Forced to Sign Lease

SeanPuddin

I have just elapsed on my lease after 12 months pain free tenancy. My landlord lives abroad. I am now being asked to sign another lease to which I am claiming Part 4 tenancy.

My landlord has not heard of this and is quite irate I am refusing (politely) to sign another lease. He has threatened to take early retirement and move home if I do not.

The rental agency has claimed it could be the fact that they cannot get insurance without a lease and that I am opening myself up to notice of eviction.

So basically I am being forced to sign the lease. So I am looking for a rent reduction in return, which was laughed down by the agency.

What is the best course of action here? I have no intention to move, but I don't like being told what to do either.

L1011

Best course of action: Move. Clearly the landlord is insane and the rental agents don't know what they are talking about at all.

bumper234

SeanPuddin wrote: »

I have just elapsed on my lease after 12 months pain free tenancy. My landlord lives abroad. I am now being asked to sign another lease to which I am claiming Part 4 tenancy.

My landlord has not heard of this and is quite irate I am refusing (politely) to sign another lease. He has threatened to take early retirement and move home if I do not.

The rental agency has claimed it could be the fact that they cannot get insurance without a lease and that I am opening myself up to notice of eviction.

So basically I am being forced to sign the lease. So I am looking for a rent reduction in return, which was laughed down by the agency.

What is the best course of action here? I have no intention to move, but I don't like being told what to do either.

So because you have a bee in your bonnet about being "told what to do" you are refusing to sign the lease? LL should just tell you to GTFO and get new tenants without such silly ideas.

Chazz Michael Michaels

Forced?

djimi

I don't see why insurance would be reliant on a lease being signed.

Call his bluff. If he wants to take early retirement and move home just to spite you then more power to him.

Nino Brown

bumper234 wrote: »

LL should just tell you to GTFO and get new tenants without such silly ideas.

That would be illegal

djimi

bumper234 wrote: »

So because you have a bee in your bonnet about being "told what to do" you are refusing to sign the lease? LL should just tell you to GTFO and get new tenants without such silly ideas.

There is no legal requirement for a tenant to sign a further lease; depending on future plans it might well be in their best interest not to. Nothing wrong with the OP sticking to their guns on this.

Nino Brown

The same thing happened to me, I just signed the lease. It has it's advantages, my LL can't increase the rent for the year, he can't decide he wants to kick me out and move in himself either. So I am tied down for another year, but so is he.

SeanPuddin

bumper234 wrote: »

So because you have a bee in your bonnet about being "told what to do" you are refusing to sign the lease? LL should just tell you to GTFO and get new tenants without such silly ideas.

I am refusing to sign the lease because I am not obliged to. I take exception to being "forced" into signing another 12 months lease for no reason other than my landlord's ignorance of part 4 tenancy.

foggy_lad

OP you do not have to sign a lease and can't be forced to by all this landlord skullduggery, you might have better rights staying on a part 4 tenancy than a lease. many landlords are terrified by part 4 tenancies. if they try any further bullsh1t you should make a complaint to the PRTB about the harrassment.

runawaybishop

SeanPuddin wrote: »

I have just elapsed on my lease after 12 months pain free tenancy. My landlord lives abroad. I am now being asked to sign another lease to which I am claiming Part 4 tenancy.

My landlord has not heard of this and is quite irate I am refusing (politely) to sign another lease. He has threatened to take early retirement and move home if I do not.

The rental agency has claimed it could be the fact that they cannot get insurance without a lease and that I am opening myself up to notice of eviction.

So basically I am being forced to sign the lease. So I am looking for a rent reduction in return, which was laughed down by the agency.

What is the best course of action here? I have no intention to move, but I don't like being told what to do either.

Rental agency probably gets a fee when you sign a new lease. You'll often see them pushing for one to be signed.

SeanPuddin

foggy_lad wrote: »

OP you do not have to sign a lease and can't be forced to by all this landlord skullduggery, you might have better rights staying on a part 4 tenancy than a lease. many landlords are terrified by part 4 tenancies. if they try any further bullsh1t you should make a complaint to the PRTB about the harrassment.

I genuinely think the landlord is petrified that the tenancy is not protected by a lease. I also think that they have never heard of part 4 and are used to getting what they like.

The landlord has already threatened to move in if I don't sign. The agency said that I'm opening myself up to this happening also, and that the ability to get home insurance is difficult without a current lease.

The agency wants me to sign a lease, and said that I "could still move out whenever I like with 1 months notice." Is this true? I highly doubt the landlord would agree to this.

SeanPuddin

runawaybishop wrote: »

Rental agency probably gets a fee when you sign a new lease. You'll often see them pushing for one to be signed.

Sounds about right.

runawaybishop

SeanPuddin wrote: »

I genuinely think the landlord is petrified that the tenancy is not protected by a lease. I also think that they have never heard of part 4 and are used to getting what they like.

The landlord has already threatened to move in if I don't sign. The agency said that I'm opening myself up to this happening also, and that the ability to get home insurance is difficult without a current lease.

The agency wants me to sign a lease, and said that I "could still move out whenever I like with 1 months notice." Is this true? I highly doubt the landlord would agree to this.

If they never heard of part 4 then how does the landlord know he can move home and you'd have to leave? Is he just ignorant of tenancy laws do you think? Even though you do not have to you could reassure them about their rights under part 4.

Difficult to get insurance my arse, how do they think everyone else does it? Part 4 tenants are not exactly uncommon.

The landlord can agree a shorter notice period if you also agree. Otherwise part 4 notice periods apply.

SeanPuddin

I think it's going one of two ways. Either I sign the lease, or I go to PTRB to complain. In the meantime, the landlord can claim to move home and evict me. Time to look about so I think. Thanks for the advice.

djimi

SeanPuddin wrote: »

I think it's going one of two ways. Either I sign the lease, or I go to PTRB to complain. In the meantime, the landlord can claim to move home and evict me. Time to look about so I think. Thanks for the advice.

They can evict on the grounds of needing the property for themselves, but if they dont ultimately move in then I think you have a good case against them.

Just be aware of other things that they might try, such as increasing the rent. While it must remain within market rate, if you are in a high demand area such as many parts of Dublin are experiencing then the market rate might have gone up quite a bit since you signed the lease.

I suppose it boils down to how much you want to remain living there. If you are happy and plan on being there long term then it might be best swallowing your pride and signing the lease. It may cost you more in the long term to move for the sake of your principles.

foggy_lad

SeanPuddin wrote: »

The landlord has already threatened to move in if I don't sign. The agency said that I'm opening myself up to this happening also, and that the ability to get home insurance is difficult without a current lease.

The agency wants me to sign a lease, and said that I "could still move out whenever I like with 1 months notice." Is this true? I highly doubt the landlord would agree to this.

If the Landlord threatens to move in to get you out then that is what he must do otherwise you have a case for illegal eviction!

Getting landlord insurance will not be any harder without a lease.

THe agency want their fees and want to have a lease to fall back on as it cuts out work for them. If they state you can move out with one months notice you would have to make sure this was included in the lease without any tricks.

SeanPuddin wrote: »

I think it's going one of two ways. Either I sign the lease, or I go to PTRB to complain. In the meantime, the landlord can claim to move home and evict me. Time to look about so I think. Thanks for the advice.

Whatever the Landlord does he will still have to give you the appropriate notice, I would contact the PRTB for advice on the situation and make a complaint if you want, it only costs €25

The_Conductor

OP- if you have a fixed term lease, and you intend to continue the tenancy after the elapse of the lease under Part 4 terms, you have to notify the landlord of this between 3 months and 1 month before the elapse of the lease.

With respect of a Part 4 tenancy- you automatically acquired this by living in the property for 6 months.

Failure to notify a landlord of your intention to continue a tenancy under Part 4 terms as opposed to signing a new lease, can result in a tenant being liable for any expenses incurred by the landlord with the letting agency and/or advertising agencies.

If the landlord incurs expenses from the letting agency- by virtue of you continuing the tenancy without signing a new lease- you are liable for those costs- as you didn't notify the landlord within the prescribed timeframe prior to the elapse of the lease, of your intention to continue the tenancy.

A Part 4 tenancy exists- come what may- but you may be out of pocket as a result of your failure to notify prior to the elapse of the fixed term lease.

The_Conductor

I'd also add- if the property is in Dublin, Cork or Galway- rents have shot up in all these locations over the past year- you could well be looking at a 20-30% rent increase (which is allowable under the act, providing the landlord can show it is in keeping with local market rates).

Clive

SeanPuddin wrote: »

The agency wants me to sign a lease, and said that I "could still move out whenever I like with 1 months notice." Is this true? I highly doubt the landlord would agree to this.

This is the important bit OP - you already have the protection of a part 4 tenancy, but you also have the weakness that the landlord can require the property for his own use and you must vacate, or increase the rent to the current market rate.

If you can get a fixed term lease with the the ability to leave with one month's notice without penalty (specifically written into the lease , not the word of the letting agent) then you have the best of both worlds.

Your rent level is fixed, you have security for another year, and the ability to leave if you wish. The agent gets their fee, the landlord doesn't have to worry about things he doesn't understand and your position is better than it would have been.

Daith

The_Conductor wrote: »

OP- if you have a fixed term lease, and you intend to continue the tenancy after the elapse of the lease under Part 4 terms, you have to notify the landlord of this between 3 months and 1 month before the elapse of the lease.

Hmm, does notify mean "wish to stay" or intent? Our lease is up in April. We've advised the agency that we would be looking to stay but obviously it depends on what rent the landlord decides. This was last week and they are still waiting for the landlord to come back.

If he doesn't come until March (just an example) would we still be allowed to rent under Part 4?

The_Conductor

You have to specifically notify the landlord, between 1 and 3 months prior to the end of the fixed term lease, that you wish to continue the tenancy on Part 4 terms, after the elapse of the fixed term tenancy. If you do not- there is a persumption (in law) that you do not- and your tenancy ends with the elapse of the lease (or according to provisions of the lease, which must be similar to, or affording the tenant additional rights, to those offered by the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act).

djimi

Daith wrote: »

Hmm, does notify mean "wish to stay" or intent? Our lease is up in April. We've advised the agency that we would be looking to stay but obviously it depends on what rent the landlord decides. This was last week and they are still waiting for the landlord to come back.

If he doesn't come until March (just an example) would we still be allowed to rent under Part 4?

This clause cannot prevent you from renting on part 4 tenancy; all it is there to do is to ensure that the landlord does not incur any expense from the assumption that you are going to vacate at the end of the lease.

In reality its fairly unlikely that a landlord is going to readvertise a property without speaking to you first to find out your intentions.

djimi

The_Conductor wrote: »

You have to specifically notify the landlord, between 1 and 3 months prior to the end of the fixed term lease, that you wish to continue the tenancy on Part 4 terms, after the elapse of the fixed term tenancy. If you do not- there is a persumption (in law) that you do not- and your tenancy ends with the elapse of the lease (or according to provisions of the lease, which must be similar to, or affording the tenant additional rights, to those offered by the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act).

This part isnt correct? The tenancy does not end at the end of a lease if you dont inform the landlord; assuming the lease is for 6 months or longer then you have already acquired part 4 tenancy rights and the presumption is that you will be remaining for up to 4 years.

In other words, the landlord cannot show up the day after a lease has expired and tell you to get out of the property if you have no informed them of your intention to remain on a part 4.

The_Conductor

djimi wrote: »

This part isnt correct? The tenancy does not end at the end of a lease if you dont inform the landlord; assuming the lease is for 6 months or longer then you have already acquired part 4 tenancy rights and the presumption is that you will be remaining for up to 4 years.

In other words, the landlord cannot show up the day after a lease has expired and tell you to get out of the property if you have no informed them of your intention to remain on a part 4.

You can invoke your Part 4 tenancy, and are fully entitled to- however, there is a presumption that the tenancy is over, if you haven't given the requisite notice of your intention to continue the tenancy. In general- if the landlord is letting the property via a letting agency or has incurred expense seeking replacement tenants- a tenant would be liable for the letting agency fees (which typically could be as much as a month's rent- if there was a presumption that a new lease was being signed with a new tenant- or indeed any actual fees incurred (advertising etc)). Letting agencies would in situations like this bill the landlord for their fee- if they didn't know in advance of the continuance of the tenancy.

Give the notice in good time- or you're liable for any costs incurred.

djimi

Letting agents charge when a new tenancy begins, not when they think a new one might begin based on the assumption that a tenant is going to leave? If the tenant decides to stay, then there would be no fee due to the agency, so why would the tenant incur any cost here?

Im not sure if its your wording or what, but there is not a presumption that the tenancy ends when the lease expires. If the tenant is in the property for 6 months then they have acquired part 4 rights; they dont have to ask for these, and they run concurrently with a fixed term lease, when when the lease expires the part 4 rights just take over (as they have been running alongside the lease anyway).

Grolschevik

The_Conductor wrote: »

You can invoke your Part 4 tenancy, and are fully entitled to- however, there is a presumption that the tenancy is over, if you haven't given the requisite notice of your intention to continue the tenancy. In general- if the landlord is letting the property via a letting agency or has incurred expense seeking replacement tenants- a tenant would be liable for the letting agency fees (which typically could be as much as a month's rent- if there was a presumption that a new lease was being signed with a new tenant- or indeed any actual fees incurred (advertising etc)). Letting agencies would in situations like this bill the landlord for their fee- if they didn't know in advance of the continuance of the tenancy.

Give the notice in good time- or you're liable for any costs incurred.

So say you were on a one-year lease. After that year, you and the landlord just agree to keep going. No new lease is signed, and no formal notice of Part 4 intention is made.

What's the situation there? I imagine this scenario is pretty common.

The_Conductor

Part 4 rights, or the rights as specified in the original lease, whichever confer greater rights on the tenant.

Grolschevik

The_Conductor wrote: »

Part 4 rights, or the rights as specified in the original lease, whichever confer greater rights on the tenant.

But if no formal notice of Part 4 was ever given, does this open up the possibility of the tenant being liable for the re-letting costs, even after several years?

(Or did I misunderstand something I read somewhere?)

The_Conductor

Potentially- but I seriously doubt it would ever be broached by a landlord- and if it ever went to arbitration, I bet they'd be laughed out of tribunal.

Daith

Grolschevik wrote: »

But if no formal notice of Part 4 was ever given, does this open up the possibility of the tenant being liable for the re-letting costs, even after several years?

(Or did I misunderstand something I read somewhere?)

How would there be re-letting costs if the tenant stays on?

Ken.

Op, are you in direct contact with the landlord or is it all through the middlemen. Because they could be telling you one thing and him another to get a fee out of him. Especially if as you say the landlord is a bit naive.

Grolschevik

Daith wrote: »

How would there be re-letting costs if the tenant stays on?

I meant in the event that the tenant eventually decides to leave (after a couple of years).

odds_on

Daith wrote: »

How would there be re-letting costs if the tenant stays on?

The landlord may have assumed that the tenancy was ending because the tenant had not advised him between 3 months and 1 month prior to the expiry of the fixed term, and gone ahead with advertising the property for rent to a new tenant. There could be advertising fees, agents fees etc. involved for which the tenant is liable.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

They can evict on the grounds of needing the property for themselves, but if they dont ultimately move in then I think you have a good case against them.

Just be aware of other things that they might try, such as increasing the rent. While it must remain within market rate, if you are in a high demand area such as many parts of Dublin are experiencing then the market rate might have gone up quite a bit since you signed the lease.

I suppose it boils down to how much you want to remain living there. If you are happy and plan on being there long term then it might be best swallowing your pride and signing the lease. It may cost you more in the long term to move for the sake of your principles.

Just to add the djimi's post:

If a notice of termination gives the reason for eviction as the owner or a close relative wants the property for themselves, then the named person must reside there for a minimum of six months. In default of the named person not staying for a minimum of 6 months, the landlord is obliged to offer a tenancy of the property to the evicted tenant.

Eldarion

Just like to say great thread, very insightful altogether.

OP, it seems like you don't want to be tied down to a lease for 12 months which is perfectly understandable, but the trade off is that you're not as secure. He's perfectly entitled to increase the rent at any time he chooses to (in line with market rates and once every 12 months) and he's well within the law to evict you for a range of reasons. He can claim he needs the property for personal use or use by a close family member. Or he intends to sell. Or to renovate. You're not exposed to rent increases or legal evictions with a lease.

It's really up to you how you want to play it but you can't expect to have it all.

SeanPuddin

Update: Signed the f-in thing.

As far as I'm concerned I can still move out with 1 months notice, as per part 4 tenancy. The agency agrees. The landlord cannot move home or pull any funny business due to new lease. Like a previous poster claimed it's seems like a win-win.

I have informed the landlord never to contact me again and only deal through the agency. If he was prepared to go into early retirement and move home, a rental increase would be next I'm sure.

It's hard to swallow your pride when the landlord is being such a c*nt, but this time it seemed like the only option to stay on.

Thanks for all the advice and input.

SeanPuddin

odds_on wrote: »

Just to add the djimi's post:

If a notice of termination gives the reason for eviction as the owner or a close relative wants the property for themselves, then the named person must reside there for a minimum of six months. In default of the named person not staying for a minimum of 6 months, the landlord is obliged to offer a tenancy of the property to the evicted tenant.

True, but they also have up to 3 months from asking you to leave to moving in. By the time you realise something is wrong, you should have moved on with your life. Trump card for the landlord.

The_Conductor

Ok- on that note, I think this thread has gone its course.
Closed.