Tenancy Situation

CATSEYES8787

Hi,

I have been sharing a house for the past three and a half years, and live there with five housemates, including the lease holder, who has been renting the house for the same amount of time. There has never been issues in the house, in terms of damage or rent payments.

The lease holder follows a strict way of life, based upon his own ethical values and has recently begun to demand others to follow his ways (i.e diet, spirituality, environmental ideas etc), or the tenancy will be terminated.

Pretty extreme and would tick the "bullying" box to me.

None of the housemates (including myself) has a tenancy contract, or any form of written agreement. As I stated above, I have been renting a room for a few years, so have my other housemates (their tenancies vary from 6 months to one and a half year). So the question is: what kind of rights do we have to protect ourselves from being asked to leave?

Thanks for any advice

Ste.phen

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

. So the question is: what kind of rights do we have to protect ourselves from being asked to leave?

Thanks for any advice

It's a little ambiguous about whether you're actually technically a tenant of the property owner, or are a licensee of the person you're saying is the 'lease holder' - in neither case will it be easy to resolve the situation, but at least if you're all renting from the same landlord the landlord may be able to intervene

If it turns our to be the latter, you've basically no rights and are probably best to start looking for a new place to live if you don't think they're going to back down or become more reasonable:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/sharing_accommodation_with_your_landlord.html

djimi

Define lease holder. Does he own the house or does he also rent. Do you pay rent to him or to a landlord.

Have you all tried sitting this guy down and telling him to back off and respect your right to live your life as you see fit, not how he thinks you should live?

CATSEYES8787

I know, I thought as long term tenants, this would give us some kind of rights..
I might sound "ignorant" there (well, never came across that sort of crazy situation before) but what does a tenancy contract look like? Any templates out there or could other "boarders" sharing houses indicate what's on the actual contract?

CATSEYES8787

Hi Djimi, yes we have, numerous times. A wall would be more understanding..
The house contract is on his name, and he also lives in the house. The rent is paid to him, then he lodges it onto the landlord's account

CATSEYES8787

He doesn't own the house

Mrs OBumble

You have no rights ... but neither are you obliged to give any amount of notice.

Happy flat-hunting.

fasttalkerchat

Find somewhere else and stop paying rent when you have found somewhere. Don't expect to get deposit back since there is no contract and PTRB won't even know you're there.

Pawwed Rig

Move somewhere else with the other tenants leaving the guy with 3-4 empty rooms at once.

If you have a receipt/proof that you paid a deposit you can't go through the PRTB but can probably apply through small claims or the district court.

CATSEYES8787

"If you have a receipt/proof that you paid a deposit you can't go through the PRTB"
Could you explain it? If I don't have a deposit proof, I CAN go through PRTB? What kind of help would they provide in this instance?

Pawwed Rig

Sorry I wasn't very clear in my previous post.

As a licencee (if that is what you are) you are not covered under the PRT Act so cannot use the PRTB to resolve the issue as they have no jurisdiction. You need to use the traditional channels which is either the small claims or the higher court (district or circuit?).
If you have proof of the deposit it would be more helpful than your word against theirs.

CATSEYES8787

We are not licencees but tenants; the lease was signed by this guy (one of the tenants) three and a half years ago, but wasn’t formally renewed every year (aka he didn’t sign a new lease).
As we do not have a written proof of tenancy, what could we expect from the small claims/higher court?

The_Morrigan

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

We are not licencees but tenants; the lease was signed by this guy (one of the tenants) three and a half years ago, but wasn’t formally renewed every year (aka he didn’t sign a new lease).
As we do not have a written proof of tenancy, what could we expect from the small claims/higher court?

If only one person has signed the lease and you give them the rent, then you are subletting and not a tenant of the landlord.

CATSEYES8787

Ok, thanks for clarifying :-) Does this mean we have no rights as such?

awec

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

Ok, thanks for clarifying :-) Does this mean we have no rights as such?

Yes, see Mrs OBumble's post above

The_Morrigan

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

Ok, thanks for clarifying :-) Does this mean we have no rights as such?

Pretty much.

As Paww said you are a licencee and the tenant you sublet from has no obligations towards you and vice versa. You can up and leave tomorrow if you wish and still be entitled to your deposit as the RTA does not apply to you.

xper

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

We are not licencees but tenants; the lease was signed by this guy (one of the tenants) three and a half years ago, but wasn’t formally renewed every year (aka he didn’t sign a new lease).
As we do not have a written proof of tenancy, what could we expect from the small claims/higher court?

No, going by the situation you have described fairly clearly in previous posts, you are licencees and not tenants as recognised by the Residential Tenancies Act 2004. It doesn't matter if you or the lease-holder has been using the word 'tenant' or how long you have been there. Even if you have a signed document that has the words "lease" or "tenant" in it, that does not necessarily make it a lease and it does not necessarily make your occupancy a tenancy. The nature of the arrangements described by the document is actually what makes it a tenancy or not.

A tenancy implies that the parties to the tenancy have full and sole use of a self-contained residential unit. You do not. You have exclusive use of one room and shared use of some other rooms with others including your 'landlord', the property's lease-holder.

You have feck all rights. It sucks but there it is. The only upside is, as said, you can leave as soon as you find somewhere else.

[Edit: Must type faster!]

runawaybishop

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

Ok, thanks for clarifying :-) Does this mean we have no rights as such?

Yes, but on the flip side you can walk out the door right now if you choose.

Muahahaha

OP if you and the other 3 tenants are in agreement you could try to get in contact with the landlord and explain the situation in an attempt to outmanoeuvre the leaseholder. He may hold the lease but it is unlikely he can afford to pay the rent on the entire house on his own and if the landlord was to know about a potential shortfall in rent he would be more likely to side with four people than one. Obviously the legalities of the lease are another matter but although you do not have any rights here collectively you do have some power. The leaseholder sounds like they're being a bit of a dictator so if they are forcing your hand to move out then you can make life equally difficult for them.

Just out of interest what kind of rules is this guy trying to lay down- is he banning the cooking of meat or something ?

CATSEYES8787

Muahahaha wrote: »

OP if you and the other 3 tenants are in agreement you could try to get in contact with the landlord and explain the situation in an attempt to outmanoeuvre the leaseholder. He may hold the lease but it is unlikely he can afford to pay the rent on the entire house on his own and if the landlord was to know about a potential shortfall in rent he would be more likely to side with four people than one. Obviously the legalities of the lease are another matter but although you do not have any rights here collectively you do have some power. The leaseholder sounds like they're being a bit of a dictator so if they are forcing your hand to move out then you can make life equally difficult for them.

Just out of interest what kind of rules is this guy trying to lay down- is he banning the cooking of meat or something ?

Hi
We are trying to get in touch with the landlord's agent in an attempt to renew the lease with our names on it. Indeed, the lease runs until June of each year,but because we've been here so long, it wasn't formally renewed after the first year. This could give us an edge.
This guy is a vegan and his life moto is to get rid of modern society "toxicity"/materialism (quick example: a few months ago he switched off house wifi because of the radiations it emits).
Nothing wrong with the idea, yet he expects people to be on the same path as him and refuses to live with people who do not connect with his ethical values.
I totally agree, he is setting up an autocracy in people's HOME, being intolerant towards people's life choices (some of us drink/smoke, and the guy cannot stand seeing addictions in people. I guess the line between addiction and simple pleasure is blurred for him) and forcing changes upon them in the name of his ideals,which are based on eloquent speakers' speeches listened to on YouTube (I.e Gary Yourofsky about animal rights).
Propagandesque autocracy

Pawwed Rig

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

Hi
We are trying to get in touch with the landlord's agent in an attempt to renew the lease with our names on it. Indeed, the lease runs until June of each year,but because we've been here so long, it wasn't formally renewed after the first year. This could give us an edge.

It doesn't give you an edge as the terms of the original lease are still in force. The leaseholder has part 4 rights at this point so legally speaking there are only a couple of ways the LL can get rid of them. None of these ways allows you to remain in the property.

It is clear from your posts that you are not compatible as house mates so unless you can convince the leaseholder to move out voluntarily there is only one solution here which is you looking for a new property.

djimi

If the contract wasnt formally renewed then you have no contract in place; just give your notice and leave. You can spend your time fighting this but honestly, whats the point? This isnt a part 4 tenancy (as far as I can see anyway), so find somewhere else to live and get away from this guy as quickly as you can. Life is too short etc to be fighting these battles.

djimi

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

I totally agree, he is setting up an autocracy in people's HOME

The problem you face here is that by the letter of the law he is your landlord and you are living in his home. Its no different than if you were living in the home of an owner occupier; they set the rules and its up to you as a lodger to either accept them or move on and find somewhere else to live.

Muahahaha

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

Hi
We are trying to get in touch with the landlord's agent in an attempt to renew the lease with our names on it. Indeed, the lease runs until June of each year,but because we've been here so long, it wasn't formally renewed after the first year. This could give us an edge.
This guy is a vegan and his life moto is to get rid of modern society "toxicity"/materialism (quick example: a few months ago he switched off house wifi because of the radiations it emits).
Nothing wrong with the idea, yet he expects people to be on the same path as him and refuses to live with people who do not connect with his ethical values.
I totally agree, he is setting up an autocracy in people's HOME, being intolerant towards people's life choices (some of us drink/smoke, and the guy cannot stand seeing addictions in people. I guess the line between addiction and simple pleasure is blurred for him) and forcing changes upon them in the name of his ideals,which are based on eloquent speakers' speeches listened to on YouTube (I.e Gary Yourofsky about animal rights).
Propagandesque autocracy

Wow, nothing worse that someone trying to tell you how to live your life. But as another poster pointed out he does have the right to lay down the rules in this situation so it seems to me like moving out is the best solution overall. Probably the best thing you can do is get the other three people together and see if you can find a four bed house together somewhere. Don't tell him your plan and then as soon as you have a lease signed and keys in hand then all four of you hand him a days notice to move out and leave him high and dry. Perhaps that will make him think about his actions and let him see how difficult it is to find decent tenants when he insists on switching the wifi off and dictating how they live their lives. It sounds to me like the guy would be better suited to living on a hippy commune in the back of beyonds if he wants to live with like minded people, either that or move in with the Hare Krishnas.
It's all a pain in the arse for you but better than than living under a constant bad atmosphere and walking on eggshells all the time.

cormie

Wouldn't they lose the deposit pulling a move like that?

Muahahaha

cormie wrote: »

Wouldn't they lose the deposit pulling a move like that?

I might be wrong but I think as the leaseholder is subletting to them they are not deemed to be tenants in the legal sense, instead they are licensees.. The leaseholder can evict them at a moments notice and conversely they can also leave at a moments notice, their deposit is still due back. I'm open to correction on this by those more knowledgable than me but as far as I'm aware that's the way it stands.

CATSEYES8787

Muahahaha wrote: »

if he wants to live with like minded people, either that or move in with the Hare Krishnas.

Funny you're mentioning this place, he has been there a few times and I think he's going to do a silent retreat there over Christmas..

As it turns out, after speaking to Treshold and Citizen Info, we are entitled to a written notice, detailing the reasons of the tenancy termination. If the reasons are as ludicrous as explained in the first post, I guess we could challenge it.

But most important, one of the other guys (living with us since June 2013) had asked the lease holder to sign a tenancy agreement as he needed to provide a proof of address. So as it turns out, we do have a piece of document stating that one of us is renting a room in the house. I haven't seen the document yet, but I would guess it contains terms and conditions of tenancy (and would not include the unreasonable requirements stated above - i.e veganism, no smoking/drinking etc)

Any thoughts?

p.s: I understand certain comments about people clearly not being compatible housemates. To be honnest, as soon as the opportunity arises, I would move out get a place for myself. But I CANNOT stand injustice and bullies, which is clearly what is going on here.

djimi

Were Threshold/CI made aware of the fact that you are subletting and are a licensee, not a tenant? Saying you are entitled to written notice is all well and good, but there are no channels to challenge it through; the PRTB does not apply to you.

The_Morrigan

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

Funny you're mentioning this place, he has been there a few times and I think he's going to do a silent retreat there over Christmas..

As it turns out, after speaking to Treshold and Citizen Info, we are entitled to a written notice, detailing the reasons of the tenancy termination. If the reasons are as ludicrous as explained in the first post, I guess we could challenge it.

But most important, one of the other guys (living with us since June 2013) had asked the lease holder to sign a tenancy agreement as he needed to provide a proof of address. So as it turns out, we do have a piece of document stating that one of us is renting a room in the house. I haven't seen the document yet, but I would guess it contains terms and conditions of tenancy (and would not include the unreasonable requirements stated above - i.e veganism, no smoking/drinking etc)

Any thoughts?

p.s: I understand certain comments about people clearly not being compatible housemates. To be honnest, as soon as the opportunity arises, I would move out get a place for myself. But I CANNOT stand injustice and bullies, which is clearly what is going on here.

You are not tenants so you're not really entitled to anything. Even the person who has an agreement may only have a license agreement.
Also just to note, the main leaseholder may also have a clause in his lease not allowing subletting in which case that mini agreement may be voidable.

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

Were Threshold/CI made aware of the fact that you are subletting and are a licensee, not a tenant? Saying you are entitled to written notice is all well and good, but there are no channels to challenge it through; the PRTB does not apply to you.

yeah its amazing how people leave out or don't clafiy things and then say threshold said x or y.

The fact is as Djimi has pointed out your not entitled to challenge it via the PRTB you have feck all rights and whats more even if you did why you would want to challenge them to stay somewhere living with somebody who clearly is a spacer.

go onto daft find somewhere new and move out and be rid of this freak

odds_on

Muahahaha wrote: »

I might be wrong but I think as the leaseholder is subletting to them they are not deemed to be tenants in the legal sense, instead they are licensees.. The leaseholder can evict them at a moments notice and conversely they can also leave at a moments notice, their deposit is still due back. I'm open to correction on this by those more knowledgable than me but as far as I'm aware that's the way it stands.

The lease holder is not sub-letting he is renting rooms to licensees.

A tenant has exclusive use of a property.
A licensee has no exclusive use of any part of the property (not even their bedroom)

The landlord of a tenant has no right of entry into the property (except in emergencies) without the express permission of the tenant.
The landlord of a licensee has a right to enter any part of his property and may come and go as he pleases (though usually, a licensee's bedroom is considered as exclusive use)

Thus, there can never be a tenancy agreement and a licensee agreement in the same property with the same landlord.

sharpsuit

OP it is correct to say that you are a licensee of the tenant, but you also have rights under the Residential Tenancies Act. You have the right to request the landlord to be recognised as tenants and the landlord must not unreasonably refuse this request.

Should the landlord refuse your request, you have the right under the Residential Tenancies Act to refer a dispute to the Private Residential Tenancies Board for the PRTB to adjudicate on whether the reasons given by the landlord are reasonable or not (see section 50(7) of the Act of 2004).

Other than that, you have the rights afforded to you by whatever oral or written contract you have with tenant. He maybe breaching those terms by bringing in new rules.

You should ask the landlord that you be recognised as tenants and refer the matter to the PRTB as necessary. This will leave you in a stronger position vis-a-vis the tenant.

Mrs OBumble

CATSEYES8787 wrote: »

p.s: I understand certain comments about people clearly not being compatible housemates. To be honnest, as soon as the opportunity arises, I would move out get a place for myself. But I CANNOT stand injustice and bullies, which is clearly what is going on here.

OP, there are several ways of looking at this your last comment.

The rest of you could be seen as bullying the lease-holder into sharing his home with people with people who have incompatible beliefs and practices.

He's been the one to man up and be responsible for making sure that the rent is paid every month - it's his name that's on the signed document with the owner, so it's him who will be chased if the rent isn't paid, not the rest of ye.

You sound very passive aggressive: "as soon as the opportunity arises I would move" vs "I am actively looking for a place every day"

Stop waiting for someone else to fix the problem for you, get busy and take responsibility for finding yourself a more appropriate place to live, where you have the legal protections that you seem to want.

to99

Sorry to hear about that.

Reminds me of this http://www.daft.ie/searchsharing.daft?id=741585

Expected to embrace meditation, tantric something or other (see projector screen) and give over the living room to these sessions (allegedly).

djimi

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

The rest of you could be seen as bullying the lease-holder into sharing his home with people with people who have incompatible beliefs and practices.

In this case I dont think this applies tbh. The tenant/"landlord" advertised looking for room mates. Im assuming he didnt advertise his wacky beliefs initially or he would have gotten no responses. Then he tries to impose these living conditions on those in the property. Whatever way you look at it, he is acting entirely unreasonably.

He is, however, the leaseholder and if the OP doesnt like it then they have to leave.