Landlord wants to kick us out after signing a four year lease

drumswan

cerastes wrote: »

We dont know that, you keep bringing it up though. Under the RTA 2004, a landlord can ask for the property back for sale or family or own use, the OP needs to check their lease, you harping on about a fixed term lease till its confirmed doesnt add anything.

If we don't know it why are you saying that the landlord can evict?

Graham

mada82 wrote: »

It's not your house. It's the landlords house.

When a landlord rents out a house he willingly foregoes some of the rights he may have previously had and accepts certain obligations.

A tenant may not own the house but it is still his/her home until the end of a valid notice period in accordance with the RTA and any additional rights granted under a fixed term lease.

Duiske

yankinlk wrote: »

further evidence that no lanldlord should ever consider signing a RAS contract ever again.

I would suspect the op was given that advice by a misinformed employee. Find it very hard to believe that it is official policy to advise tenants to ignore eviction notices.

drumswan

Duiske wrote: »

I would suspect the op was given that advice by a misinformed employee. Find it very hard to believe that it is official policy to advise tenants to ignore eviction notices.

It's entirely correct to advise tenants to ignore invalid eviction notices.

Kinet1c

There is a get out clause in the contract for both the council and landlord if sufficient notice is provided.

Graham

drumswan wrote: »

It's entirely correct to advise tenants to ignore invalid eviction notices.

Legally it may be correct, practically it wouldn't be very sensible. Tenant would be much better to clarify his/her position asap and then communicate that clarification to the landlord.

drumswan

Kinet1c wrote: »

There is a get out clause in the contract for both the council and landlord if sufficient notice is provided.

Is there a standard RAS lease? Can you post a link? Who on earth would sign a four year lease that allowed the landlord to evict them at any point?

Graham

Kinet1c wrote: »

There is a get out clause in the contract for both the council and landlord if sufficient notice is provided.

You've seen the contract? Are they the exact same contract for all RAS properties?

Documentation I've seen suggests the contract can't even be terminated if the house is sold.

MouseTail

I think perhaps people are getting confused between a 4 year lease, and the RAS contract signed for 4 years. The LL can evict under RAS for the reason stated. The RAS Officer is wrong to give advice to over hold, and possibly just doesn't want the hassle of rehousing the family.

The advice given by posters to put pressure on the RAS section is correct. The contract is between the Council and the LL, and the tenant and the Council, not between the tenant and the LL. The Council have a duty to rehouse here.

drumswan

Graham wrote: »

Legally it may be correct, practically it wouldn't be very sensible. Tenant would be much better to clarify his/her position asap and then communicate that clarification to the landlord.

I read that as the RAS admin advised to ignore the eviction notice, not ignore the landlord altogether, sorry

The_Morrigan

Folks before this turns into yet another train wreck of thread whereby half the posters are just arguing among themselves rather than giving constructive advice I will say this.

We want absolutely no discussion of any illegal activities (not paying rent, over staying etc)
We have no idea the terms of the RAS agreement or the scheme
We do not know if the RAS scheme is subject to the RTA 2004

There will be no further warnings - any messing and you will be thread banned.

drumswan

MouseTail wrote: »

I think perhaps people are getting confused between a 4 year lease, and the RAS contract signed for 4 years. The LL can evict under RAS for the reason stated. The RAS Officer is wrong to give advice to over hold, and possibly just doesn't want the hassle of rehousing the family.

The advice given by posters to put pressure on the RAS section is correct. The contract is between the Council and the LL, and the tenant and the Council, not between the tenant and the LL. The Council have a duty to rehouse here.

Can you post a source for this? I find it hard to believe that a four year RAS agreement doesn't come with a for year fixed term lease. Otherwise it's utterly valueless for the tenant.

cerastes

drumswan wrote: »

If we don't know it why are you saying that the landlord can evict?

I said the OP should check their lease, and unless they have a fixed term lease there is little they can do to counter this or words to that effect, Ive offered other advice to appeal to the landlords better nature/judgement. As if the landlord is just offering it to their son because they think the tenant has suddenly become difficult soon after signing a lease, they may not be in a fixed term lease (but the OP should check this) and the landlord would be exercising either a right to give a notice to quit for a family member or own use, the only other options to give notice to quit are within the first 6 months of a tenancy (no reason required and I believe this is even possible if you have had a previous 4 year tenancy) or if the landlord wanted to sell.

drumswan

The_Morrigan wrote: »

We do not know if the RAS scheme is subject to the RTA 2004

Yes we do.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/local_authority_and_social_housing/rental_accommodation_scheme.html

Seamus1964

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

For a tenancy that has lasted between 6 months and 4 years – known as a Part 4 tenancy – the landlord can end it only in the following circumstances:

* If the landlord needs the property for him/herself or for an immediate family member (son?)
* If the landlord intends to refurbish the property substantially (damp?)

Graham

Seamus1964 wrote: »

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

For a tenancy that has lasted between 6 months and 4 years – known as a Part 4 tenancy – the landlord can end it only in the following circumstances:

* If the landlord needs the property for him/herself or for an immediate family member (son?)
* If the landlord intends to refurbish the property substantially (damp?)

Unless there is a fixed term lease that grants the tenant additional rights over and above a part 4.

Seamus1964

Sorry, I can't find a link/information about that - would you mind to point it out ,please?

drumswan

cerastes wrote: »

I said the OP should check their lease, and unless they have a fixed term lease there is little they can do to counter this or words to that effect, Ive offered other advice to appeal to the landlords better nature/judgement. As if the landlord is just offering it to their son because they think the tenant has suddenly become difficult soon after signing a lease, they may not be in a fixed term lease (but the OP should check this) and the landlord would be exercising either a right to give a notice to quit for a family member or own use, the only other options to give notice to quit are within the first 6 months of a tenancy (no reason required and I believe this is even possible if you have had a previous 4 year tenancy) or if the landlord wanted to sell.

Can you have a look at the title of the thread please.

cerastes

drumswan wrote: »

Can you have a look at the title of the thread please.

Thread title doesnt say its a fixed term lease and even if it did, really the place to look would be in the lease, not the thread title.

Graham

Seamus1964 wrote: »

Sorry, I can't find a link/information about that - would you mind to point it out ,please?

This is probably more suited to your own thread so I'll be brief

FIXED TERM TENANCIES
Landlords and tenants often enter into a tenancy for a fixed term period. For example a landlord or tenant may agree that the tenancy will be for a period of two years. Usually, the terms of a fixed term tenancy are contained in a lease agreement. A written lease agreement is not necessary however, for a fixed term tenancy to exist, as the Act provides that a fixed term tenancy may also be oral or implied.
FIXED TERM TENANCIES AND PART 4
The existence of a fixed term tenancy does not preclude the operation of Part 4. Part 4 runs with a fixed term tenancy, so that the continuous occupation by a tenant under a fixed term tenancy for a period of 6 months, means the tenant shall, as in normal course, become entitled to the protections of a Part 4 tenancy. In cases of fixed term tenancies however, the rights under Part 4 only apply to the extent that they benefit the tenant over and above the rights afforded to him or her under the terms of the fixed term tenancy.

drumswan

cerastes wrote: »

Thread title doesnt say its a fixed term lease and even if it did, really the place to look would be in the lease, not the thread title.

Do you want to explain how a four year lease, or a one year lease or a three year lease for that matter, is not a fixed term lease?

You've been giving advice on thread based on the assumption that no fixed term lease is in place, where is this assumption coming from?

If the RAS scheme has some legal exemption to the norms of Irish tenancy law please post a source for same, it would be extremely helpful.

MouseTail

drumswan wrote: »

Can you post a source for this? I find it hard to believe that a four year RAS agreement doesn't come with a for year fixed term lease. Otherwise it's utterly valueless for the tenant.

It does not come with a 4 year fixed term lease (unless the LL is a bit of an eejit). Benefits of RAS to the tenant include the ability to work and remain on RAS, no deposit required, and the onus on the Council to re house (unless anti social behaviour is involved in eviction). Until the OP clarifies if tenant signed a 4 year contract with the Council (likely), or a 4 year fixed term lease with the LL (unlikely), the only valid advice is to check the agreement, put pressure on RAS Officer and to keep worry and stress of this away from the children.

old_aussie

TireeTerror wrote: »

If the landlord requires the home to sell or for immediate family members he has the right to evict you.

It is his house and if he wants it back, then you should be accepting of that. Look on the bright side, if its damp and he has not properly fixed it, then why would you want your children sleeping in a damp room? Get out and find somewhere even better!

Makes signing a lease in Ireland MEANINGLESS

The_Morrigan

Drumswan watch your tone - your posts are coming across very aggressive and I will not have you posting in that manner here.
If you can't post in a civil manner, do not post at all.

Graham

old_aussie wrote: »

Makes signing a lease in Ireland MEANINGLESS

It would only make them meaningless if TireeTerror was correct in his assumption that notice period for a part 4 tenancy also applied to a fixed term lease.

The_Conductor

Guys-

We don't know precisely what the contractual agreement between the landlord and the Local Authority is.

Typically- a landlord will sign up with a Local Authority for the Rental Accommodation Scheme. They sign a contract with the Local Authority for the scheme- they do not sign a separate contract with the tenant. Typically the Local Authority offers the Landlord a guaranteed rental income- at a set percentage below the open market rate (which varies from Local Authority to Local Authority).

The Landlord typically continues to have a duty of care towards the property- including maintaining it and fixing any issues or problems that arise. Unfortunately some Local Authorities imagine that they can pass all responsibility to the Landlord- when this is not entirely true.

The tenant in turn- is housed by the Local Authority under the RAS scheme (in the landlords property).

I'm not going to offer legal advice- and indeed, will edit and warn other people not to do so- however- I would quite simply point out the simple fact- the landlord has a contract with the Local Authority- and not with the tenant. Certainly tenancy law applies- and protects the tenant- however, it is far from clear that there is any onus on the Local Authority to house the family in a particular property- the onus is simply on them to house the family.........

The OP *needs* to keep on the Local Authority's case.
The Local Authority have a duty towards them- alongside the contractual arrangements they have with the landlord.
It is not satisfactory for the Local Authority to abdicate these responsibilities- and if they attempt to- the OP needs to escalate the case to an officer who actually understands how the RAS scheme works, and is in a position to review all aspects of the case, to ensure a satisfactory outcome all round.

Note- a satisfactory outcome is not necessarily that the OP gets to stay in the property- a satisfactory outcome is that they are housed in a suitable property. Suitability is also not up to the tenant to determine- its up to the deciding officer in the Local Authority.

omnithanos

I actually think Drumswan is giving the most intelligent advice here. Having had a thread locked here yesterday myself I find these boards to be quite negative. Arguing over whether the OP's lease is fixed or not must be quite hurtful to the OP. I find there is very little sympathy for people in distress on these boards. I was accused of ranting and raving yesterday when I was mearly reporting some facts and granted I did offer a few opinions. My great grand uncle, Michael Collins, did his fair share of ranting and raving but people treat him with a bit more respect.

I am a landlord myself and I am aware that if a Tenant digs their heels in it could cost a landlord thousands of euro and many months to have someone evicted.

I believe a series of notices are required, at least two if not three. This information is all available on the PRTB website.

That being said I have always been a very soft landlord and have on occasion had to threaten but never enforce eviction.

I have encountered solicitors and bankers and such types who can be completely unreasonable to deal with but that being said even Hitler had a soft side, he loved dogs. I wonder do you recall the short lived comedy tv series where Hitler was depicted as a landlord?

I would ask you appeal to your landlords better nature and ask if some compromise can be agreed. If his son needs the house perhaps he doesn't need it immediately and you could arrange to stay for six months or so giving you time to arrange alternative accommodation.

Compromise is usually the best solution.

Graham

omnithanos wrote: »

I actually think Drumswan is giving the most intelligent advice here. Having had a thread locked here yesterday myself I find these boards to be quite negative. Arguing over whether the OP's lease is fixed or not must be quite hurtful to the OP. I find there is very little sympathy for people in distress on these boards. I was accused of ranting and raving yesterday when I was mearly reporting some facts and granted I did offer a few opinions. My great grand uncle, Michael Collins, did his fair share of ranting and raving but people treat him with a bit more respect.

I am a landlord myself and I am aware that if a Tenant digs their heels in it could cost a landlord thousands of euro and many months to have someone evicted.

I believe a series of notices are required, at least two if not three. This information is all available on the PRTB website.

That being said I have always been a very soft landlord and have on occasion had to threaten but never enforce eviction.

I have encountered solicitors and bankers and such types who can be completely unreasonable to deal with but that being said even Hitler had a soft side, he loved dogs. I wonder do you recall the short lived comedy tv series where Hitler was depicted as a landlord?

I would ask you appeal to your landlords better nature and ask if some compromise can be agreed. If his son needs the house perhaps he doesn't need it immediately and you could arrange to stay for six months or so giving you time to arrange alternative accommodation.

Compromise is usually the best solution.

Like it or not, whether its a fixed term lease or not is likely to have a massive bearing on the outcome for the tenant.

The facts here are the important thing, sympathy, anecdotes and history are not going to help the OP or keep a roof over his neighbours family.

drumswan

Can anyone actually confirm that the tenant signs a lease under the RAS scheme? Has anyone seen one? Is it a fixed term lease or not? How do they manage to have a lease that covers a fixed period without it being considered a fixed term lease?

Citizens information says tenancies covered under the RAS scheme are governed by the RTA. There must be some council bylaw or additional legislation that changes the legality of tenancies under this scheme, anyone any clue?

antoinolachtnai

RAS stuff I have seen before involved two legal agreements, one with landlord and the tenant (a lease) and another with the landlord and Local Authority (an availability agreement).

I would write to the council's RAS office, enclosing a copy of the lease you signed and the eviction notice and outlining the circumstances. Ask them specifically what they propose you do.

Mark the letter urgent.

I would be surprised if they do not refer it to the legal office. They will know what to do.

Be sure to get an answer in writing.