Rent Review

JaMarcusHustle · 02-12-2014 12:41pm #1

Quick question, and I'm pretty sure I know the answer but just wanted to run it by people who may be more knowledgable about this or have had a similar situation.

Imagine the following scenario:

Couple living in an apartment, lease expires in 2 weeks. Landlord texts them:

"Hi XX and YY, as you know your lease expires on 15th December. If you would like to renew for another year, the rent will remain at €XXXX per month. Please let me know your plans."

The couple inform the landlord that they intend to remain as Part IV tenants. The couple did not give the 3 months to 1 month notice required, but there does not appear to be any cost to the landlord (apartment was not re-listed, letting agent was not hired etc). Landlord insists on a new lease, the couple quote the relevant section of the RTA that allows them to stay under Part IV. Landlord, clearly frustrated at not getting a new lease, informs the couple that "in that case, rent will be increased by €100 per month".

Am I right in saying that as the landlord had initially informed the couple that rent would stay the same, and the couple accepted this (by saing that the non-increase was appreciated and that they would be staying in the apartment), then the landlord cannot further increase the rent for another 12 months? Or has the fact that the landlord has worded it as "If you would like to renew for another year, the rent will remain at €XXXX per month." allowed them to do this?

Thanks,

hfallada · 02-12-2014 12:50pm

I think the landlord just wanted to see where they staying or leaving. My parents are LLs and the amount of tenants that will either A) tell you last minute after you advertised it( as they were certain they were going back home to Eg Germany after 12 months) decide they want to stay for another year. Or

dont bother telling you they are leaving after they saying a few months ago that they are staying for at least a year.

I dont why the couple stated that they wanted a lease. They were protected by law from eviction. I think the LL might have rents have risen in the area and now whats an increase because they want a lease. They should have just said they were staying

JaMarcusHustle · 02-12-2014 12:53pm

hfallada wrote: »

I dont why the couple stated that they wanted a lease.

Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear enough. The couple stated...........ah feck it, why am I persisting with this "the couple" shíte.....WE stated that we appreciated that there would be no increase, but that we wanted to stay as Part IV tenants and that is what we will do.

My question is, does the fact that the landlord has phrased the increase as "if you renew for another year, the rent will remain the same" mean that they can raise it further if we don't sign a new lease and remain as Part IV?

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 12:55pm

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear enough. The couple stated...........ah feck it, why am I persisting with this "the couple" shíte.....WE stated that we appreciated that there would be no increase, but that we wanted to stay as Part IV tenants and that is what we will do.

My question is, does the fact that the landlord has phrased the increase as "if you renew for another year, the rent will remain the same" mean that they can raise it further if we don't sign a new lease and remain as Part IV?

Yes - you are not renewing for another year (as in signing a lease) so the terms are now being renegotiated.

murphaph · 02-12-2014 12:56pm

Silly tenants really. LL in the right here. He offered them same rent in a landlord's market in exchange for further lease and it was thrown back in his face. Let the tenants now stay on under part four but at the market rate.

drumswan · 02-12-2014 12:58pm

Technically you are correct, no change in rent has been agreed and he must accept part 4. Of course, you wont have the protections of a fixed term and he can use any of the reasons allowed for under part 4 to give you notice. In todays market a fixed term is more desirable for the tenant IMO.

JaMarcusHustle · 02-12-2014 12:59pm

murphaph wrote: »

Silly tenants really. LL in the right here. He offered them same rent in a landlord's market in exchange for further lease and it was thrown back in his face. Let the tenants now stay on under part four but at the market rate.

Not silly at all. We don't intend on staying for anywhere near another 12 months so it would have been silly to agree to a new lease. I should probably have mentioned in the OP that was why we didn't want to sign a new lease!

drumswan · 02-12-2014 1:00pm

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Yes - you are not renewing for another year (as in signing a lease) so the terms are now being renegotiated.

Rent has already been negotiated and tenant has accepted the terms. Tenant is under no obligation to sign a new lease.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 1:01pm

drumswan wrote: »

Rent has already been negotiated and tenant has accepted the terms. Tenant is under no obligation to sign a new lease.

They didn't accept the terms - they rejected the 'renew for another year' element of the offer. Counteroffer is now on the table.

JaMarcusHustle · 02-12-2014 1:02pm

drumswan wrote: »

Rent has already been negotiated and tenant has accepted the terms. Tenant is under no obligation to sign a new lease.

That's the thing though, the way the Landlord has phrased it, it could also be implied that a rent review was carried out, and there was scope to raise the rent but it would remain the same if we commited to a new lease.

We're not trying to be difficult at all. In all likelihood, we will be moving in the near future and giving the required notice - and have been model tenants up to now. We just didn't want to commit to a new lease and I just wanted clarification if the above counted as a rent review. It seems it hasn't and that's fine. This isn't one of those threads where the OP will only accept an answer that suits them

Arbiter of Good Taste · 02-12-2014 1:04pm

drumswan wrote: »

Rent has already been negotiated and tenant has accepted the terms. Tenant is under no obligation to sign a new lease.

It's not a pick-n-mix scenario for the tenant to choose at will.

drumswan · 02-12-2014 1:05pm

The_Morrigan wrote: »

They didn't accept the terms - they rejected the 'renew for another year' element of the offer. Counteroffer is now on the table.

I see what you are saying but permission is not needed from the landlord to obtain Part 4 rights - the tenant is automatically entitled to the statutory protection of Part 4 after 6 months. There is no requirement to negotiate that element.

http://www.threshold.ie/download/pdf/part_4_rights_and_the_residential_tenancies_act_2004.pdf

drumswan · 02-12-2014 1:07pm

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

That's the thing though, the way the Landlord has phrased it, it could also be implied that a rent review was carried out, and there was scope to raise the rent but it would remain the same if we commited to a new lease.

We're not trying to be difficult at all. In all likelihood, we will be moving in the near future and giving the required notice - and have been model tenants up to now. We just didn't want to commit to a new lease and I just wanted clarification if the above counted as a rent review. It seems it hasn't and that's fine. This isn't one of those threads where the OP will only accept an answer that suits them

If you are only staying another month or so then I'd just accept the increase, doesnt seem worth the hassle. If its a bit longer I'd ask for a fixed term for that period, maybe meet in the middle on the rent.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 1:09pm

drumswan wrote: »

I see what you are saying but permission is not needed from the landlord to obtain Part 4 rights - the tenant is automatically entitled to the statutory protection of Part 4 after 6 months. There is no requirement to negotiate that element.

http://www.threshold.ie/download/pdf/part_4_rights_and_the_residential_tenancies_act_2004.pdf

Yes, I know that.
The landlord was agreeable to keeping the rent the same if they signed a new lease, they didn't want to sign a new lease so the rent is being increased as an alternative of the fixed term offer as the landlord doesn't have the same stability for the next 12 months.

The review was conditional on the fixed term lease, the tenants rejected those terms and a counteroffer was provided. The 'review' isn't complete until an agreement is reached.

Arbiter of Good Taste · 02-12-2014 1:11pm

drumswan wrote: »

I see what you are saying but permission is not needed from the landlord to obtain Part 4 rights - the tenant is automatically entitled to the statutory protection of Part 4 after 6 months. There is no requirement to negotiate that element.

http://www.threshold.ie/download/pdf/part_4_rights_and_the_residential_tenancies_act_2004.pdf

A contract is made up of an offer and acceptance. The LL offered keep the rent at the same amount in exchange for commitment to a 12 month lease. The OP did not accept the 12 month lease, and as such the offer of the rent no longer stands.

JaMarcusHustle · 02-12-2014 5:29pm

Just to clarify this, we were expecting the rent to be raised as a result of not committing to a new lease so this question was about getting some advice/info in preparation for that.

However, this has now gotten very messy in the past couple of hours after the landlord has sent us an email requesting us to vacate the apartment in 13 days time! All because we didn't want to sign a new lease and would rather become Part IV tenants, if that's the correct way of phrasing it.

Obviously this isn't legal so I've gotten back to her, but we're a bit miffed. We've always had a very courteous and rather friendly relationship with our landlord. We've been model tenants and she has been a model landlord up to this point. And now because we wouldn't sign a new lease, she's trying to illegally evict us. Madness.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 5:37pm

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Just to clarify this, we were expecting the rent to be raised as a result of not committing to a new lease so this question was about getting some advice/info in preparation for that.

However, this has now gotten very messy in the past couple of hours after the landlord has sent us an email requesting us to vacate the apartment in 13 days time! All because we didn't want to sign a new lease and would rather become Part IV tenants, if that's the correct way of phrasing it.

Obviously this isn't legal so I've gotten back to her, but we're a bit miffed. We've always had a very courteous and rather friendly relationship with our landlord. We've been model tenants and she has been a model landlord up to this point. And now because we wouldn't sign a new lease, she's trying to illegally evict us. Madness.

Not necessarily - your lease comes to an end and you've already admitted that you didn't notify her of your intention to remain on Part IV under the terms of the lease. What does your lease say about termination or the ending of the lease?

Ring your landlord and try to have a discussion about it without it getting emotional.

ted1 · 02-12-2014 5:38pm

drumswan wrote: »

Rent has already been negotiated and tenant has accepted the terms. Tenant is under no obligation to sign a new lease.

No it wasn't , they were offered a new lease at X, which they rejected.

drumswan · 02-12-2014 5:39pm

ted1 wrote: »

No it wasn't , they were offered a new lease at X, which they rejected.

They dont need a new lease, they already have part 4 rights. Its not a case of 'rejecting' anything.

OP needs to have rational discussion with the LL and sort this out.

ted1 · 02-12-2014 5:39pm

drumswan wrote: »

I see what you are saying but permission is not needed from the landlord to obtain Part 4 rights - the tenant is automatically entitled to the statutory protection of Part 4 after 6 months. There is no requirement to negotiate that element.

http://www.threshold.ie/download/pdf/part_4_rights_and_the_residential_tenancies_act_2004.pdf

The tent can be increased every 12 months, what part don't uou

drumswan · 02-12-2014 5:45pm

ted1 wrote: »

The tent can be increased every 12 months, what part don't uou

Landlord is entitled to raise the rent, yes. OP is entitled to continue the tenancy under part 4.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 5:50pm

drumswan wrote: »

Landlord is entitled to raise the rent, yes. OP is entitled to continue the tenancy under part 4.

Once they notify the landlord of their intention.

Claiming a Part 4 tenancy at the end of a lease
If you have a fixed-term contract or lease (for example of 1 year) and you wish to remain in the property under the rights acquired under Part 4, you must notify your landlord of your intention to stay in the property between 3 months and 1 month before the expiry of your fixed–term tenancy or lease agreement. You can use this sample letter of notification to remain in the property under Part 4.

If you do not notify your landlord you cannot be refused coverage under Part 4 but you may have to compensate the landlord for any financial loss she/he has incurred because you did not notify him/her of your intention to remain in the tenancy.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/types_of_tenancy.html

drumswan · 02-12-2014 5:51pm

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Once they notify the landlord of their intention.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/types_of_tenancy.html

"If you do not notify your landlord you cannot be refused coverage under Part 4 but you may have to compensate the landlord for any financial loss she/he has incurred because you did not notify him/her of your intention to remain in the tenancy."

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 5:58pm

drumswan wrote: »

"If you do not notify your landlord you cannot be refused coverage under Part 4 but you may have to compensate the landlord for any financial loss she/he has incurred because you did not notify him/her of your intention to remain in the tenancy."

Right now, they are governed by the lease agreement. In 14 days the Part IV rights come into play after the lease has expired. Right now they have to play by the rules of the lease agreement because they didn't notify the landlord on time.

drumswan · 02-12-2014 6:01pm

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Right now, they are governed by the lease agreement. In 14 days the Part IV rights come into play after the lease has expired. Right now they have to play by the rules of the lease agreement because they didn't notify the landlord on time.

And? Ive already said that. Right now they are under fixed term rules. The landlord cannot evict them within 14 days, after which they come under Part 4 rules.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 6:03pm

drumswan wrote: »

And? Ive already said that. Right now they are under fixed term rules. The landlord cannot evict them within 14 days, after which they come under Part 4 rules.

They could, depending on the terms of the lease.

drumswan · 02-12-2014 6:08pm

The_Morrigan wrote: »

They could, depending on the terms of the lease.

What makes you think that this is anything other than a standard lease? The OP has made no mention of any clause which provides for shorter notice times.

Tenancies do not end when fixed term leases expire, they automatically become part 4 tenancies.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 6:14pm

drumswan wrote: »

What makes you think that this is anything other than a standard lease? The OP has made no mention of any clause which provides for shorter notice times.

Tenancies do not end when fixed term leases expire, they automatically become part 4 tenancies.

Experience tells me that 'standard' documents are often not standard.

Although you may claim that tenancies do not end when the fixed term lease expires and that they automatically become part IV tenancies, without sight of the lease noone can say that for certain.

Beaner1 · 02-12-2014 6:16pm

The fact that he offered a ceratain rent sets the market level so he is obliged to keep it at this.

The_Morrigan · 02-12-2014 6:18pm

Beaner1 wrote: »

The fact that he offered a ceratain rent sets the market level so he is obliged to keep it at this.

OMG - no they don't!

The initial offer was based on the renewal of the fixed term lease, the OP didn't agree to those terms, therefore a counter offer was made.
There was no agreement and there is definitely no obligation.

drumswan · 02-12-2014 6:19pm

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Experience tells me that 'standard' documents are often not standard.

Although you may claim that tenancies do not end when the fixed term lease expires and that they automatically become part IV tenancies, without sight of the lease noone can say that for certain.

Ive never seen a lease which included a clause kicking me out after a year of fixed term. Why would anyone sign away the basic security of tenure provided for in four year cycles under the RTA? Im not sure thats even legal.

Tenant should have notified LL of intent, but for some reason didnt.
What happens then is the LL can conduct a rent review, tenant can sign a new lease or continue under part 4.
Simple enough I would have thought.
I can see why a LL would make rent price dependent on tenant signing a new fixed term, makes sense I suppose.

Rent Review

Comments