Lease about to expire, landlord set to raise rent

super_furry

Hi, myself and my girlfriend have been renting an apartment in South Dublin for the last two years with no problem on either our side or the landlord's. There have been no rent increases and the estate agent dealing with the property on behalf of the landlord has signaled that rent is likely to increase. Fair enough really given the market and understandable. Having spoken about it with my girlfriend we're willing to pay more but have a limit of 1200 which we're not going to go above, so I'm wondering what the story is if we can't come to an agreement with the landlord. Am I right in thinking that after two years, he'd still have to give us two months notice? And what would the rent be for those two months? Would it stay at the price we've been paying for the last two years or would he be within his rights to increase it for the notice period?
Thanks.

miller50841

Hi Furry you have a few options...

42 days notice has to be given by LL or you if deciding to vacate.
If you feel the rent increase is too much you can bring a case before the PRTB and pay the normal agreed rent price until a decision is made.

You do not have to sign a new lease you would be on part 4 tenancy now.

The_Conductor

Period of notice to vacate the tenancy-

Up to 2 years = 42 days
Between 2 and 3 years = 56 days

The landlord has to give you 30 days notice of an increase in the rent- the increase does not apply until the elapse of 30 days.

If he were to tell you he is increasing the rent- and you don't want to pay the increased amount-

you have three options

1. Dispute the increase with the PRTB. If you loose the increase is due from 30 days from notice of the increase- not from the date of PRTB determination.

2. Issue notice to quit- in which case you would presumably have to give either 42 or 56 days notice- 12 or 26 of which would be at the higher rental amount.

or 3. Sit down and discuss it with the landlord and come to an arrangement you can all live with.

The_Conductor

miller50841 wrote: »

If you feel the rent increase is too much you can bring a case before the PRTB and pay the normal agreed rent price until a decision is made.

If you choose to go this path- and the PRTB rule against you- the rent increase is due from 30 days from notification of the increase, not from the date of the PRTB ruling.

sunnysoutheast

The_Conductor wrote: »

The landlord has to give you 30 days notice of an increase in the rent- the increase does not apply until the elapse of 30 days.

It's at least 28 days notice, but the rest of this advice is spot on.

Also have to raise a dispute with the PRTB within 28 days.

hfallada

Don't bother with the PRTB. They are easily one of the most inefficient quango in this country. It takes months for them to them to even investigate a complaint. They are horrible value for tax payers money.

Op I would go on daft and see what other apartments similar to you are for rent for. Also check can you actually get any where. There is **** all supply at the moment. Try contact the ll direct and offer him 10% off what he wants and tell him to get rid of the estate agent. They are probably taking 15% of his rent as a letting fee. Just avoid using the PRTB. They pretty useless.

super_furry

Thanks guys. Don't think a dispute with the PRTB would do either of us any good really. I'll have a chat and hopefully come to an agreement but it's good to know that there's a bit of breathing room time wise to find somewhere else if it comes to that.

The_Conductor

super_furry wrote: »

Thanks guys. Don't think a dispute with the PRTB would do either of us any good really. I'll have a chat and hopefully come to an agreement but it's good to know that there's a bit of breathing room time wise to find somewhere else if it comes to that.

You've been a good tenant thus far- its in a landlord's interest to find a middle ground with you- than have a new tenant who might not take as good care of their property as you have done. Organise to discuss it with him- I'd suggest doing your homework first- so you know what the going rate in the area is- and if it is substantially higher than your current rent- making him an offer, cognisant of this- but without bankrupting yourself either.

Santa Cruz

Good advice to get the average in the area. However landlords/letting agents are advertising properties at rents that I know have been reduced by negotiation at time of letting. If the property is empty for a month the landlord will have lost any benefit got from a rent increase. As good tenants it's in his interest to hold on to you

D3PO

just to clarify. If the OP doesn't agree to the increase it is not the LL who has to give notice as mentioned previously. Its the OP has to give notice to quit.

The LL cannot give notice to quit due to the tenant refusing to a rent increase.

djimi

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Good advice to get the average in the area. However landlords/letting agents are advertising properties at rents that I know have been reduced by negotiation at time of letting. If the property is empty for a month the landlord will have lost any benefit got from a rent increase. As good tenants it's in his interest to hold on to you

Depends on the area. Id say in a "normal" rental market you could probably knock €50 off the asking price to get an idea of the actual rental rate. In high demand areas the asking price is the rental price. Not that it makes much odds; the average asking price for an area based on the price on Daft isnt going to be too far off the mark, certainly not enough to matter for a rent increase dispute.

Ray Palmer

The_Conductor wrote: »

You've been a good tenant thus far- its in a landlord's interest to find a middle ground with you- than have a new tenant who might not take as good care of their property as you have done. Organise to discuss it with him- I'd suggest doing your homework first- so you know what the going rate in the area is- and if it is substantially higher than your current rent- making him an offer, cognisant of this- but without bankrupting yourself either.

Not seeing how you have any indication he is a good tenant. Absence of saying he was a bad tenant gives no indication.

It is also questionable to say it is in the interests of the LL to find a middle ground. In 15 years of renting one place it has been only vacant for 2 days between lets. If I negotiated every time the rent was going up I would have made less on the property.

Once the rent is within 10% of amounts being asked for you really don't have a case for the PRTB either.

In saying that you can always ask and see how the response is.

The_Conductor

Ok Ray, lets give the Good-Tenant/Bad-Tenant thing a break (I accept I brought it up- but lets just sit on it).

If everything else is equal- its more convenient to simply stay with Tenant no.1 than it is to go completing paperwork, registering a new tenancy etc.

If the tenant makes an offer within ~10% of what the landlord is asking- I'd suggest running with it. If they go over this threshold- you are probably as well off seeking someone new- if you're happy that you'll get a responsible tenant, and its an area of reasonably high demand.

Ray Palmer

The_Conductor wrote: »

Ok Ray, lets give the Good-Tenant/Bad-Tenant thing a break (I accept I brought it up- but lets just sit on it).

If everything else is equal- its more convenient to simply stay with Tenant no.1 than it is to go completing paperwork, registering a new tenancy etc.

If the tenant makes an offer within ~10% of what the landlord is asking- I'd suggest running with it. If they go over this threshold- you are probably as well off seeking someone new- if you're happy that you'll get a responsible tenant, and its an area of reasonably high demand.

Fair enough but registering a new tenant is going to take less than an hour. If you are talking about €50 a month that is a lot of money to write off for a relatively small amount of effort.

Dealing with a tenant that resents an increase in rent can often be not worth it either.

I get people don't like paying more but from the LL view it is not as simple as saying keeping the existing tenant is always preferable when it really isn't the case. It is often overrated by people who aren't LL.

djimi

Theres always a risk in changing tenant. Any landlord with sense will weigh up whether or not its worth losing a tenant that they are happy with, who pays their rent on time and doesnt wreck the place, for the uncertainty of a new tenant for the sake of an extra grand a year. One month of pricking around from the new tenant and any benefit is gone.

Ray Palmer

djimi wrote: »

Theres always a risk in changing tenant. Any landlord with sense will weigh up whether or not its worth losing a tenant that they are happy with, who pays their rent on time and doesnt wreck the place, for the uncertainty of a new tenant for the sake of an extra grand a year. One month of pricking around from the new tenant and any benefit is gone.

Why would it take a month? I am telling you as a LL it makes little or no difference to me. What you have said about losing money doesn't happen. I am running a business I'd rather have €1k thank you very much.

There is always a risk with any tenant and actually leaving a tenant in a place without having a complete clean out can leave issues hidden. Had a tenant who was destroying window sills with plants and it wasn't until they were moved we saw the damage for example.

djimi

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Why would it take a month? I am telling you as a LL it makes little or no difference to me. What you have said about losing money doesn't happen. I am running a business I'd rather have €1k thank you very much.

There is always a risk with any tenant and actually leaving a tenant in a place without having a complete clean out can leave issues hidden. Had a tenant who was destroying window sills with plants and it wasn't until they were moved we saw the damage for example.

My point is that if you have a tenant who never has any issues paying the rent on time, and you replace them with one who never pays on time or worse still doesnt pay at all, then very quickly any benefit you get from changing for the sake of €50 a month quickly disappears.

Im not saying that you should never look for a rent increase, or never consider letting a tenant go if they wont/cant agree to it, but its a genuine question that needs to be asked, that if you have a tenant that you are happy with and is causing trouble, then is it a case of better the devil you know or is it worth risking ending up with a nightmare tenant for the sake of a few hundred quid extra, when the downside could cost you multiples of that.

Ray Palmer

djimi wrote: »

My point is that if you have a tenant who never has any issues paying the rent on time, and you replace them with one who never pays on time or worse still doesnt pay at all, then very quickly any benefit you get from changing for the sake of €50 a month quickly disappears.

Im not saying that you should never look for a rent increase, or never consider letting a tenant go if they wont/cant agree to it, but its a genuine question that needs to be asked, that if you have a tenant that you are happy with and is causing trouble, then is it a case of better the devil you know or is it worth risking ending up with a nightmare tenant for the sake of a few hundred quid extra, when the downside could cost you multiples of that.

You just have to do your homework first and you could equally get a better person. The majority of lets tend to go fine

djimi

Is it an equal chance of getting a better tenant than a worse one?

You know the risk yourself, but I know if it was me and I had a tenant that I was happy with and who never caused me any trouble then I would have to seriously weigh up how much it was worth to me to potentially rock the boat, especially when the gain is likely to be about maybe 70% of a months rent if even that.

Ray Palmer

djimi wrote: »

Is it an equal chance of getting a better tenant than a worse one?

You know the risk yourself, but I know if it was me and I had a tenant that I was happy with and who never caused me any trouble then I would have to seriously weigh up how much it was worth to me to potentially rock the boat, especially when the gain is likely to be about maybe 70% of a months rent if even that.

Have you ever been a LL? It sounds like you are telling me how it should work (in favour of the tenant) without any actual practical experience.

I do know the risks and I fully aware that the likelihood of getting a bad tenant is relatively low if you do your checks correctly. There is a risk but 1 year turns into two into 3 and you have a tenant paying much less than the going rate and not willing to pay the going rate which may easily have cost you thousands to let a tenant stay.

I have tenants with me over a decade haven't had a bad tenant for a while along with vacancy rates of days not weeks. Maybe I know more about this. I am telling you as a LL that the claim to keep a tenant on by not raising the rent means very little to me. You can't change my mind with a theory that doesn't match my reality.