Am I being unreasonable?

drumswan

Lemming wrote: »

/sigh

The tenant wishes to remain on part 4 whislt still looking for somewhere 'suitable' with the LL willing to oblige. All the LL has to do is serve termination to co-incide with end of lease and the OP is in exactly the position they're pleading the poor mouth over; "being turfed out of their home with nowhere else to go"..

What are you sighing for? Perhaps you missed the part where the landlord is being forced to sell the house, the OP will be moving anyway, he is simply looking to stay for the period he has a lease for.

drumswan

anonyanony wrote: »

Rent review at the end of 12 months even if he has a lease for another year LL can raise the rent to market value and as it's an in demand area could be costly, OP then has to pay the increase if reasonable or he breaks the lease and would be evicted.

You say this like its news to anyone.

Ken79

D3PO wrote: »

Perhaps I missed something I didn't see where you said you would be out my the end of March.

That changes the dynamic completely. I read that you said you would try to be out by the end of march but that's different to agreeing to be out the end of march..

can you clarify then what the exact proposal you put the LL was.

in terms of compensation and when you will move out etc.

Oh, sorry. It's entirely possible I was unclear.

The proposal as presented was as follows:
- Agree to be out by end of March
- no rent in interim
- Deposit to be repaid, in full and immediately

I also went on to say that if she absolutely needed us to be out before then that she would have to make a serious counter-proposal.

The reason for the deposit bit is because it is the old landlords responsibility to give us the deposit and up to us to forward it on to the new ll. If the old landlord decided not to then we would be out of pocket and if the new landlords took over they could ask us for the deposit we never go back putting us further out of pocket and, of course, no guarantee we'd get that back either because we don't know them from Adam.

Ken79

anonyanony wrote: »

Rent review at the end of 12 months even if he has a lease for another year LL can raise the rent to market value and as it's an in demand area could be costly, OP then has to pay the increase if reasonable or he breaks the lease and would be evicted.

And if I argue down because of a problem with mold that was never resolved? Let the PRTB decide and, sure, we'll be gone by then anyway.

anonyanony

Ken79 wrote: »

Oh, sorry. It's entirely possible I was unclear.

The proposal as presented was as follows:
- Agree to be out by end of March
- no rent in interim
- Deposit to be repaid, in full and immediately

I also went on to say that if she absolutely needed us to be out before then that she would have to make a serious counter-proposal.

The reason for the deposit bit is because it is the old landlords responsibility to give us the deposit and up to us to forward it on to the new ll. If the old landlord decided not to then we would be out of pocket and if the new landlords took over they could ask us for the deposit we never go back putting us further out of pocket and, of course, no guarantee we'd get that back either because we don't know them from Adam.

You will have to be out for the new people to buy if they want to rent you it will be a new contract, the deposit right away is unreasonable and you will never have to look from it form the new LL when you leave the house in good Condition you would get it back.

D3PO

Hmm based on that Id change my stance, I certainly did not understand that as the proposal so Id imagine others likewise did not.

On the basis you would incur moving costs, potential loss of earnings, for inconvenience and also may depending on the rental market be out of pocket having to pay an increased rent for a similar property in the market then its not an unreasonable demand.

Now weather its actually workable for the LL or not is a different matter in terms of the demands of the sellers.

Sala

Ken79 wrote: »

Oh, sorry. It's entirely possible I was unclear.

The proposal as presented was as follows:
- Agree to be out by end of March
- no rent in interim
- Deposit to be repaid, in full and immediately

I also went on to say that if she absolutely needed us to be out before then that she would have to make a serious counter-proposal.

The reason for the deposit bit is because it is the old landlords responsibility to give us the deposit and up to us to forward it on to the new ll. If the old landlord decided not to then we would be out of pocket and if the new landlords took over they could ask us for the deposit we never go back putting us further out of pocket and, of course, no guarantee we'd get that back either because we don't know them from Adam.

What happens if you can't find anywhere get out by end of march and you stay until end of lease - will you pay her back the 11 months (or whatever it is) rent?
If you can't leave by the end of march are you proposing to stay there still paying no rent or resume payments?

Deposit - in my opinion it should be paid back subject to the usual rules i.e. damage.

?

anonyanony

Ken79 wrote: »

And if I argue down because of a problem with mold that was never resolved? Let the PRTB decide and, sure, we'll be gone by then anyway.

See you you are being unreasonable, you would walk away from a year left lease if it suits you. Mold is mostly caused by the tenant also.

Ken79

anonyanony wrote: »

You will have to be out for the new people to buy if they want to rent you it will be a new contract, the deposit right away is unreasonable and you will never have to look from it form the new LL when you leave the house in good Condition you would get it back.

All that relies on trust. I'm afraid trust has broken down. The current ll is deceiving the new buyers by not telling them about us and they have not dealt with us in an open and transparent manner since most of what we have learned has come from the estate agents.

Doesn't mean they aren't lovely people but when somebody starts acting with less than full honesty then I protect myself and if I don't guarantee the deposit now I'll have lost my opportunity.

anonyanony

anonyanony wrote: »

You will have to be out for the new people to buy if they want to rent you it will be a new contract, the deposit right away is unreasonable and you will never have to look from it form the new LL when you leave the house in good Condition you would get it back.

If it is an unreasonable demand it's up to the landlord to make a counter offer other than "be a sport and get out of the house in 8 weeks"!

Seriously, I am amazed at the people here who think someone should just walk away from a 2 year rental contract because it would be the nice thing to do.

Again (and I notice nobody has answered this question) - would this logic apply to hard up tenants not paying rent?

D3PO

anonyanony wrote: »

You will have to be out for the new people to buy if they want to rent you it will be a new contract, the deposit right away is unreasonable and you will never have to look from it form the new LL when you leave the house in good Condition you would get it back.

this is completely and utterly wrong.

god almighty the amount of people on this thread who has posted completely wrong information on tenancy law and indicated its fact is astonishing and scary in equal measure ""

firstly you do not have to be out for somebody to buy a house, you can purchase a house with tenants in situ however a bank will not give you a mortgage in this regard so it would be a cash buy.

if you do buy with tenants in situ you take on the tenants and equally the terms of their tenancy that means the lease is still legally enforceable. If its a part 4 situation the part 4 tenancy also continues in terms of security of tenure etc.

however this is completely and utter off topic so not even sure why your bringing it up

BarryD

To the OP, you come across as a chap who is careful in how you manage yourself and your affairs - you choose your words carefully and cover all the bases, as you say. This is highly commendable IMHO and the country would unlikely to be in the financial mess that it's in, if most people were like you.

Most ordinary Irish people are not like this though, they're a bit casual with their arrangements and expect others to be too. You're going by what you perceive to be the letter of the law, which is basically a logical and objective test. But you're then wondering if you're being unreasonable which is subjective. Given the more casual attitude of most Irish people mentioned above, you are being unreasonable in expecting too much by way of compensation.

However at the end of the day, there's two of you in it and I presume your wife has views as well as to what's the best course of action.

Ken79

Sala wrote: »

What happens if you can't find anywhere get out by end of march and you stay until end of lease - will you pay her back the 11 months (or whatever it is) rent?
If you can't leave by the end of march are you proposing to stay there still paying no rent or resume payments?

Deposit - in my opinion it should be paid back subject to the usual rules i.e. damage.

?

If we can't then we will have to take something unsuitable. It's a risk because I stick to my word and thats what I'm charging for.

Sala

Sala wrote: »

What happens if you can't find anywhere get out by end of march and you stay until end of lease - will you pay her back the 11 months (or whatever it is) rent?
If you can't leave by the end of march are you proposing to stay there still paying no rent or resume payments?

Deposit - in my opinion it should be paid back subject to the usual rules i.e. damage.

?

Another one.

The landlord wants to break the contract. The tenant is a) quite happy to see out the contract, or alternatively b) quite right to ask for whatever the hell they want in return if they don't. The landlord will have to negotiate.

Honestly, maybe some of you lads with tracker mortgages should ring your bank and get them moved to variables, would be the decent thing to do after all...

Sala

Deleted User wrote: »

If it is an unreasonable demand it's up to the landlord to make a counter offer other than "be a sport and get out of the house in 8 weeks"!

Seriously, I am amazed at the people here who think someone should just walk away from a 2 year rental contract because it would be the nice thing to do.

Again (and I notice nobody has answered this question) - would this logic apply to hard up tenants not paying rent?

Well I don't agree the OP should have to walk away without being compensated... but in answer to your question (kind of) it appears Threshold are now advising tenants who can't pay to overhold. So in reality it does apply to hard up tenants now (although it shouldn't)

anonyanony

Deleted User wrote: »

Again (and I notice nobody has answered this question) - would this logic apply to hard up tenants not paying rent?

Hard up tenants overhold for months and threshold even tell you how to do this even though you shouldn't wink wink.

BarryD

BarryD wrote: »

To the OP, you come across as a chap who is careful in how you manage yourself and your affairs - you choose your words carefully and cover all the bases, as you say. This is highly commendable IMHO and the country would unlikely to be in the financial mess that it's in, if most people were like you.

Most ordinary Irish people are not like this though, they're a bit casual with their arrangements and expect others to be too. You're going by what you perceive to be the letter of the law, which is basically a logical and objective test. But you're then wondering if you're being unreasonable which is subjective. Given the more casual attitude of most Irish people mentioned above, you are being unreasonable in expecting too much by way of compensation.

However at the end of the day, there's two of you in it and I presume your wife has views as well as to what's the best course of action.

This 'easy going' Irish argument would be fine if (to give one example I quoted above) they weren't saying things like:

"It really sickens me with these protests and the socialists getting involved. Its simple - pay for your house or get out"

on other threads....

Ken79

anonyanony wrote: »

See you you are being unreasonable, you would walk away from a year left lease if it suits you. Mold is mostly caused by the tenant also.

Or in this case a gutter which is angled the wrong way. Or so the builder who came to look at it said.

anonyanony

anonyanony wrote: »

Hard up tenants overhold for months and threshold even tell you how to do this even though you shouldn't wink wink.

Oh I know it happens. I am asking you if you are in favour of it, or have no objection to it.

Sala

Deleted User wrote: »

Another one.

The landlord wants to break the contract. The tenant is a) quite happy to see out the contract, or alternatively b) quite right to ask for whatever the hell they want in return if they don't. The landlord will have to negotiate.

Honestly, maybe some of you lads with tracker mortgages should ring your bank and get them moved to variables, would be the decent thing to do after all...

What you mean another one? I actually agree the OP should be compensated, I just wanted clarification on his proposal given he is not 100% sure he leave at a certain point

anonyanony

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh I know it happens. I am asking you if you are in favour of it, or have no objection to it.

No I am not, but I am not in favour of the op's situation happened either just think the way he let it happened was unreasonable, he should have said outright now I want the 2 years and no viewings. LL increase their rent to cover more of the mortgage at the 12 month mark and sell the house at the end of the lease. OP allowing the viewing probably gave the wrong impression to the LL and should have been firm on his no.

Pinkycharm

Ken79 wrote: »

I want to stay until my lease is over. This is a good compromise for her. Up to a max of 2 grand for buying out a lease? If anything I'm being way overgenerous considering I have her over a barrel. Understand that, if I asked for 5 grand cash she will give it to me because she has no choice but I'm not because that would be greedy.


Remember, we could find a place next month or the month after. We cannot afford to wait until March because the houses are not there and we will have to take the first suitable one that comes along. Come March we will have to contend with letting agents and their bi-monthly inspections which I find intolerable.

The banks will have you over a barrel in a few weeks if you arent careful. Sometimes its better to bite the bullet Ken. Stop playing the victim because you certainly are not one.

Post back when the banks have taken the house, the locks are changed and all your stuff is locked inside and your looking in the window and raging that you didnt get out when you could.

Ken79

Sala wrote: »

What you mean another one? I actually agree the OP should be compensated, I just wanted clarification on his proposal given he is not 100% sure he leave at a certain point

It's then at the latest. If they want no deal then it'll be whenever we find a new home.

Killing thing is they probably won't get us out any sooner with the proposal I offered but if they need a deadline and the pressure it puts me under then I'm going to charge.

You would expect some houses to com up early next year but what if they don't and I agree to a date? I wouldn't overhold. It's not how I do business and my word comes with a price.

Ken79

Pinkycharm wrote: »

The banks will have you over a barrel in a few weeks if you arent careful. Sometimes its better to bite the bullet Ken. Stop playing the victim because you certainly are not one.

Post back when the banks have taken the house, the locks are changed and all your stuff is locked inside and your looking in the window and raging that you didnt get out when you could.

The bank knows we are here and have tacitly agreed to the lease so they'll have just as big a fight on their hands. Provided I get the opportunity and if I don't it tells you all you need to know about how tenants are treated in this country.

Sala

Ken79 wrote: »

It's then at the latest. If they want no deal then it'll be whenever we find a new home.

Killing thing is they probably won't get us out any sooner with the proposal I offered but if they need a deadline and the pressure it puts me under then I'm going to charge.

You would expect some houses to com up early next year but what if they don't and I agree to a date? I wouldn't overhold. It's not how I do business and my word comes with a price.

So you are looking to pay no rent for January - March but giving an undertaking you will be certainly be gone by March? Seems fair to me given there is no obligation on your to break the lease.

ec18

legalities aside, based on the thread title. Yes I think you are being unreasonable.

Rightly or wrongly your landlord had inferred your co operation when you agreed to viewings being held and even compensated you with reduced rent. If you had been upfront about your intention to enforce the legality of the fixed term lease this situation could possible have been avoided.

Mezcita

Pinkycharm wrote: »

The banks will have you over a barrel in a few weeks if you arent careful.

Doubt it.

Pinkycharm

Ken79 wrote: »

The bank knows we are here and have tacitly agreed to the lease so they'll have just as big a fight on their hands. Provided I get the opportunity and if I don't it tells you all you need to know about how tenants are treated in this country.

Let us know how it goes. I'll follow this one.

anonyanony

ec18 wrote: »

legalities aside, based on the thread title. Yes I think you are being unreasonable.

Rightly or wrongly your landlord had inferred your co operation when you agreed to viewings being held and even compensated you with reduced rent. If you had been upfront about your intention to enforce the legality of the fixed term lease this situation could possible have been avoided.

This is my biggest problem with how OP went about it, he should have been firm from the get go and not allowed viewings

Field east

Ken 79, at 12.53 to-day. you said the lease is a fixed term one and not a part 4. Is this lease registered with the PRTB and if not is it registered with anyone else. If reg with a regulated body or recognised agent , did you get a receipt?