Can I break the Lease?

jim7864034

I live in an apartment complex and am 10 months into my year lease. This is my second year living here. Due to certain circumstances I want to move immediately. Can someone break a lease suddenly and just leave? The landlord works through a letting agency aswell.

miller50841

Yes you can leave but do not expect to receive your deposit back.

If there were major problems with the property or the landlord was at fault then you may have had a case to termunate

jim7864034

can you get a reference if you break the lease aswell?

miller50841

Honestly? or are you actually joking seriously that is a stupid question if you want my honest opinion.

athtrasna

miller50841 wrote: »

Yes you can leave but do not expect to receive your deposit back.

If there were major problems with the property or the landlord was at fault then you may have had a case to termunate

If you have signed a lease then you are legally responsible for the rent due to the end of the lease - whether or not the landlord will try to enforce that is another matter. Unless of course there is a break clause in your lease? You also need to give notice to your landlord, your lease may state a certain period (perhaps 30 days) otherwise you would be bound by legal notice periods which for your time in the property would be 42 days.

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

jim7864034

nvm

Nino Brown

The landlord will not enforce the lease, they will keep your deposit, and if you leave on bad terms they probably won't give you a reference. But I've broken a lease before, the landlord kept the deposit, but I gave a month's notice, and left the place clean, so they gave me a good reference.

miller50841

You do have to give notice was just telling you don't expect to get your deposit back and other poster I do know they have to do it the right way LEGALLY but its Ireland and it would cost too much for the landlord to chase for 2 months rent less deposit so equals 1 months rent....

athtrasna

miller50841 wrote: »

You do have to give notice was just telling you don't expect to get your deposit back and other poster I do know they have to do it the right way LEGALLY but its Ireland and it would cost too much for the landlord to chase for 2 months rent less deposit so equals 1 months rent....

You don't know anything other than what the OP has told you so you make a whole lot of assumptions and give advice that could be costly.

• The landlord may well pursue the OP for breach of lease, you don't know their financial situation or their relationship with the tenant
• You don't know what state the property is in, the landlord may be out of pocket for more than the missing rent
• You don't know why the OP is leaving - why assume the tenant is always innocent
• Advising anyone to ignore the law is irresponsible to say the least

miller50841

athtrasna wrote: »

You don't know anything other than what the OP has told you so you make a whole lot of assumptions and give advice that could be costly.

• The landlord may well pursue the OP for breach of lease, you don't know their financial situation or their relationship with the tenant
• You don't know what state the property is in, the landlord may be out of pocket for more than the missing rent
• You don't know why the OP is leaving - why assume the tenant is always innocent
• Advising anyone to ignore the law is irresponsible to say the least

Not advising to do anything illegal just pointing out the obvious really why are you so up tight about it.

It's obvious from the posts the tenant/op doesn't really care they just want to leave.

I know for a fact that it would not be worth the while taking action as the costs would be much higher then 1 months rent lost.

Now if the property is damaged I would expect and like to see the tenant punished for such.

athtrasna

miller50841 wrote: »

Not advising to do anything illegal just pointing out the obvious really why are you so up tight about it.

It's obvious from the posts the tenant/op doesn't really care they just want to leave.

I know for a fact that it would not be worth the while taking action as the costs would be much higher then 1 months rent lost.

Now if the property is damaged I would expect and like to see the tenant punished for such.

I'm not uptight - I'm just one of those people who obeys the law and rules in general. If I sign a lease then I am agreeing to be bound by it.

And you can't "know for a fact" that action costs are more than lost rent. The LL could be a solicitor, the rent could be high - all these things we don't know.

Victor

miller50841 wrote: »

Honestly? or are you actually joking seriously that is a stupid question if you want my honest opinion.

No need to be insulting.

Moderator

The Cool

OP, did you pay a deposit and how much?
Generally the deposit would be one month's rent (I find), if that is your case why not just call the landlord, give the month's notice and tell them to use the deposit for the outstanding rent. Given that your accommodation is still in as good nick as you found it, that should be no problem really, and it's worth ending the lease on good terms in case you need a reference - you may end up wanting one a little down the line even if not now.
If you don't give the landlord the common courtesy of sorting it out with them beforehand and making sure you're both comfortable and not done out of money, then why would they do you the favour of writing you a reference?

odds_on

athtrasna wrote: »

If you have signed a lease then you are legally responsible for the rent due to the end of the lease - whether or not the landlord will try to enforce that is another matter. Unless of course there is a break clause in your lease? You also need to give notice to your landlord, your lease may state a certain period (perhaps 30 days) otherwise you would be bound by legal notice periods which for your time in the property would be 42 days.

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

A clause in a lease giving or allowing a shorter notice period than the notice periods required as set out in the RTA 2002 would not be valid.

However, at the time of the Notice of Termination (or immediately prior to such a notice or after the notice), landlord and tenant may mutually agree a shorter or longer (though there are limits) period.

ted1

jim7864034 wrote: »

can you get a reference if you break the lease aswell?

Honestly No you can't get one. The landlord won't give you a good one and would be hesitant to hi e you a bad one as that may be defamation and lead to libeous action

[Jackass]

Landlord can sue you for the shortfall in the lease. Never heard of it happening, but in this climate, you never know. Especially if (s)he can't find a new tennant. Obviously you lose your deposit also. (....and probably wont get a reference )

The_Conductor

odds_on wrote: »

A clause in a lease giving or allowing a shorter notice period than the notice periods required as set out in the RTA 2002 would not be valid.

However, at the time of the Notice of Termination (or immediately prior to such a notice or after the notice), landlord and tenant may mutually agree a shorter or longer (though there are limits) period.

A clause in the lease giving or allowing a shorter period of notice than that specified in the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act, is not necessarily invalid. Rights and obligations in a lease, are in addition to those granted in the Act- and do not detract from them. A shorter period of notice is perfectly acceptable- providing it does not detract from those rights or obligations. If a landlord chooses to grant a tenant a shorter notice period- so be it. The landlord themselves will still be bound by the statutory notice rules however- they cannot mitigate against their obligation- they can mitigate against their tenants. Its quite common to allow a tenant of long standing a 30 day notice period- despite the fact that in law they may have to give 56 (or even longer) days notice, depending on the length of their tenancy.

OP- check your lease, read through the clauses, who knows, perhaps you have an opt-out you can use.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

odds_on

smccarrick wrote: »

A clause in the lease giving or allowing a shorter period of notice than that specified in the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act, is not necessarily invalid. Rights and obligations in a lease, are in addition to those granted in the Act- and do not detract from them. A shorter period of notice is perfectly acceptable- providing it does not detract from those rights or obligations. If a landlord chooses to grant a tenant a shorter notice period- so be it. The landlord themselves will still be bound by the statutory notice rules however- they cannot mitigate against their obligation- they can mitigate against their tenants. Its quite common to allow a tenant of long standing a 30 day notice period- despite the fact that in law they may have to give 56 (or even longer) days notice, depending on the length of their tenancy.

OP- check your lease, read through the clauses, who knows, perhaps you have an opt-out you can use.

Have I misunderstood section 69 of the RTA 2004?

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 agree-
ment cannot constitute such an agreement.

djimi

I would take that to mean that a landlord cannot say issue a 30 day fixed term lease and expect the tenant to leave at the end of 30 days when they are entitled to longer, ie they cannot use the term of the lease to shorten the notice period. That is my understanding of that; I could of course be reading it wrong!

It is my understanding that clauses written into a lease can only serve to enhance the rights that are given to a tenant. So if a landlord chooses to wave the legal notice period as required to be given by a tenant should they choose to vacate the property then that would be perfectly legal, as it enhances the rights of the tenant. Again I could be wrong about that.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

I would take that to mean that a landlord cannot say issue a 30 day fixed term lease and expect the tenant to leave at the end of 30 days when they are entitled to longer, ie they cannot use the term of the lease to shorten the notice period. That is my understanding of that; I could of course be reading it wrong!

It is my understanding that clauses written into a lease can only serve to enhance the rights that are given to a tenant. So if a landlord chooses to wave the legal notice period as required to be given by a tenant should they choose to vacate the property then that would be perfectly legal, as it enhances the rights of the tenant. Again I could be wrong about that.

I see your reasoning djimi - if a fixed term was longer than 6 months (i.e. once Part 4 rights have been acquired).

Section 18 of the RTA, is about "No contracting out from terms of section 12 or 16 permitted, etc."
This clearly implies to the terms or conditions of sections 12 or 16, and not the length of the lease.

My interpretation of "term of a lease" as used in the RTA 2004 S 69 (above in my previous post was a term or condition (i.e. a clause), as above.

Therefore,a clause in a lease might say:
The tenant or landlord may give 30 days notice to terminate this agreement.

If the tenant has been in occupancy for over 1 year but less than 2 years, both landlord and tenant are required to give 42 days notice - but, S 69 (2) allows, by mutual agreement, a shorter notice period to be made which may result in say 30 days (or what ever period they decide at the that time).

My understanding was that 30 days may not be written into any agreement.

djimi

You could be right. I took term of the lease to mean the length, but if in this case term means clause then it seems that an altered notice period cannot be written into the lease. Im working off the idea that clauses can be written into the lease to enhance the rights of the tenant, but in this case the RTA seems to contradict that.