Landlord not giving back deposit

take everything

Finally got a determination.
Unbelievably, despite what happened at the tribunal (where the guy couldn't answer those things I put to him above) the PRTB ruled that he only owes me 103 euro of the deposit ie there was 350 euro odd damage above wear and tear.
I've no idea what damage they are referring to tbh.
I can't believe how a guy who didn't register me and ignored the process originally can get away with this.
Something very peculiar going on here IMO.

Edit: Just looking at the breakdown of the 350 odd damage that I supposedly caused.
This is shocking to me:

-Lamp (an old lamp worth nothing): 35 euro. I specifically refuted this testifying that i never touched this lamp and asked that he provide a before and after to show I did anything to the lamp (which he could not).

-Chair (an old chair again worth nothing): 40 euro. I again specifically testified that I did nothing to this chair (and again he had no answer to this being unable to provide a before and after to show I did anything to the chair). Either way, what he was claiming this 40 euro for was a chip off the top of this old chair. What did they think I was doing, using it for firewood. Again he had no answer to this at the hearing but they see fit to allow him take 40 euro for this imaginary damage that I caused.

-Cleaning/decorating: 150 euro. Again he could not prove I did anything to his apartment in terms of showing a difference between before and after states (which I specifically referred to at the hearing). And I specifically referred to the dampness in the apartment which despite me ventilating and heating the apartment regularly was always there. He did not deny this at the hearing. Why did they ignore my testimony that he did up his apartment to a far higher standard to what it was before I moved in.
Which he again did not refute at the hearing.

-Blind: 85 euro. Again I specifically testified that I did nothing to his blind and that any mildew on the blinds was due to a damp apartment despite constant heating and ventilation (which he had no answer to). I was dead from removing this mildew. What did they think I was doing to the blind.

None of this makes sense to me. It's like my testimony was worth nothing and they believed a guy who never registered me, avoided the process until the last minute, always dealt in cash (and gave no satisfactory answers at the hearing why he never gave me receipts), lied to me that he would return the deposit minus approx. 75 euro (a figure he admitted at the hearing) but avoided multiple phone calls from me a month later, over me, someone who never had problems with landlords in the past (providing 5 glowing references attesting to this at the hearing).

I feel sick tbh. 11 mths of crap.

thehouses

Is there anything else you can do? It doesn't make sense to me.

Ken.

thehouses wrote: »

Is there anything else you can do? It doesn't make sense to me.

He can but it'll cost either €85 or €100 to appeal.

http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/appeals

An appeal against the Adjudicator’s determination can be made in accordance with section 100 of the Residential Tenancies Act. Either party to a dispute can submit an appeal.
The Appeal must be made on a PRTB Appeal form and must be submitted, along with an appeal fee of €100, within 21 days of the date of receipt of the Adjudicators report. (the Appeal fee for registered online users is €85)

take everything

Just looking over this and they seem to have just taken every figure this guy dreamt up and halved it.
So the redecorating 300/2=150.
The blinds 170/2= 85.
The paint 75/2= 37 (approx.)
Curiously they left the chair and lamp cost as 40 and 35 euro (the values he dreamt up) suggesting they believed him on this point (arguably the least believable stuff). Jesus Christ.

I would dearly love to know what informed their thinking.

As I say (and I said nearly as much at the hearing), why are they placing as much credence in this guy's testimony as mine (given the narrative I outlined- lying to me about returning the deposit, not answering repeated phone calls, not registering me with the prtb etc etc).

From what I can see, they are implying I perjured myself on at least the chair and lamp (given that they went with the full figures he claimed for). That's something I'm not happy with.

And their facile halving of his dreamt up figures stinks. It's like they took 11 months to divide by two. No thought seems to have gone into this at all.

The guy should've gone for a nice round 900 and he'd have managed to hold onto the full deposit.

Beaner1

Definitely appeal the decision.

thehouses

I would agree, €100 isn't that much to be honest. Maybe ask a solicitor for advice too.

Kristopherus

Op, have you reported him to Revenue and the L.A. yet. IMHO you should forget about appealing. That will take another 3/4 months. And there's a chance you wont win, thereby losing your appeal fee, and your deposit.

Beaner1

Kristopherus wrote: »

Op, have you reported him to Revenue and the L.A. yet. IMHO you should forget about appealing. That will take another 3/4 months. And there's a chance you wont win, thereby losing your appeal fee, and your deposit.

Small price to pay for having him flustered on the stand again. A shot to nothing really.

take everything

Really finding hard to take that I am less believed by these people than this guy who has done all this stuff.
I'm wracking my brain how they could believe him (given what he did and given how he didn't have credible answers about what he did) over me.

take everything

Just to clarify again the tribunal 2 months ago was the appeal (by him) of the original judgment back in may (which he didn't even turn up to and which was won by me).

So I dunno about whether appealing is possible. Don't really want to anyway (i'm sick of it and I think it costs 85 euro).

What I would dearly love to do is sit the chairman down and ask him straight why he thinks I damaged this guy's lamp and chair (and why he thinks the guy is entitled to 75 euro for it).
Among other things. But this specifically, to spell out his thinking to me.
And maybe also ask him if the guy raised his estimate to 900 or 1000 would he end up keeping the 450 given that they seem to just divide by two any figure he dreams up.
(Nice lesson there for any landlords reading this. Make sure you estimate damages at twice the deposit and you'll get to keep the full deposit seemingly).
I don't care about the money. I just want to know why specifically they believed this guy over me. It makes no sense.

runawaybishop

take everything wrote: »

Just to clarify again the tribunal 2 months ago was the appeal (by him) of the original judgment back in may (which he didn't even turn up to and which was won by me).

So I dunno about whether appealing is possible. Don't really want to anyway (i'm sick of it and I think it costs 85 euro).

What I would dearly love to do is sit the chairman down and ask him straight why he thinks I damaged this guy's lamp and chair (and why he thinks the guy is entitled to 75 euro for it).
Among other things. But this specifically, to spell out his thinking to me.

I don't care about the money. I just want to know why specifically they believed this guy over me. It makes no sense.

The assumption is the lamp and chair were in good condition when you moved in, you'd need to show you reported they were not somehow.

enfant terrible

take everything wrote: »

I don't care about the money. I just want to know why specifically they believed this guy over me. It makes no sense.

Just an Irish way of doing things, he was looking for a certain amount so yer man gave him half, everyone's happy so he thought.

take everything

runawaybishop wrote: »

The assumption is the lamp and chair were in good condition when you moved in, you'd need to show you reported they were not somehow.

Why would one assume the chip on the old chair wasn't there before I moved in. This would be something you would have to look closely at to notice.
You could invoke an inventory argument (which incidentally he didn't) to claim the chair and lamp were brand new and undamaged prior to moving in (which incidentally they weren't) but then he'd have to explain eg why said inventory never stated eg "Shower: leaking" (which it was when I moved in). It works both ways but seemingly only benefits him.

So any inventory argument (if invoked) is not valid. So what you're left with is my testimony (ie that I did no damage to lamp or chair) vs his testimony (that he maintains I used the chair for firewood presumably last winter).
And that's apart from the fact that a chip on an old chair could never be valued at the price he dreamt up. You would have to pay someone to take this ****ty chair from you.

And here I come back to it: why on earth would they believe a guy like this (with the stuff he did) over me.

ZeroThreat

I'm not surprised at the bias of the tribunal. You have to take into consideration that the majority of our political class are also landlords, so most state institutions will favour them over Joe Soap on any given day.

take everything

runawaybishop wrote: »

The assumption is the lamp and chair were in good condition when you moved in, you'd need to show you reported they were not somehow.

The condiion of the ****ty chair and lamp was immaterial to me. I never used them. The lamp was in a wardrobe unused for the duration of my tenancy for example.

MarkAnthony

Appeal it and mentions the words 'Judicial Review' liberally and loudly on the phone while you wait to go in :pac:

On a serious note, an appeal and a call into one of the local rags/radio stations might be in order. The situation with rentals in this country needs to be looked at; it's a farce for all involved.

Grandpa Hassan

I guess the starting point is that unless you complained in writing about the chair etc when you moved in, then they are assumed to have been in perfect condition. Tbh, in a 'your word against his' scenario, I am not sure how an impartial adjudicator could take any different an approach

When I move into a rented place I take photos of every carpet, every item of furniture. If there is not an agent that does an inventory check for me (as there normally is in London)

take everything

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I guess the starting point is that unless you complained in writing about the chair etc when you moved in, then they are assumed to have been in perfect condition. Tbh, in a 'your word against his' scenario, I am not sure how an impartial adjudicator could take any different an approach

When I move into a rented place I take photos of every carpet, every item of furniture. If there is not an agent that does an inventory check for me (as there normally is in London)

As I say perfect condition on moving in was not argued by him. And rightly so as he'd then have to explain why the inventory said "shower" and not "shower: leaking" (which it was when I moved in).

In other words there is nothing to say that the chair was perfect or imperfect, new or old, chipped or not chipped, when I moved in. He had no photos to say what it was like before I moved in (if that's what you mean by assuming it was in perfect condition).

Otherwise why would one assume it was in perfect condition.
That would be a dangerous tool for any landlord to exploit. Why not assume that everything was in perfect condition so- i'd be fleeced buying new stuff for him by the time I got out of there.

My point is if he couldn't show I caused any damage to his stuff it's his word against mine. And I don't know why they believe a guy like him.
If he really wants to assert that his place was brand new when I moved in (which it was anything but) and gouge me on that basis he'll need to back that up with photos of such newness (which he couldn't).
So my word vs him.
And they believe him.

Grandpa Hassan

take everything wrote: »

As I say perfect condition on moving in was not argued by him. And rightly so as he'd then have to explain why the inventory said "shower" and not "shower: leaking". In other words there is nothing to say that the chair was perfect or imperfect, new or old, chipped or not chipped, when I moved in. He had no photos to say what it was like before I moved in (if that's what you mean by assuming it was in perfect condition).
Otherwise why would one assume it was in perfect condition.
That would be a dangerous tool for any landlord to exploit. Why not assume that everything was in perfect condition so- i'd be fleeced buying new stuff for him by the time I got out of there.

My point is if he couldn't show I caused any damage to his stuff it's his word against mine. And I don't know why they believe a guy like him.
If he really wants to assert that his place was brand new when I moved in (which it can was anything but) and gouge me on that basis he'll need to back that up with photos of such newness (which he couldn't).
So my word vs him.
And they believe him.

Well, they don't believe him fully. They've taken it 50:50 as there is no evidence either way. I understand your frustration, but I'd be carful before appealing because I genuinely can see how an adjudicator would take a 50:50 view in your word against his. I don't think it guaranteed at all that this decision would be overturned

This is why we need independent inventory clerks in Ireland

Edit: sorry I see they believed him on the chair. I don't get that seeing as they went 50:50 on the rest

MayoAreMagic

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

Well, they don't believe him fully. They've taken it 50:50 as there is no evidence either way. I understand your frustration, but I'd be carful before appealing because I genuinely can see how an adjudicator would take a 50:50 view in your word against his. I don't think it guaranteed at all that this decision would be overturned

This is why we need independent inventory clerks in Ireland

Edit: sorry I see they believed him on the chair. I don't get that seeing as they went 50:50 on the rest

Exactly. I mean you say one thing, he says the other and neither can offer any proof of anything. They can see you felt strongly enough to bring the case, and he felt strongly enough to appeal it. That is all they have to go off really. Now I don't doubt your story, but there are plenty similar stories with horror tenants out there also, who will pull every trick in the book to get off with not paying, as they would be well aware of, so you cant simply side with the tenant every time. If you were in their position what would you do?

Beaner1

take everything wrote: »

Really finding hard to take that I am less believed by these people than this guy who has done all this stuff.
I'm wracking my brain how they could believe him (given what he did and given how he didn't have credible answers about what he did) over me.

The people adjudicating at the first stage can be useless. I've seen many tribunal results with complete reversals.

greendom

it seems to be a charter to benefit the unscrupulous, regardless of whether they are a tenant or landlord

take everything

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

Well, they don't believe him fully. They've taken it 50:50 as there is no evidence either way. I understand your frustration, but I'd be carful before appealing because I genuinely can see how an adjudicator would take a 50:50 view in your word against his. I don't think it guaranteed at all that this decision would be overturned

This is why we need independent inventory clerks in Ireland

Edit: sorry I see they believed him on the chair. I don't get that seeing as they went 50:50 on the rest

They believed him on the chair and the lamp.
By their logic I should thank my lucky stars he wasn't looking for 200 for his ****ty lamp and 300 for his ****ty chair. I'd be down 500.
And that he didn't pluck 1500 out of the air for the cleaning etc. I could've found myself with another 750 from that.
Seeing they take whatever figure he throws out and halve it.

take everything

Beaner1 wrote: »

The people adjudicating at the first stage can be useless. I've seen many tribunal results with complete reversals.

I suppose my point was that he ignored it and appealed what he ignored.
And was rewarded for his appeal of what he initially ignored.
Weird process.

Kristopherus

take everything wrote: »

I suppose my point was that he ignored it and appealed what he ignored.
And was rewarded for his appeal of what he initially ignored.
Weird process.

I'm just wondering are PTRB subject to the F.o.I Act. If so, you could make an enquiry about the decision under that.

take everything

Kristopherus wrote: »

I'm just wondering are PTRB subject to the F.o.I Act. If so, you could make an enquiry about the decision under that.

This is something I hadn't thought of.
Thanks. Might look at it.

h2005

I'd forget about it at this stage. It's hardly worth the hassle. I'd also contact revenue.

take everything

OP here.
Just an update on this.
So at least 28 days have passed since the PRTB (binding) determination order.

Not a dickybird from your man.
Despite me contacting him twice to remind him of his obligation to return the 103 euro (now officially deemed by the PRTB that he owes me).

Seems the PRTB may have backed the wrong guy (in believing him over me about the chair, lamp, blinds etc). A nice little **** you again from your man to them this time.

It's like he has some magic hold over them.
He fails to register me as a tenant with them, ignores their calls to attend the dispute and now he's broken their heart again by ignoring their determination order.
The PRTB love a bad boy it seems. They continue to put up stoicly with this behaviour. After believing him and everything.

Anyway the PRTB feebly tell me all they can do is send out a letter to him.
When, I ask.
In the next few months sometime.
So this could be going on for 18 months.
Pathetic tbh.

Never again.
They are beyond useless.

thehouses

I hope he gets a fine from revenue or organisation for not registering the tenancy. Hopefully then he would be out more than the amount the PRTB awarded him.

foggy_lad

Ask the prtb who exactly in that organisation is well known or in business or family of this landlord that he gets such favourable treatment from them. Better still get a local Councillor or TD to do the asking!