your claim.

You don't say how long you stayed in the apartment - but by the sound of it, you didn't give enough notice (I am open to correction) and this is something the PRTB will not look upon favourably (in my hearing, it was one of the first things they asked, and I needed to provide written proof that I gave the requisite notice). The LL has you on that, if nothing else. If you are in a place for 1 – 2 years, you have to give notice of 6 weeks (42 days) then that jumps to 8 weeks (56 days) after 2 – 3 years.

The best thing you can do is get all your paperwork in order and have answers ready for any questions that can come up - prepare well and don't get caught out. RESEARCH this really well so you know the ins and outs. If you haven't filed yet, do it now as it takes ages to process.

Even if you don't win the LL will at least be fined by PRTB (nothing to do with your case in particular, but he can be held accountable for not being registered once he is reported).

It's impossible to tell how it will turn out. Although PRTB do look out for tenants, they still have to take the interests of LLs into account.

rdubz

You say you paid cash,did you get a rent book?Is there a paper trail of payments?Maybe make sure he paid tax on rent given and all is legit,if not confront him and go from there,good luck.

Ms Tootsie

We are currently due a hearing with the PRTB as our landlord with held our deposit when we moved out last year. To get to this point we had to supply a significant amount of documentation to prove we (a) paid a deposit (b) paid all our rent (c) paid all our bills before leaving the apartment (d) we left the place in good condition.

Thankfully, as our landlord was a bit of a cowboy anyway I had a feeling he would try to with hold the deposit so I contacted Threshold in advance and they told me everything I would need to provide. We took and dated pictures of the apartment before we handed over our keys.

We then filled in forms with the help of Threshold, got phone records to prove we tried to contact our landlord to arrange return of the deposit, submitted copies of the photos, copies of the lease, copies of our gas and electric accounts to show there were no outstanding bills on the property and copies of our bank statements showing the DD for the rent each month.

We submitted all that in June and only have a hearing date now.

The best advice I can offer you is to contact Threshold. They will be able to tell you whether or not you have a decent case to go to the PRTB with. But I can tell you, the PRTB deal in legal proceedings and as with all legal proceedings you will need documentation and proof to back up what you are saying.

thesiren

Rasmus wrote: »

T

You don't say how long you stayed in the apartment - but by the sound of it, you didn't give enough notice (I am open to correction) and this is something the PRTB will not look upon favourably (in my hearing, it was one of the first things they asked, and I needed to provide written proof that I gave the requisite notice). The LL has you on that, if nothing else. If you are in a place for 1 – 2 years, you have to give notice of 6 weeks (42 days) then that jumps to 8 weeks (56 days) after 2 – 3 years.

I thought I did mention that: I signed a lease for one year. When it came to a year since having lived there, he said that he was happy for me to rent on a month by month basis and that if I wanted to move out at anytime I could, just to give him a month's notice and I would get the deposit etc.

I am aware that this was a verbal arrangment. HOWEVER I gave written notice of one month as he had asked. I have kept my copy of that, which had the date on it and full details and also outlined that we had agreed it would be a month by month basis after the first year was up.

thesiren

rdubz wrote: »

You say you paid cash,did you get a rent book?Is there a paper trail of payments?Maybe make sure he paid tax on rent given and all is legit,if not confront him and go from there,good luck.

Thank-you. No he did not give me a rent book (I am not an Ireland native, I moved from England where you are not legally required to have a rent book, and tenants have virtually no real rights). I know this is illegal, so I will use this at the hearing.

You mention confronting him: he has actually rung me several times tonight (strangely, after I left and texted him about the deposit, he claimed not to recognise my number - yet now he knows it?). I haven't answered because I wonder is it legal for him to be ringing me if the PRTB are in the basis of organising a hearing?

thesiren

I received several missed calls from him (the ex-landlord) this evening, all within ten minutes of each other. I haven't answered because I don't know if I should - the PRTB are organising the hearing at the moment and I don't know if it's 'above board' for both parties to be in contact with each other. Should I answer next time he rings, or text to find out why he's calling? If I could just get the deposit back I'd be happy enough to drop the case, because I gave plenty of notice that I was leaving, I never got a rent book, and he said he was keeping the deposit for painting 'a few marks'.

D3PO

thesiren wrote: »

I received several missed calls from him (the ex-landlord) this evening, all within ten minutes of each other. I haven't answered because I don't know if I should - the PRTB are organising the hearing at the moment and I don't know if it's 'above board' for both parties to be in contact with each other. Should I answer next time he rings, or text to find out why he's calling? If I could just get the deposit back I'd be happy enough to drop the case, because I gave plenty of notice that I was leaving, I never got a rent book, and he said he was keeping the deposit for painting 'a few marks'.

it makes sense to answer. if hes ringing to offer your full deposit back great. If not just hang up and tell him you will see him at the hearing.

thesiren

D3PO wrote: »

it makes sense to answer. if hes ringing to offer your full deposit back great. If not just hang up and tell him you will see him at the hearing.

If he rings back I'll answer, I guess I just don't want someone being rude/horrible to me over the phone (when I rented from him, I overheard a really nasty argument between him and a tenant and was never sure what it was about, but he was borderline abusive, and I don't really want that!)

odds_on

thesiren wrote: »

Thank-you. No he did not give me a rent book (I am not an Ireland native, I moved from England where you are not legally required to have a rent book, and tenants have virtually no real rights). I know this is illegal, so I will use this at the hearing.

You mention confronting him: he has actually rung me several times tonight (strangely, after I left and texted him about the deposit, he claimed not to recognise my number - yet now he knows it?). I haven't answered because I wonder is it legal for him to be ringing me if the PRTB are in the basis of organising a hearing?

In Ireland, if there is a written lease contract, this usually conforms to the legal requirements of a rent book. Where there is no written contract, the landlord is required to provide a Rent book, which also gives details of the the property, the landlords address/contact and details of the tenant.

I would suggest that you cantact Threshold who may even provide a representative to attend the PRTB hearing with you.

athtrasna

thesiren wrote: »

I thought I did mention that: I signed a lease for one year. When it came to a year since having lived there, he said that he was happy for me to rent on a month by month basis and that if I wanted to move out at anytime I could, just to give him a month's notice and I would get the deposit etc.

I am aware that this was a verbal arrangment. HOWEVER I gave written notice of one month as he had asked. I have kept my copy of that, which had the date on it and full details and also outlined that we had agreed it would be a month by month basis after the first year was up.

There is a problem with this. If you didn't sign a new lease your tenancy continued as a Part IV tenancy. The notice periods you are required to give, by law, depend on how long you've lived at the property.

Less than 6 months - 4 weeks (28 days)
6 months to 1 year - 5 weeks (35 days)
1 – 2 years - 6 weeks (42 days)
2 or more years - 8 weeks (56 days)

The landlord may now claim that you gave inadequate notice (you only gave a month) and therefore can justify retaining at least some of the deposit.

Rasmus

thesiren wrote: »

I thought I did mention that: I signed a lease for one year. When it came to a year since having lived there, he said that he was happy for me to rent on a month by month basis and that if I wanted to move out at anytime I could, just to give him a month's notice and I would get the deposit etc.

I am aware that this was a verbal arrangment. HOWEVER I gave written notice of one month as he had asked. I have kept my copy of that, which had the date on it and full details and also outlined that we had agreed it would be a month by month basis after the first year was up.

The year lease is not what you need to give notice on, it is the length of time you resided in the apartment. If you have proof that the LL agreed that your month to month agreement included only 28 days notice, signed by both of you, then good. Otherwise you went into part IV tenancy and the notice periods apply. It is just something to think about as the LL could bring this up as a reason why he is withholding.

Also, if the LL is ringing to offer you a settlement, I'd take it. It is not worth the hassle of PRTB if you can get some of your money back now.

miller50841

Hi I had my deposit retained and left for health reasons as the property was not fit to live in.

I got a lot of very helpful advice off Threshold and sent a letter which they will give as a sample letter(just change date & name) to the ex landlord. I later on recieved nearly half the deposit but their excuse for keeping the rest was because they had supplied us with a new bed as the one they brought down to us was very badly worn and stained and had bed bugs.

I put in for adjudication through the PRTB and my case was seen a few weeks ago after 6-8 months waiting.
I can tell you they are very thorough and listen to both sides and look for as much info/ evidence as possible.

I took a lot of pics and had all documents/receipts but my laptop crashed and main computer fried so lost every pic I had.

In the end I recieved a letter recently stating that I am due my full deposit back as it was illegal for the ex landlord to retain it and for not keeping the property maintained to the correct standards they have to pay me a full months rent as compensation to me so I am delighted and glad I fought for my rights and sure as hell didn't want the rich and I mean super rich ex landlord to get away with it.

Also I did break the lease but the landlord broke there legal end so we left and never returned the keys ha ha.

Best of luck op.

JoeB-

Rasmus wrote: »

The year lease is not what you need to give notice on, it is the length of time you resided in the apartment. If you have proof that the LL agreed that your month to month agreement included only 28 days notice, signed by both of you, then good. Otherwise you went into part IV tenancy and the notice periods apply. It is just something to think about as the LL could bring this up as a reason why he is withholding.

Also, if the LL is ringing to offer you a settlement, I'd take it. It is not worth the hassle of PRTB if you can get some of your money back now.

The bit in bold is slightly incorrect. A shorter notice period can only be agreed when the notice of termination is issued, .. it cannot be agreed in advance.

See Section 69-2
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0027/sec0069.html

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0027/sec0069.html wrote:

69.—(1) Subject to subsection (2), the landlord or tenant may agree to a lesser period of notice being given than that required by a preceding provision of this Chapter and such lesser period of notice may be given accordingly.


(2) Such an agreement to a lesser period of notice being given may only be entered into at, or after, the time it is indicated to the tenant or landlord (as appropriate) by the other party that he or she intends to terminate the tenancy.


(3) For the avoidance of doubt, a term of a lease or tenancy agreement cannot constitute such an agreement.