Does a tenant have the right to let a friend stay over?

starling

Hey I'd really appreciate some advice here.
My cousin is renting a flat; I live at home cause I'm disabled. My cousin went away for the weekend, and offered to let me "housesit" ie just stay in her flat for three nights while she's gone.
Her next-door neighbour is the landlord's son, and i met him, and introduced myself.
He threw a mickey fit and said I had no right to be there, that my cousin legally had to ask his permission if she wanted to let a guest stay in her flat, and told me to feck off.
I told him she was allowed to have guests if she wanted to, but that sent him off again so I just walked away.
So I'm in the flat right now and this weirdo has been knocking on the door for five minutes. Obviously I'm ignoring him as he seems to be a bit aggressive. If it was just me I'd tell him what he could do with himself, but since he's obviously going to cause trouble for my cousin, I don't dare make it any worse by interacting with this guy.
He shoved a piece of paper under the door and said "Have a read of that and tell your cousin to come and see me when she gets back. It's the residential tenancies act of 2004."
So I have a look at it and he's underlined the following - in red, if you don't mind: "[the tenant is obliged] not to assign or sublet, part with possession of the property, or let or allow any other person live at the property without the landlord's written consent."

Now to me, there's a difference between "staying in the property for a couple of nights" and "living" there, but this is obviously how he's interpreted it, and he appears to be absolutely set on that.

So I have two questions.
1. Am i right, or is he?
2. If I'm right, how do i convince him of this, because I don't want my cousin to have to deal with hassle just for doing me a favour. He seems like the kind of person who could be really unbearable if he takes against you, and while that doesn't bother me, it would upset her a lot. Not to mention that if a landlord takes against you it's very easy for him to find some BS excuse to kick you out.:(

Thanks for any help you guys can give me!

Doom

He is the son of the landlord...not the landlord. Report him to the gardai and and get the tenant onto the PTRB for harassment. You are a guest of the tenant. You are not sub letting or moving in.
BTW keep the note, it will be very handy to use against him, let him know that too.

Cedrus

He sounds like a right nutter, of course you are right. I was once offered a tenancy where I would have had to sign away any rights, I declined. There is nothing in the residential tenancies act to restrict visitors, subletting or cramming an extended family into a too small property is covered.
If he doesn't stop banging on the door call the gaurds. Unless the landlord is more reasonable that the son, your cousin is probably going to suffer from this but that can't be helped.

crucamim

Doom wrote: »

He is the son of the landlord...not the landlord. Report him to the gardai and and get the tenant onto the PTRB for harassment. You are a guest of the tenant. You are not sub letting or moving in.
BTW keep the note, it will be very handy to use against him, let him know that too.

I would report him to the police for assault and for threatening conduct.

starling

Thank you all for replying so quickly. You've really helped put my mind at ease because the longer i sit here (not playing the radio or DVD in case the nutter starts going on about noise) the more it's starting to bother me.

Doom wrote: »

He is the son of the landlord...not the landlord. Report him to the gardai and and get the tenant onto the PTRB for harassment. You are a guest of the tenant. You are not sub letting or moving in.
BTW keep the note, it will be very handy to use against him, let him know that too.

Apparently he "works" as his father's agent (because he got fired from his IT job some time ago) and the only reason he got the flat he's in now is because he caught the previous tenant subletting and had him kicked out. (No way to know if the tenant actually was subletting, I guess)

I'll definitely keep his "note" but unfortunately there's nothing on it except his underlining - all his aggression has been verbal and I can't prove anything.

Apparently he hasn't been giving my cousin any trouble before this, she seems to think he's alright (she's a bit younger than me and God bless her a bit naive. Well, not naive maybe, but she tends to see the best in people, whereas i can spot a nutcase from fifty paces). That might change now, of course.

I'm a bit cautious about ringing the guards straight away; he hasn't done anything since he pushed the printout under the door. I dunno maybe it's just me but I'm afraid they'll think i'm overreacting or wasting their time. It's not like he can actually get in here if i don't open the door. I've never really had to call the guards before and i don't know how they look at this kind of thing.

I am wondering though if maybe I should write him a (scrupulously polite) note, tomorrow, to say that I have consulted the PRTB and that we're not doing anything wrong, and that if he tries to initiate contact with me in any way while i'm here, i will call the guards. Otherwise it's a case of just trying to avoid him, which might be tricky because he doesn't go out to work and can basically sit there listening for the noise of the door opening.

longhalloween

Ignore the fool.

If you want you could answer the door, but warn him you'll call the guards if he takes a step inside.

gaius c

starling wrote: »

Thank you all for replying so quickly. You've really helped put my mind at ease because the longer i sit here (not playing the radio or DVD in case the nutter starts going on about noise) the more it's starting to bother me.



Apparently he "works" as his father's agent (because he got fired from his IT job some time ago) and the only reason he got the flat he's in now is because he caught the previous tenant subletting and had him kicked out. (No way to know if the tenant actually was subletting, I guess)

I'll definitely keep his "note" but unfortunately there's nothing on it except his underlining - all his aggression has been verbal and I can't prove anything.

Apparently he hasn't been giving my cousin any trouble before this, she seems to think he's alright (she's a bit younger than me and God bless her a bit naive. Well, not naive maybe, but she tends to see the best in people, whereas i can spot a nutcase from fifty paces). That might change now, of course.

I'm a bit cautious about ringing the guards straight away; he hasn't done anything since he pushed the printout under the door. I dunno maybe it's just me but I'm afraid they'll think i'm overreacting or wasting their time. It's not like he can actually get in here if i don't open the door. I've never really had to call the guards before and i don't know how they look at this kind of thing.

I am wondering though if maybe I should write him a (scrupulously polite) note, tomorrow, to say that I have consulted the PRTB and that we're not doing anything wrong, and that if he tries to initiate contact with me in any way while i'm here, i will call the guards. Otherwise it's a case of just trying to avoid him, which might be tricky because he doesn't go out to work and can basically sit there listening for the noise of the door opening.

Absolutely not. It sounds like he's semi-calmed down now and you shouldn't do anything to provoke him. It's your cousin's issue to deal with and you should try to stay out of it as much as you can.

Phoebas

gaius c wrote: »

It's your cousin's issue to deal with and you should try to stay out of it as much as you can.

^^ This.

If he approaches you again, tell him to take it up with her - she has the tenancy agreement, not you.

starling

Yeah - you guys are right, i'll just avoid him and explain it to her when she gets back. He is definitely the type to get easily provoked, if he says anything to me I'll just tell him to stay away from me.
Thanks again for your help

fasttalkerchat

I would inform the guards now anyway. If anything else happens tonight you want them to have some background on him.
Let your cousin deal with what happens after you go.

starling

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I would inform the guards now anyway. If anything else happens tonight you want them to have some background on him.
Let your cousin deal with what happens after you go.

I took your advice and rang the rathmines gardai, and the beangarda I talked to was really understanding. Rather than treating me as though I was overreacting, she actually seemed to think I was underreacting! Of course she's only got my story to go on, so being a Garda and seeing this kind of thing all the time she probably overestimates the potential for violence.
She wanted to send someone right over to have "a little chat" - her argument was "It's not really a great idea to wait for something to happen if we can prevent it," but I said I really got the feeling that having a Garda knock on his door might only provoke him, and to be fair, he hadn't actually done anything illegal; I explained i just wanted them to know a bit about the situation just in case.
Obviously I can't know for sure but I think he thinks he's made his point and has no need to bother me. But personally I feel better knowing that they're aware of the situation, so thanks for encouraging me to call them.
I was actually surprised to find myself getting tearful on the phone - I really am quite level-headed and if anything i tend to under-react, not overreact, I swear I'm not the "hysterical" type:o

I am a bit of a worrier though and i feel bad about "causing" trouble for my cousin, even though logically I know it's not my fault or hers that she's got a fool next door.

dh0011

sounds like you handled it well op

starling

We handled it well - without your guys' advice i probably would have caused an international incident;)
I have limited internet access and a dead laptop, so i don't get to spend as much time here as I'd like, but I always know that in a pinch I can get helpful advice from the hive mind that is boards!

starling

Update: So that weirdo called his dad, who called my cousin and told her i had to leave!
The worst part is, that's my cousin's only holiday this year, and I know she's going to be worrying about this crap instead of enjoying it. :mad:

Richard Dower

starling wrote: »

Update: So that weirdo called his dad, who called my cousin and told her i had to leave!
The worst part is, that's my cousin's only holiday this year, and I know she's going to be worrying about this crap instead of enjoying it. :mad:

after that....i'd be banging on his door and have it out with him :mad:

djimi

I suspect what he has presented you with is a copy of your cousins lease rather than of the RTA2004, which in fairness if it does include such a clause (about not allowing another person to live at the property without the landlords consent) then your cousin really should have run it by the landlord before allowing you to stay in the property in her absence. For most people this would not be an issue as the landlord would be unlikely to find out, but in this case, given that the landlords son/agent is the next door neighbour, it was a near certainty that they would find out, and it was likely to cause an issue. A quick conversation with the landlord/son in advance would have sorted this.

Your cousin should be able to sort this issue when she returns as she was not subletting to you and you are not living there permanently.

djimi

Richard Dower wrote: »

after that....i'd be banging on his door and have it out with him :mad:

No you wouldnt; its got absolutely nothing to do with the OP. Its between the cousin and their landlord. The OP has no real right to get involved; doing so is only likely to make matters worse for the cousin.

listermint

djimi wrote: »

I suspect what he has presented you with is a copy of your cousins lease rather than of the RTA2004, which in fairness if it does include such a clause (about not allowing another person to live at the property without the landlords consent) then your cousin really should have run it by the landlord before allowing you to stay in the property in her absence. For most people this would not be an issue as the landlord would be unlikely to find out, but in this case, given that the landlords son/agent is the next door neighbour, it was a near certainty that they would find out, and it was likely to cause an issue. A quick conversation with the landlord/son in advance would have sorted this.

Your cousin should be able to sort this issue when she returns as she was not subletting to you and you are not living there permanently.

Would this sort of clause supercede official tenancy acts ?

Merch

Op
at first i read that as you were there as a guest while the person renting was staying.

The RTA 2004 says a person can have guests

The person does not need to behave the way they did, but I dont believe you would have any right to stay at the property while the tenant is not present.

I'd say you have no rights in the matter, the property has been let to another person and they are away, the landlord would have a right to be concerned about what might appear to be subletting as usually (unless its agreed by the landlord) that wouldnt be allowed, I think it might have other implications for the landlord, not to mention potential insurance issues.

Besides, they have no agreement with you?

djimi

listermint wrote: »

Would this sort of clause supercede official tenancy acts ?

I dont know what the RTA says about subletting, but its a very common clause in a lease to not allow subletting, so I doubt its superseding anything.

Just to be clear, Im not saying that the landlord/son are necessarily in the right, but I can see where the confusion has come from. As far as they can see, there is a stranger in their property, with the tenant nowhere to be seen. They dont know that money hasnt changed hands in order to allow the OP to stay there in the tenants absence. A quick two minute conversation in advance would have notified all concerned of the arrangement, and would have prevented this situation from arising.

starling

djimi wrote: »

I suspect what he has presented you with is a copy of your cousins lease rather than of the RTA2004, which in fairness if it does include such a clause (about not allowing another person to live at the property without the landlords consent) then your cousin really should have run it by the landlord before allowing you to stay in the property in her absence.

No i looked up the RTA myself and what he's printed out is a page from it. I know that a lease can contain all kinds of rules which the tenant agrees to when they sign, but the loony next door specifically said "She's required to ask for permission in writing under the Residential Tenancies Act," when he was ranting on. He never even mentioned her lease; if there were such a clause in it I feel certain he would have pointed that out. He's not making things up so much as misinterpreting "living at the property" to mean "staying there overnight."

My cousin is desperate not to have to move out and she's not going to dispute anything with the landlord. She wants to avoid conflict as much as possible so she's going to apologise and say it won't happen again and that'll be the end of it:(

djimi

starling wrote: »

He's not making things up so much as misinterpreting "living at the property" to mean "staying there overnight."

But you have to see it from their point of view; if your cousin was there then you are an overnight guest. The fact that a stranger (to the landlord) is staying in the property in the absence of the tenant looks like the tenant has sublet the property, and they have a right to be concerned about what is going on. Doesnt give them an excuse to act the way they did, but if what you say about previous tenants subletting is true then I guess you can understand why they might be wary about it happening again.

listermint

djimi wrote: »

I dont know what the RTA says about subletting, but its a very common clause in a lease to not allow subletting, so I doubt its superseding anything.

Just to be clear, Im not saying that the landlord/son are necessarily in the right, but I can see where the confusion has come from. As far as they can see, there is a stranger in their property, with the tenant nowhere to be seen. They dont know that money hasnt changed hands in order to allow the OP to stay there in the tenants absence. A quick two minute conversation in advance would have notified all concerned of the arrangement, and would have prevented this situation from arising.

You appear to think this case falls into subletting ?

"In real estate law, sublease (or, less formally, sublet) is the name given to an arrangement in which the lessee (e.g. tenant) in a lease assigns the lease to a third party, thereby making the old lessee the sublessor, and the new lessee the sublessee, or subtenant. This means they are not only leasing the property, but also subleasing it simultaneously."

Which it doesnt. So based on the fact the landlords cousin had some form of IT related employment i assume he is intelligent enough to know what 'subletting' means and that he has over reacted in this instance and is entirely wrong.

starling

djimi wrote: »

I dont know what the RTA says about subletting, but its a very common clause in a lease to not allow subletting, so I doubt its superseding anything.

Just to be clear, Im not saying that the landlord/son are necessarily in the right, but I can see where the confusion has come from. As far as they can see, there is a stranger in their property, with the tenant nowhere to be seen. They dont know that money hasnt changed hands in order to allow the OP to stay there in the tenants absence. A quick two minute conversation in advance would have notified all concerned of the arrangement, and would have prevented this situation from arising.

The RTA specifically forbids subletting, which is fair enough, and letting another person live at the property without informing the landlord that they're there.

The nutter next door doesn't dispute that I'm the tenant's cousin and has no reason to believe that money has changed hands. But judging by the conversation neither of those is the problem here. Just check out the first thing he said:

me: Hello! I'm ____. I'm _____'s cousin. She's away for a long weekend, I'm staying in her flat while she's gone. And -
weirdo: *interrupting* She didn't ask me.

His issue seems to be exactly that: she didn't ask him.

ETA: Yeah, i know this situation might have been avoided if she'd talked to him in advance, but it's too late now. Besides he sees it as asking for permission, rather than informing, and he might have just said "no" because he wants to poke through her knicker drawer while she's away.

starling

djimi wrote: »

But you have to see it from their point of view; if your cousin was there then you are an overnight guest. The fact that a stranger (to the landlord) is staying in the property in the absence of the tenant looks like the tenant has sublet the property, and they have a right to be concerned about what is going on. Doesnt give them an excuse to act the way they did, but if what you say about previous tenants subletting is true then I guess you can understand why they might be wary about it happening again.

Yeah, if what the landlord's son says about that previous tenant is true, I can understand them being wary about subletting. But if you suspect a tenant is subletting surely any sane person would investigate that - watch for at least a week, see if this strange person is getting post at the address, etc - rather than just going "OMG SUBLETTING!1!1!" every time a person they don't recognise shows up.
If I were subletting why would I introduce myself to this guy?
I was in the place ten minutes - literally - and he was banging on the door, harrassing me, and then having his dad call my cousin in Italy ffs.

starling

Richard Dower wrote: »

after that....i'd be banging on his door and have it out with him :mad:

I would love to give him a punch in the balls, but I'll have to restrain myself because any interaction with him will definitely make things even worse for my cousin. Technically she's responsible for the conduct of any guests and even if she weren't, this git would take it out on her anyway.

jmayo

starling wrote: »

...
So I have two questions.
1. Am i right, or is he?
2. If I'm right, how do i convince him of this, because I don't want my cousin to have to deal with hassle just for doing me a favour. He seems like the kind of person who could be really unbearable if he takes against you, and while that doesn't bother me, it would upset her a lot. Not to mention that if a landlord takes against you it's very easy for him to find some BS excuse to kick you out.:(

Thanks for any help you guys can give me!

The long ans the short of this is that the landlord's son is an ass***e who is on a bit of a power trip.

All he had to say, when you introduced yourself as the cousin who was staying over whilst your cousin was away, was that he wished she had let him know so that he wasn't surprised by a stranger going into the flat.

If he had an ounce of cop on he could even have dropped in a hint about how they got caught out before by someone subletting and now that he knew the situation he wouldn't be jumping to the wrong conclusion.
It would be letting you and the cousin know that they wouldn't put up with subletting, but staying over was fine.

Instead he acted the moron and if anything will make for another one of the group of Irish landlords who act unprofessionally.
I can see why he lost his job in IT if this is the way he behaves with the public or customers.

As for the current situation I think you just leave as your presence makes life difficult for your cousin who wants to continue to rent there.

Although she may need to make it damm clear that she has the right to have someone stay over if she is in the property and she doesn't need to ask his permission like some child.

djimi

listermint wrote: »

You appear to think this case falls into subletting ?

"In real estate law, sublease (or, less formally, sublet) is the name given to an arrangement in which the lessee (e.g. tenant) in a lease assigns the lease to a third party, thereby making the old lessee the sublessor, and the new lessee the sublessee, or subtenant. This means they are not only leasing the property, but also subleasing it simultaneously."

Which it doesnt. So based on the fact the landlords cousin had some form of IT related employment i assume he is intelligent enough to know what 'subletting' means and that he has over reacted in this instance and is entirely wrong.

No, Im saying that it looks to the landlord/his son that the tenant is subletting. As I said, for most people this situation would not arise as the tenant could go away and let someone use the property for the weekend, and its extremely unlikely that the landlord would ever find out, but in this case the landlord almost certainly was going to find out, so a quick two minute conversation in advance of the tenant going away could have prevented the confusion that has arisen. Its about damage limitation; the landlord might not be in the right, but thats not much consolation to the tenant who has to spend the rest of their holiday with this hanging over them.

listermint

djimi wrote: »

No, Im saying that it looks to the landlord/his son that the tenant is subletting. As I said, for most people this situation would not arise as the tenant could go away and let someone use the property for the weekend, and its extremely unlikely that the landlord would ever find out, but in this case the landlord almost certainly was going to find out, so a quick two minute conversation in advance of the tenant going away could have prevented the confusion that has arisen. Its about damage limitation; the landlord might not be in the right, but thats not much consolation to the tenant who has to spend the rest of their holiday with this hanging over them.

Im not sure how 'it looks' anything. The guy verbally spoke with this person as they were walking in. He was given the detail of what is going on but chose to act like a big 'pr**k' instead. Some people just prefer power trips tbh sounds like this lad loves lording over others.

starling

jmayo, that's pretty much my take on the situation exactly. He's an asshat, and he's basically thrown a tantrum.

I know tons of people are losing their jobs right now through no fault of their own, but I would put good money on it, if i had any, that his personality problems were a big factor in his getting the boot from work.

Unfortunately I think he's going to keep doing crap like this because my cousin hates any kind of confrontation or bad feeling and will let him away with this. She's more likely to simply never have an overnight guest ever again than to stand her ground on this issue.

I know she needs to learn to be more assertive, and it's not right for me to try to step in and "fix" this, but it annoys me anyway, because a) I hate to see a bullying asshat like this get away with taking his personal problems out on other people and b) she's kind of like a little sister to me and I feel kind of protective, I want to punch anyone who makes her sad. This fecker has ruined her only holiday and IMO deserves the crap kicked out of him. I'm not going to do or say anything, but that's how I feel.

The other problem is that because I'm disabled, it's going to be a while before I can leave. i need to wait for my pain meds to start kicking in, shower, and try to arrange some kind of a lift. The fool next door will probably spend that whole time texting his dad going "she's still there......still there.....hasn't left yet.....":(

djimi

listermint wrote: »

Im not sure how 'it looks' anything. The guy verbally spoke with this person as they were walking in. He was given the detail of what is going on but chose to act like a big 'pr**k' instead. Some people just prefer power trips tbh sounds like this lad loves lording over others.

Im not disagreeing with you; the guy sounds like a dickhead. Im simply saying that prevention is better than cure; in future, its easier to take measures to prevent this kind of mix up and situation from occurring, rather than trying to clean up the mess when it does arise.

The other problem is that because I'm disabled, it's going to be a while before I can leave. i need to wait for my pain meds to start kicking in, shower, and try to arrange some kind of a lift. The fool next door will probably spend that whole time texting his dad going "she's still there......still there.....hasn't left yet....."

Just ignore him.

jmayo

starling wrote: »

jmayo, that's pretty much my take on the situation exactly. He's an asshat, and he's basically thrown a tantrum.

I know tons of people are losing their jobs right now through no fault of their own, but I would put good money on it, if i had any, that his personality problems were a big factor in his getting the boot from work.

Unfortunately I think he's going to keep doing crap like this because my cousin hates any kind of confrontation or bad feeling and will let him away with this. She's more likely to simply never have an overnight guest ever again than to stand her ground on this issue.

I know she needs to learn to be more assertive, and it's not right for me to try to step in and "fix" this, but it annoys me anyway, because a) I hate to see a bullying asshat like this get away with taking his personal problems out on other people and b) she's kind of like a little sister to me and I feel kind of protective, I want to punch anyone who makes her sad. This fecker has ruined her only holiday and IMO deserves the crap kicked out of him. I'm not going to do or say anything, but that's how I feel.

The other problem is that because I'm disabled, it's going to be a while before I can leave. i need to wait for my pain meds to start kicking in, shower, and try to arrange some kind of a lift. The fool next door will probably spend that whole time texting his dad going "she's still there......still there.....hasn't left yet.....":(

You can't do anything as it will make matters worse for your cousin.
Also you can't touch him even if he deserves it as that is illegal.

One thing I would do is put your phone on record mode as you are leaving.
And yes we all know the legalities of recording people and it's use in a court of law, but it can be handy in a "he said she said" arguement.
Hell you can even tell him and then it is perfectly legal.

This guy could be waiting, since he doesn't appear to have a proper job, and might want to have a go.

If he challenges you, tell him you are leaving as soon as was possible in your condition, your cousin regrets not informing him, and that is it.

Of course if he starts up, you have to make judgement call whether or not you enquire as to whether his ability is God given natural ability or if he has actively studied to become such an assh***.
You could also say you are not going to argue since he will only drag it to his level and beat you with his undoubted experience.

starling

jmayo wrote: »

Of course if he starts up, you have to make judgement call whether or not you enquire as to whether his ability is God given natural ability or if he has actively studied to become such an assh***.
You could also say you are not going to argue since he will only drag it to his level and beat you with his undoubted experience.

LMAO!

I will definitely be recording as I leave, and I would have absolutely no problem telling him "I'm recording this conversation." Besides which if he attempts to initiate any kind of interaction I'll be making it clear that I don't wish to have any contact with him of any kind, that i contacted the Gardai last night and will do so again without hesitation if he so much as looks at me.
Hopefully i won't be alone either, if i can get a lift; whoever's driving me home will come and carry my bag for me as i can't carry it myself. I wouldn't have brought a bag i couldn't carry except that the original arrangement meant having a lift both ways; besides the amount i actually can carry is pretty pathetic.

Merch

starling wrote: »

ETA: Yeah, i know this situation might have been avoided if she'd talked to him in advance, but it's too late now. Besides he sees it as asking for permission, rather than informing, and he might have just said "no" because he wants to poke through her knicker drawer while she's away.

The landlord or their agent really are not being informed though, the tenant would need to ask permission, they could have legitimately said no.

Also, its a fair stretch to say they might want to look through her knickers??

starling wrote: »

I know tons of people are losing their jobs right now through no fault of their own, but I would put good money on it, if i had any, that his personality problems were a big factor in his getting the boot from work.

I know she needs to learn to be more assertive, and it's not right for me to try to step in and "fix" this, but it annoys me anyway, because a) I hate to see a bullying asshat like this get away with taking his personal problems out on other people and b) she's kind of like a little sister to me and I feel kind of protective, I want to punch anyone who makes her sad. This fecker has ruined her only holiday and IMO deserves the crap kicked out of him. I'm not going to do or say anything, but that's how I feel.

The other problem is that because I'm disabled, it's going to be a while before I can leave. i need to wait for my pain meds to start kicking in, shower, and try to arrange some kind of a lift. The fool next door will probably spend that whole time texting his dad going "she's still there......still there.....hasn't left yet.....":(

How or why he lost his job is really irrelevant it would seem.
Also even suggesting that he should have the crap beaten out of him, lets just say it was a landlord coming on saying that or anyone, they would be rightfully shut down.

I think you need to accept, even based on their previous experience that it would have been wise to bring this all up in advance, your cousin knowing them, knowing the person lives very close and of the previous subletting dropped herself in it by not bringing this up. She is as much at fault as they are,how is she even aware of a previous subletting?? unless she was specifically told about it, which passes the responsibility even more to her. The landlord might be annoyed this was brought up and then it seems ignored? I cant see how she would know otherwise?

They may not have approached it in the best way, but Id be more inclined to think if the Gardai turned up, they could justifiably have any person other than the tenant removed, especially in the absence of the tenants presence. Without any agreement they might think you just know the tenant and have agreed to allow yourself in, maybe without the tenants permission. At the very least the landlord is protecting themselves by not allowing something noticed to go unchallenged.

It seems fair that they should give you some time to organise things as you weren't expecting all this, but they could probably demand you leave or are turned out instantly and to hand any keys back to them as you have no agreement with them or permission to enter the property.

I think the blame is squarely in your cousins corner, it seems possible its a breach of the tenancy agreement also.

starling

Merch wrote: »

The landlord or their agent really are not being informed though, the tenant would need to ask permission, they could have legitimately said no.

Legally she doesn't have to ask his permission though, that was the point I was making, this guy wants her to "ask" as opposed to "inform".
And legally she doesn't have to inform him at all of a guest staying for a couple of nights. She has to inform him of anyone living at the property, which isn't applicable here. My point was just that his insistence on being asked for permission is clearly a reflection of his own personal issues.

Merch wrote: »

Also, its a fair stretch to say they might want to look through her knickers??

I'm not actually suggesting that's what he wants to do; I was just saying that even if my cousin had informed him out of courtesy that I would be staying there, his insistence on having a say in it would mean that if he felt like it, for any reason, he might have said "No you can't" because he mistakenly thinks he has the right to. Which he doesn't. I was just saying that in my opinion of his strange personality he is probably the type to say no for his own personal reasons as opposed to anything like insurance considerations or whatever.

Merch wrote: »

How or why he lost his job is really irrelevant it would seem.
Also even suggesting that he should have the crap beaten out of him, lets just say it was a landlord coming on saying that or anyone, they would be rightfully shut down.

I was just agreeing with a previous poster that his personality issues probably affected his work if that's the way he deals with "conflict." I don't know or care how he lost his job. And obviously I'm not seriously endorsing violence, for one thing I'm a woman and he's a man who outweighs me by quite a lot, for another I'm disabled so I am not likely to be actually starting any fights, and for another why would I call the guards if i were going to try to use violence? It wasn't meant to be taken literally, I was just saying I think he deserves to suffer because he's a bully and he's caused so much trouble for other people for no reason other than his own control issues.

Merch wrote: »

I think you need to accept, even based on their previous experience that it would have been wise to bring this all up in advance, your cousin knowing them, knowing the person lives very close and of the previous subletting dropped herself in it by not bringing this up. She is as much at fault as they are,how is she even aware of a previous subletting?? unless she was specifically told about it, which passes the responsibility even more to her. The landlord might be annoyed this was brought up and then it seems ignored? I cant see how she would know otherwise?

I've already agreed that it would have been wise of her to mention it in advance, even though it would be a courtesy as opposed to a legal obligation. But "she should have done xyz" doesn't actually help me rigth at this minute because that's in the past.

Merch wrote: »

They may not have approached it in the best way, but Id be more inclined to think if the Gardai turned up, they could justifiably have any person other than the tenant removed, especially in the absence of the tenants presence. Without any agreement they might think you just know the tenant and have agreed to allow yourself in, maybe without the tenants permission. At the very least the landlord is protecting themselves by not allowing something noticed to go unchallenged.
It seems fair that they should give you some time to organise things as you weren't expecting all this, but they could probably demand you leave or are turned out instantly and to hand any keys back to them as you have no agreement with them or permission to enter the property.

I insisted that the gardai not turn up in person specifically because it would just provoke the weirdo next door to some kind of retaliation, probably against my cousin.
This joker doesn't actually dispute that i'm here with my cousin's permission. He is not claiming that I'm some randomer off the street who stole the keys and decided to have a little holiday in someone else's flat. The gardai, if they turned up, would tell him to leave me alone, and that's it. Yes, legally they could escort me off the premises, if he tried to claim that I had no permission -from the tenant, not them to be in the flat; however legally they cannot force me to leave just because he doesn't want me there, because he does not have the right to arbitrarily decide what guests my cousin can have.

Merch wrote: »

I think the blame is squarely in your cousins corner, it seems possible its a breach of the tenancy agreement also.

I don't see how she's to blame for anything, and it's not a breach of her tenancy agreement. The landlord's son didn't say "That's against the terns of her lease" he said "That's against the law according to the RTA 2004." He's squarely to blame for this, but it's me and my cousin who have to suffer for it.

starling

UPDATE: So my cousin texted me this morning saying "just had call from landlord, he is really not happy with me having someone stay there, really sorry but I'm going to have to ask you to leave."
I replied "Of course I'll leave if you want but btw you do know he's wrong and you've every right to have a guest."
She said "I know I just don't want any bad vibes with him."
I said "No problem I'll go as soon as the pills start working & I have a shower & find a lift. Had to call the guards last night because yer man was being so aggressive."

She freaked out and called me, was basically livid. At one stage she said "I have to live there! Did the guards turn up there? No? Well does he know you called them?"
I said "No, I just called them because he was unbelievably aggressive, is clearly unstable, and I didn't know what he was going to do. They wanted to come and talk to him, but i said 'Please don't, i think he's had his say now and he probably won't do anything; i think having the guards show up will only make trouble, it might provoke him to make trouble for my cousin, I'm just staying in here and ignoring him, I just wanted you to be aware of the situation just in case anything happens."
So she said, clearly worried, "Wait, so they have his name and address and everything?"
"No, i still don't know his name, they have my name and the address. It's a note in their blotter of call record or whatever, it's not an official police report or anything."
"So you haven't told him about calling the guards?"
I said "No, but if he tries to start anything with me while i'm leaving, I will tell him 'I don't want any contact with you, don't talk to me, leave me alone or I'll call the guards."
"Don't tell him that. I have to live there, can you understand that? If he thinks you called the guards on him he'll make sure I get kicked out one way or another."
"This guy is a lunatic. If he comes near me i will tell him I'm going to call the guards. I'm sorry but that's about my personal interactions with him and I need to keep him away from me."
"Right, well I just hope you don't meet him," she said, and hung up.

So she's basically blaming me for the whole thing, this is the worst fight we've ever had, and it's all down to this tool and his power trip.:mad::(:confused:

djimi

Sounds to me like she knows already what this lad is like, which makes me question why she agreed to let you stay there in the first place when she probably knew that this would be his reaction.

starling

She knew he was "a bit neurotic" but didn't think he'd have a problem with this. I mean a normal person wouldn't have a problem with it. But I don't think he's ever shown her that aggressive side.

the groutch

just make sure your cousin isnt afraid to call the Gardai if the landlord or moreso his son start giving her hassle, she's still entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of the property, regardless of what potential breach of lease contract there may be (although I don't think there was one).

drumswan

Merch wrote: »

It seems fair that they should give you some time to organise things as you weren't expecting all this, but they could probably demand you leave or are turned out instantly and to hand any keys back to them as you have no agreement with them or permission to enter the property.

I think the blame is squarely in your cousins corner, it seems possible its a breach of the tenancy agreement also.

Are you mad? The OP doesnt need permission from the landlord, she has permission of the tenant to be there as a guest. Its the tenants home, she dictates who comes or goes as a guest, not the landlord...

RachWatch

Did you think about giving Threshold a quick call? They give advice to tenants. The landlord's son/agent is acting completely over the top. I'm a landlord myself and tenants are indeed entitled to "quiet enjoyment" - ok yes if I saw a stranger in my apartment and there was no sign of the tenant I'd be a bit concerned - but I'd either pick up the phone to the tenant and ask what was going on or ask (not yell at) the 'stranger'. If this situation was explained to me I'd have no problem whatsoever with a friend staying over for a few days. Especially as you explained right up front what you were doing there and why...
The main thing is - don't let get this in the way of your undouted friendship with your cousin! Don't let him do that to either of you!!

Emme

OP, the landlord's son is out of order. It's up to your cousin to contact PRTB and/or Threshold but she seems like a quiet unconfrontational sort. Perhaps that's why the landlord rented the apartment to her in the first place.

However, I don't think she should let it go. The more idiots like that are allowed to bully tenants the worse they will get. Years ago people fought and died in this country so tenants could have rights. Some tenants would go to the PRTB for a lot less. If your cousin is in a Part 4 tenancy there is very little the landlord can do.

I wonder if the little scumbag wants to get rid of your cousin so he can let the apartment to one of his mates.

She would be well advised to contact PRTB, Threshold or even the Gardai but it's up to her at the end of the day. It's a shame you were caught up in it all.

MIRMIR82

starling, just leave when you can and forget about it, its your cousins problem now, it doesnt sound like she has any b@lls at all!!!

Gatling

Wonder if the cousin needs the landlord permission if the op cousin wanted to have children

Merch

drumswan wrote: »

Are you mad? The OP doesnt need permission from the landlord, she has permission of the tenant to be there as a guest. Its the tenants home, she dictates who comes or goes as a guest, not the landlord...

Well, given the previous history the OP mentioned regarding the property
I think it would have made sense to inform the landlord. That may have prevented this, they may be up in arms as they are unaware and suddenly see or hear (if its right beside?) someone at the property when they know the Tenant is not around.

The RTA says a person can have guests and Im not going to look at it in detail to see what it says, I dont have the time.
But I suspect the meaning of that is have guests to stay when you are present, not allow people to stay when you are not present, but more so if the tenant is specifically gone on holiday/away. In that circumstance the tenant would have to give a key/s to some other person, that the landlord has not entered into an agreement to allow access the property.

Lets just say if I was renting with someone else (as I have done in the past), (I know its seems the tenant in this case rents on their own) Id be a bit suprised if a fellow tenant went on a holiday and allowed someone to stay in their absence, especially if they never told me about it and the first I know of it is bumping into them in the place.

thing is tenants and landlords have rights and obligations, they cant just do as they please. That'd be like saying its the tenants home, the tenant can start knocking walls down or redecorating
or the landlord could let themself in when the tenant isnt there, or midway through dinner.

They could easily have tested the water by informing the landlord in advance, which it's admitted did not happen. A small bit of communication can go a long way.

drumswan

Merch wrote: »

But I suspect the meaning of that is have guests to stay when you are present, not allow people to stay when you are not present

You suspect it do you? When someone rents a property it becomes their home and they are entitled to have guests, regardless to whether they are there or not, the same as any other home. End of story.

This notion that a rental agreement is like appointing your landlord as your new Mammy or Daddy that seems to go on in Ireland is amusing. It must be because actual tenancy rights are a relatively new phenomenon here.

Grandpa Hassan

drumswan wrote: »

You suspect it do you? When someone rents a property it becomes their home and they are entitled to have guests, regardless to whether they are there or not, the same as any other home. End of story.

This notion that a rental agreement is like appointing your landlord as your new Mammy or Daddy that seems to go on in Ireland is amusing. It must be because actual tenancy rights are a relatively new phenomenon here.

It depends when they change from being a guest (permitted) to living there (not permitted). In the absence of the tenant you could argue that the 'guest' is not a guest at all, but is living there

drumswan

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

It depends when they change from being a guest (permitted) to living there (not permitted). In the absence of the tenant you could argue that the 'guest' is not a guest at all, but is living there

How could you argue that? If I have my mate over and nip down to the shop for a pack of fags is he 'living there' for the twenty minutes Im out?

Grandpa Hassan

drumswan wrote: »

How could you argue that? If I have my mate over and nip down to the shop for a pack of fags is he 'living there' for the twenty minutes Im out?

No. But you go on holiday for a few days and he is.

Grolschevik

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

No. But you go on holiday for a few days and he is.

The "staying there" v "living there" distinction would probably be based not only on length of time but also what class of personal possessions were brought. Overnight bag? Staying. Television and furniture? Different kettle of fish...

drumswan

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

No. But you go on holiday for a few days and he is.

Says who? Can you show where having a guest for a few days is deemed as having someone else living there in the RTA?