Advice on getting a tenant out

enricoh

hi, i am looking for some solid info on how to get rid of a tenant thats not paying rent.
a good mate of mine is an accidental landlord - split up with the missus (who's now abroad), n couldnt afford to live in house after going on a 3 day week at work.
an estate agent got a family to move in. yer man had a good snag list to sort out on day one, but as i said to my mate at least u've someone in. i gave him a hand fencing n sorting out the garden one weekend n met the guy n he seemed decent. (i could tell an irish scumbag a mile away but he's foreign) a couple of months later n 100 would be docked from rent for a phantom plumber, next month 150 for a spark etc. no rent paid in december or this month n laughs when my friend rings looking!
my mate now is getting a local heavy to throw the guy out at the weekend which i think is a bad plan n leaves him open to getting sued. or is it ok as he has broken terms of lease?
the guy works n is not on rent allowance if this makes any odds n is in house 6-8 months, cheers

D3PO

if your friend does that he could end up getting fined 5 figures for an illegal eviction.

the process is to first send a notice of arrears giving the tenant 14 days to pay whats owed do this by registered post and registered post only and do not tell the tenants your going to do this in advance or they will most likely to refuse to sign for any post. if this isn't done the next step is to issue a 28 day notice of eviction.

hopefully the family will then move out. If they don't however your friend is going to have to get a court order to remove them.

This is unfortunately a timely process so they could remain in the property for a year plus with paying no rent if they know how to play the system.

Your friend should go the legal route, issue notice of arrears and then eviction notice if they move out great (although hes never going to recover the owed rent) if they don't move out then unfortunalty hes going to have to decide which is the best course of action for him

is the risk of a 10k plus fine down the line worth more or less that the lost rent and make a decision there as to whats in his best interests.

Penny Tration

Yes, he's leaving himself open to be sued for an illegal eviction.
He must issue a 14 day notice of arrears, if the missing money is paid in that time, the tenant is allowed stay on. If it's not, he can issue a 28 days notice of termination.

The_Morrigan

Is your friend registered with the PRTB? The tenancy needs to be registered for the landlord to lodge a complaint.

enricoh

dunno about the ptrb - he did ber certs n all that craic for estate agent so he prob is legit.
cheers d3 n green i'll pass on the registered post bit. so the guy could drag out not paying rent for a year? wow, the joys of being a landlord!
it probably would be worth turfing him out so as the rent is about 750-800 n in a sought after area. ta

Avns1s

Has he a tenancy agreement in place?

Check what it says about delivery of notices.....! I remember sending a registered letter at one stage for the same purpose as is suggested above but the tenancy agreement stated that normal post was sufficient. When it went legal, the Solr advised to send it again - by normal post, so it set me back timewise!

Banjoxed

Unfortunately the Al Capone approach is frowned on. Your mate is going to be screwed around badly and Official Ireland is just going to shrug. He will have to go legal and if he isn't PRTB registered the tenant is going to ride him cowboy style. Accidental or not, any landlord needs deep pockets, a decent agent, access to good legal advice and the ability to keep chucking money at blood sucking management companies where applicable, mortgagers and Revenue.

D3PO

Avns1s wrote: »

Has he a tenancy agreement in place?

Check what it says about delivery of notices.....! I remember sending a registered letter at one stage for the same purpose as is suggested above but the tenancy agreement stated that normal post was sufficient. When it went legal, the Solr advised to send it again - by normal post, so it set me back timewise!

what a load of nonsense. Seriously :rolleyes:

The_Morrigan

Avns1s wrote: »

Has he a tenancy agreement in place?

Check what it says about delivery of notices.....! I remember sending a registered letter at one stage for the same purpose as is suggested above but the tenancy agreement stated that normal post was sufficient. When it went legal, the Solr advised to send it again - by normal post, so it set me back timewise!

The point of registered post is to prove receipt of the letter. Of course normal post would suffice until you end up in a hearing trying to prove you followed everything to the letter of the law.
From all the legal docs I've drafted I don't think I've ever seen a stipulation relating to a type of post to be used. Usually it is written notice by fax or to a specific address which can be delivered by post or hand.

It is just an extra comfort with regards an audit trail.

Alpha Fenian

D3PO wrote: »

what a load of nonsense. Seriously :rolleyes:

Unfortunately there a few scumbag tenants out there who abuse the system which only exists to protect the population from the equal amount of scumbag landlords out there.

Avns1s

D3PO wrote: »

what a load of nonsense. Seriously :rolleyes:

I don't know why in gods name I bother posting!!

What experience or qualification have you to make that statement??

I have given a specific experience of what happened and you ridicule it. Now Seriously!!:rolleyes:

D3PO

if your solicitor told you to jump off a cliff would you ?

Firstly it would be very uncommon for a lease to specify how notifications should be delivered and there is no need for such a thing.

Secondly stating that normal post is sufficient doesn't mean registered post is insufficient and somebody telling you to send normal post where you cannot prove it was delivered over registered post whereby you can is nonsense.

suggest you find yourself a new solicitor tbh. Hope you weren't charged for that nugget of advice.

D3PO

Alpha Fenian wrote: »

Unfortunately there a few scumbag tenants out there who abuse the system which only exists to protect the population from the equal amount of scumbag landlords out there.

Im not exactly sure how your reply has any relation to my post at all.

TheDriver

Its AND, not n. Makes your post very hard to read.

Theres no such thing as an accidental landlord, you either go into business renting out your house properly or you don't and no excuses will suffice to the authorities. Maybe get some legal advice? He needs to be registered and follow the code, al capone will land him in more trouble...

Avns1s

D3PO wrote: »

if your solicitor told you to jump off a cliff would you ?

Firstly it would be very uncommon for a lease to specify how notifications should be delivered and there is no need for such a thing.

Secondly stating that normal post is sufficient doesn't mean registered post is insufficient and somebody telling you to send normal post where you cannot prove it was delivered over registered post whereby you can is nonsense.

suggest you find yourself a new solicitor tbh. Hope you weren't charged for that nugget of advice.

You clearly don't know much about tenancy agreements when you state that "it would be very uncommon for a lease to specify how notifications should be delivered and there is no need for such a thing". All such agreements do (or should) specify how notifications should be delivered.

Secondly, where exactly in my post did I state that "Registered post was insufficient"? The inference was to follow the line of the tenancy agreement. Of course, registered post could and should be used for proof of delivery and that the tenant had seen the notification.

I note that you neglected to reply to the request for your relevant expertise and qualification and until you do you might keep your comments about myself and my solicitor to yourself, if you don't mind! Particularly when you clearly have neither knowledge nor experience in these matters.

djimi

Avns1s wrote: »

You clearly don't know much about tenancy agreements when you state that "it would be very uncommon for a lease to specify how notifications should be delivered and there is no need for such a thing". All such agreements do (or should) specify how notifications should be delivered.

Secondly, where exactly in my post did I state that "Registered post was insufficient"? The inference was to follow the line of the tenancy agreement. Of course, registered post could and should be used for proof of delivery and that the tenant had seen the notification.

I note that you neglected to reply to the request for your relevant expertise and qualification and until you do you might keep your comments about myself and my solicitor to yourself, if you don't mind! Particularly when you clearly have neither knowledge nor experience in these matters.

To be fair, I agree with D3PO; I think the solicitor was wasting your time on time tbh. Id be amazed if the tenancy agreement clearly specified that all correspondance must be by way of regular, non-registed post, and as such them telling you to resend the letter via non-registered post was an unnecessary waste of your time and money.

Can you give any legal reason why you needed to send the letter via non-registered post as opposed to registered?

murphaph

djimi wrote: »

Can you give any legal reason why you needed to send the letter via non-registered post as opposed to registered?

Tenants know well not to sign for registered letters in these circumstances, so normal post is deemed sufficient. We were also advised to serve notice on an overholding commercial tenant with normal post after he refused registered letters and it was never challenged by his solicitor (it went to circuit court).

Avns1s

djimi wrote: »

To be fair, I agree with D3PO; I think the solicitor was wasting your time on time tbh. Id be amazed if the tenancy agreement clearly specified that all correspondance must be by way of regular, non-registed post, and as such them telling you to resend the letter via non-registered post was an unnecessary waste of your time and money.

Can you give any legal reason why you needed to send the letter via non-registered post as opposed to registered?

The point on this is simple - the tenancy agreement that was in place stated that notices sent by normal post were considered to have been delivered. The solicitors point was that when that was included, it was clearly better to follow the line for delivery as noted in the tenancy agreement as they may be raised in court. I agree with the solicitor and I have no understanding of how anyone can't see this point.

enricoh

ta for the info folks. about the notice of arrears letter - does he send this or the estate agent? if its him could someone post up a sample letter, sound

djimi

Avns1s wrote: »

The point on this is simple - the tenancy agreement that was in place stated that notices sent by normal post were considered to have been delivered. The solicitors point was that when that was included, it was clearly better to follow the line for delivery as noted in the tenancy agreement as they may be raised in court. I agree with the solicitor and I have no understanding of how anyone can't see this point.

Initially you said that the lease said that notices sent via normal post would be sufficient, not that it was a requirement.

Also a line in a lease stating that "notices send via normal post would be considered to be delivered" would surely not stand up if challeneged legally? If a tenant doesnt receive the notice then its not valid, so its up to the landlord to prove that they received it. With normal post there is no proof that the letter was even sent, let alone received. I dont see how sending a letter via normal post when you can prove that you sent it registered already makes it any more valid?

murphaph wrote: »

Tenants know well not to sign for registered letters in these circumstances, so normal post is deemed sufficient. We were also advised to serve notice on an overholding commercial tenant with normal post after he refused registered letters and it was never challenged by his solicitor (it went to circuit court).

Again, how would a form of post that has no traceability be more valid that a form of post that is at least partially traceable?

Im not arguing with you guys as such; I know youre only relaying the advice that you were given. I just dont see the logic.

The_Morrigan

enricoh wrote: »

ta for the info folks. about the notice of arrears letter - does he send this or the estate agent? if its him could someone post up a sample letter, sound

Your friend really needs to research his position.

I suggest going to;
*www.irishlandlord.com
*www.Prtb.ie
*www.citizensinformation.ie

Just because he is an accidental landlord does not mean he can ignore his legal obligations. He has to play by the rules to rely on the law otherwise he will find himself in a lot of trouble.

Bepolite

Seeing as there is a fruitful discussion (bickering :P) going on about getting document to tenants, would serving them not be the best way forward? I used to do document serving for a solicitors, you can then sign an affidavit that the document was handed over. Will that not suffice?

I realise this will involve a solicitor who is probably charging for me to serve the document (which I was doing for free!) and for the affidavit.

Avns1s

djimi wrote: »

Initially you said that the lease said that notices sent via normal post would be sufficient, not that it was a requirement. .

For your convenience, here's what I said

"I remember sending a registered letter at one stage for the same purpose as is suggested above but the tenancy agreement stated that normal post was sufficient. When it went legal, the Solr advised to send it again - by normal post"

For total clarity, it should be noted that the reason for the normal post being sufficient was that the Tenancy Agreement stated this. My post makes this point. It was not a general statement rather one that the OP should check the tenancy agreement - if there is one.

djimi wrote: »

Also a line in a lease stating that "notices send via normal post would be considered to be delivered" would surely not stand up if challeneged legally? If a tenant doesnt receive the notice then its not valid, so its up to the landlord to prove that they received it. With normal post there is no proof that the letter was even sent, let alone received. I dont see how sending a letter via normal post when you can prove that you sent it registered already makes it any more valid?.

You can get proof of postage.

djimi wrote: »

Again, how would a form of post that has no traceability be more valid that a form of post that is at least partially traceable?

Im not arguing with you guys as such; I know youre only relaying the advice that you were given. I just dont see the logic.

The logic is that you follow what's in the tenancy agreement to the letter as a minimum. If that states normal post, then normal post it is. There is nothing to stop you sending it registered post as well and I would personally consider it good practice to do so.

djimi

Stating that something is a "minimum" suggests to me that you can use this method, or anything above. If it had stated that the notice must be served by normal post and no other method then fair enough. However, registered post would meet the terms of the lease, as it meeting and exceeding the minimum requirement. This is the logic from your solicitor that I do not understand; its simply wasting time and money to resend the notice via a method that has no traceablility when you have already fulfilled the terms of the lease.

Avns1s

djimi wrote: »

Stating that something is a "minimum" suggests to me that you can use this method, or anything above. If it had stated that the notice must be served by normal post and no other method then fair enough. However, registered post would meet the terms of the lease, as it meeting and exceeding the minimum requirement. This is the logic from your solicitor that I do not understand; its simply wasting time and money to resend the notice via a method that has no traceablility when you have already fulfilled the terms of the lease.

I give up!! That really is just arguing, for the sake of it.

djimi

Avns1s wrote: »

I give up!! That really is just arguing, for the sake of it.

Fair enough. I'm not arguing for the sake of it; I simply don't see the logic in what you were told. Based on the terms of the lease and what you have said, I get the distinct impression that the solicitor was waiting your time and money by getting you to do something that was neither necessary or beneficial.

The_Morrigan

Ok time to get back on topic.

Thanks

Páid

How long has the tenant been there? Is there a fixed term lease in place?

If the tenant is less than six months in the place (and a Part 4 Tenancy has not been established) you can serve a Notice of Termination for any reason - http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/sample-notices-of-termination
Sample form - http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/disputes---carolyn's-docs/format-of-notice-of-termination.pdf?sfvrsn=2

This is the procedure for Notice of Termination for Rent Arrears - http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/information-on-terminating-a-tenancy-for-rent-arrears

This is an example notice - http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/disputes---carolyn's-docs/example-of-notice-of-termination-for-non-payment-of-rent.pdf?sfvrsn=2

enricoh

Páid wrote: »

How long has the tenant been there? Is there a fixed term lease in place?

If the tenant is less than six months in the place (and a Part 4 Tenancy has not been established) you can serve a Notice of Termination for any reason - http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/sample-notices-of-termination
Sample form - http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/disputes---carolyn's-docs/format-of-notice-of-termination.pdf?sfvrsn=2

This is the procedure for Notice of Termination for Rent Arrears - http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/information-on-terminating-a-tenancy-for-rent-arrears

This is an example notice - http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/disputes---carolyn's-docs/example-of-notice-of-termination-for-non-payment-of-rent.pdf?sfvrsn=2

ta, i'll report back whether it ends in tears or not!

the_syco

Avns1s wrote: »

The point on this is simple - the tenancy agreement that was in place stated that notices sent by normal post were considered to have been delivered. The solicitors point was that when that was included, it was clearly better to follow the line for delivery as noted in the tenancy agreement as they may be raised in court. I agree with the solicitor and I have no understanding of how anyone can't see this point.

The problem with saying that normal post is sufficient is that when you send the arrears letter, then the eviction letter, followed by the eviction process, you could get to the eviction notice, and the tenant could say they never received any letter, and you have no proof of otherwise. With regards to the commercial property, I'm unsure in regards to what you have to tell them and how during the eviction process.

Avns1s wrote: »

You can get proof of postage.

I'm unsure if proof that you posted it can be used as proof that the tenant received the notice.

Bepolite wrote: »

Seeing as there is a fruitful discussion (bickering :P) going on about getting document to tenants, would serving them not be the best way forward? I used to do document serving for a solicitors, you can then sign an affidavit that the document was handed over. Will that not suffice?

I realise this will involve a solicitor who is probably charging for me to serve the document (which I was doing for free!) and for the affidavit.

No and yes. The OP giving the tenant the document is not enough, but an appointed affidavit giving the notice should be sufficient.

/edit

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Ok time to get back on topic.

Thanks

Only seeing this now.

=-=

OP, start the eviction process, and demand receipts for all previous work done, or have it added to the total the tenants owe.

Páid

enricoh wrote: »

ta, i'll report back whether it ends in tears or not!

I also should have said that the landlord must give a minimum amount of notice to the tenant when terminating depending on how long the tenant has been there - http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/good-landlord-guides/good-landlord-guide-(english).pdf?sfvrsn=4

djimi

Páid wrote: »

I also should have said that the landlord must give a minimum amount of notice to the tenant when terminating depending on how long the tenant has been there - http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/good-landlord-guides/good-landlord-guide-(english).pdf?sfvrsn=4

Not when the tenancy is being terminated for non-payment of rent. In this case its 14 days notice of arrears followed by 28 notice of termination, regardless of the length of the tenancy.

H3llR4iser

enricoh wrote: »

hi, i am looking for some solid info on how to get rid of a tenant thats not paying rent.
a good mate of mine is an accidental landlord - split up with the missus (who's now abroad), n couldnt afford to live in house after going on a 3 day week at work.
an estate agent got a family to move in. yer man had a good snag list to sort out on day one, but as i said to my mate at least u've someone in. i gave him a hand fencing n sorting out the garden one weekend n met the guy n he seemed decent. (i could tell an irish scumbag a mile away but he's foreign) a couple of months later n 100 would be docked from rent for a phantom plumber, next month 150 for a spark etc. no rent paid in december or this month n laughs when my friend rings looking!
my mate now is getting a local heavy to throw the guy out at the weekend which i think is a bad plan n leaves him open to getting sued. or is it ok as he has broken terms of lease?
the guy works n is not on rent allowance if this makes any odds n is in house 6-8 months, cheers

Needless to say, the "local heavy" (which I assume is some sort of menacing scumbag/group of the same) way is indeed the stupidest possible idea.

It would be very useful to have some additional information - what are the reasons that led to the tenant not paying rent? Has the "snag list" from day one been sorted out fully, prodiving it contained reasonable requests? What happened when the "ghost" plumber bill came out? If the tenant just decided to chance their luck and not pay then well, your friend should go ahead and exercise his legal rights; If however the latter didn't perform the necessary repairs or services and failed to provide a suitable property to the tenant, it's a whole different story.

Páid

djimi wrote: »

Not when the tenancy is being terminated for non-payment of rent. In this case its 14 days notice of arrears followed by 28 notice of termination, regardless of the length of the tenancy.

I disagree. You have missed step 1 - Give the tenant Notice that they have breached their obligation to pay rent;

Where a landlord seeks to terminate a Part 4 tenancy (a tenancy of duration longer than 6 months) because the tenant has failed to pay rent, the following three-step procedure must be followed:
1. Give the tenant Notice that they have breached their obligation to pay rent;
2. Serve a 14-day Warning Notice for failure to pay rent;
3. Serve a 28-day Notice of Termination of the Tenancy.

Step 1 can be a verbal notice and the tenant has a "reasonable amount of time to remedy the arrears".

Only then can step 2 & 3 be carried out.

If the tenancy is within six months the landlord can terminate for any reason and give only 28 days notice i.e. they don't have to follow the procedure when terminating for rent arrears which would take longer.

The tenant still owes the landlord the same amount of money either way.

djimi

What are you disagreeing about? You have just re-posted what I said...

The 28 days notice within 6 months only applies where no fixed term lease is in effect, which is fairly unlikely in most cases in the first year of a tenancy (very few landlords will rent without at least 1 year fixed term these days). If it applies then fair enough, it is the quickest route to sort the issue, but after 6 months, and in the majority of cases really, the arrears procedure must be followed, which has fixed notice periods that are not related to the length of the tenancy.

Páid

What are you disagreeing about? You have just re-posted what I said...

No I haven't, you are missing step 1. Before you can serve the 14-day Warning Notice for failure to pay rent you must first notify the tenant that they are in rent arrears and allow them a reasonable time to rectify the problem. This is an informal process and the notice can be verbal. Only then can you proceed to step 2.

D3PO

Páid wrote: »

No I haven't, you are missing step 1. Before you can serve the 14-day Warning Notice for failure to pay rent you must first notify the tenant that they are in rent arrears and allow them a reasonable time to rectify the problem. This is an informal process and the notice can be verbal. Only then can you proceed to step 2.

What the hell are you talking about. Show me where in the RTA you have to give verbal notice and then reasonable time before issuing notice of arrears .....

Djimi is right.

djimi

Páid wrote: »

No I haven't, you are missing step 1. Before you can serve the 14-day Warning Notice for failure to pay rent you must first notify the tenant that they are in rent arrears and allow them a reasonable time to rectify the problem. This is an informal process and the notice can be verbal. Only then can you proceed to step 2.

Fine. Thats not what I was disagreeing with though. You seemed to be suggesting that the length of notice is tied to the length of the tenancy, and that is not the case when issuing notice for arrears.

Páid

http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/information-on-terminating-a-tenancy-for-rent-arrears

STEP ONE:
Notice of breach of obligation the landlord must notify the tenant that:
the tenant is in arrears of rent;
the tenant is allowed a reasonable time to remedy that breach of obligation;
the landlord is entitled to terminate the tenancy if the tenant fails to remedy that breach of obligation within the period specified.
This first notification does not need to be in writing. A landlord can give a tenant verbal notice of the rent arrears but must ensure that the tenant is aware that failure to pay the rent arrears within a reasonable time will result in the landlord terminating the tenancy. As a landlord may need to give evidence that this has been communicated to the tenant, it may be prudent to give this notice in writing.
A sample written version of this Notice is available below.
Within this first Notice, the landlord must give the tenant “a reasonable time” to pay the rent arrears. What is “reasonable” can vary given the circumstances of the case.

STEP TWO:
14 day warning notice for failure to pay rent, where a tenant falls into rent arrears, the landlord must serve a written notice on the tenant informing him or her of the amount of rent that is due. The landlord must then give the tenant 14 days to pay those rent arrears. A sample Notice for the 14-day Warning Notice can be found here.

STEP THREE:
28 day notice of termination, if the tenant fails to pay the rent due within 14 days of receipt of the written notice at point 2, the landlord may proceed to terminate the tenancy by serving a 28 day notice of termination. A sample Notice can be found here.

When a tenant goes into arrears you cannot just server the 14 notice without any warning. You must start with step one or the tenant would have grounds that the correct procedure was not followed.

All assuming there is no fixed term lease.

Páid

djimi wrote: »

Fine. Thats not what I was disagreeing with though. You seemed to be suggesting that the length of notice is tied to the length of the tenancy, and that is not the case when issuing notice for arrears.

Agreed. My point was that if it was within the first six months of the tenancy it would be quicker not to use the rent arrears termination procedure.

D3PO

what a pile of crap "reasonable notice" without defining it means nothing. A call to a tenant advising them you will be issuing notice of arrears covers "step 1"

Unless you can point to a PRTB tribunal finding an eviction to be illegal due to insufficient notice of step 1 being applied its nothing more than an admin step informing the tenant you are about to begin the arrears process.

Páid

I didn't write the rules and there is no need to be so hostile.

djimi

Páid wrote: »

Agreed. My point was that if it was within the first six months of the tenancy it would be quicker not to use the rent arrears termination procedure.

Assuming there is no fixed term lease. Which in the vast majority of cases there will be in the first year!

quietsailor

Páid wrote: »

Agreed. My point was that if it was within the first six months of the tenancy it would be quicker not to use the rent arrears termination procedure.

Hmmm, I have friends/friends of friends renting rooms off me at the moment (Part 4 rather than fixed term*) and 2 of them are always late with the rent.

Is it really an advantage to use this, can the PRTB see it as a way of sidestepping the procedures?

* = I rent out close to a college so there is a high demand, fixed term or not doesn't really worry me as most students want a 9 month lease

djimi

quietsailor wrote: »

Hmmm, I have friends/friends of friends renting rooms off me at the moment (Part 4 rather than fixed term*) and 2 of them are always late with the rent.

Is it really an advantage to use this, can the PRTB see it as a way of sidestepping the procedures?

* = I rent out close to a college so there is a high demand, fixed term or not doesn't really worry me as most students want a 9 month lease

Where no lease is in place, in the first six months you don't need to give a reason to terminate the tenancy, so the PRTB can have no issue. Plus constantly late rent would be seen as a perfectly valid reason to terminate in this situation.

UCDVet

Just an honest question from someone who is clueless but....

A lot of things I read about tenant/landlord obligations say things about 'X days notice' - but what determines when those days start counting?

If I'm out of town for a month and the landlord mails me a written notice that I'm being thrown out in 14 days, for example, does that start when he mails it? Or when I receive it? Or when I read it?

quietsailor

UCDVet wrote: »

Just an honest question from someone who is clueless but....

A lot of things I read about tenant/landlord obligations say things about 'X days notice' - but what determines when those days start counting?

If I'm out of town for a month and the landlord mails me a written notice that I'm being thrown out in 14 days, for example, does that start when he mails it? Or when I receive it? Or when I read it?

I would think when it enters the property your renting.

The landlord can't use the date it's written as they could write it today then hand it to you in 13 days time and you have 1 days notice.

Waiting until you've read it doesn't make sense either as you can claim you never read it so the 14 days would never start.

I'd think 14 days from the arrival of the letter at the house. From a landlords perspective I'd use tracked post, a courier or hand deliver it with either a witness or a picture with a dated paper in it which I'd then email to myself as further proof

The landlord is supposed to give you peaceful enjoyment of the property so you can't now argue to the PRTB that they should have kept calling around until you answered the door - that's harassing you - so you can't use "I wasn't here and the landlord didn't call to check" as a reason to ignore the notice.

I'm starting to see more and more instances like this where the tenancy laws are going to work against tenants, my own case - where I'm near a college and it's usually a 9 month lease with cheaper rents over summer is another example.If its a 12 month lease a tenant couldn't get a reduction in the summer as I'm breaking the law to do so.

Mr. Incognito

Your "friend" should have the tenancy registered with the PRTB and his fees up to date.

The requirements for a valid notice of termination are set down in the Residential Tenancies Act



Issuing of the Notice is in accordance with Section 6


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0027/sec0006.html#sec6

(a) by delivering it to the person;

(b) by leaving it at the address at which the person ordinarily resides or, in a case in which an address for service has been furnished, at that address;

(c) by sending it by post in a prepaid letter to the address at which the person ordinarily resides or, in a case in which an address for service has been furnished, to that address;

(d) where the notice relates to a dwelling and it appears that no person is in actual occupation of the dwelling, by affixing it in a conspicuous position on the outside of the dwelling or the property containing the dwelling.

In the courts rules and legislation prepaid post normally means ordinary post but can apply equally to registered mail. In practice I would normally carry out two services. Personal and post so that there is no doubt.

The grounds for termination are set out in S 34
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0027/sec0034.html#sec34

The Landlord has to give the tenant notice of the breach and time to correct the remedy. This is where step one is coming from in the PRTB steps.

After that it is the correct Notice of Termination steps with the periods of time as set out in the legislation/ PRTB website.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0027/sec0067.html#sec67

14 days and 28 days.

The days are counted from the receipt by the tenant of the notice. So in practice again, I would post one and the next day serve it personally. The date after posting is then counted as day one.

The MOST important item in the Notice of Termination is the form. It should state the date it takes effect from and the date it expires and that the tenant has the right to appeal the Notice of Termination to the PRTB. This is one of the most frequent reasons that Notices of Termination are held to be invalid.

There is a list of Determinations on the PRTB site which is useful if you have any specific queries.

The above is not intended as legal advice nor should it be relied upon and is for informational purposes only

Traditional

one way that might persuade them to move as a friend of mine did , was to inform them the house or apt is up for sale , and he got a for sale sign up in garden , and they packed up an left !!
you could also cancel all bills with the esb ,water rates, gas.
as sure thats would be too cruel as well .
you could get onto the Landlords Association they will be on your side , forget about the prtb as they are on the tennants side.

enricoh

i printed out this thread n it convinced him not to get the heavies in yet. is heading to the letting agents monday morning he knows one of the lads in there well. he is registered with the ptrb which is a miracle in itself.

as for the "friend" bit moderator maybe i should'a pretended it was mine - would that keep u happy? i recommended a brand of tyre in motors before n someone said i owned a tyre shop!

djimi

Traditional wrote: »

you could also cancel all bills with the esb ,water rates, gas.

Bills should be in tenants name, but even if they arent it would be illegal to cut off utilities as a means to evict a tenant.

Traditional wrote: »

you could get onto the Landlords Association they will be on your side , forget about the prtb as they are on the tennants side.

Landlords associations might be alright for giving advice etc, but ultimately they cannot bypass the PRTB, which is the only legal route to pursue tenancy issues.