Agent jumps ship

jeffwebb36

I live in England but own a flat in Dublin so I employed an agent. I have owned the flat for few years the tenants were already there when I bought it. The tenants have been there four years paying a very reasonable 700 pcm with no increases for all of their tenancy. The Tenancy contract ended December 2014. In Oct 2014 I told my agent that I wanted to refurbish the apartment and rent it out at 950pcm. My agent did not like this idea (maybe because I told her that I would seek other estimates before giving her contractors the job)and said I would be better off if I let the present tenants stay at 825 pcm;reluctantly I agreed and told her to tell the tenants the rent would be increased. In November the agent told the tenants initially they said I was being greedy and the flat was not worth 825pcm. The Tenants said they would find a cheaper flat and move out 31 dec. Late in December they told my agent that they had failed to find a cheaper flat. My agent suggested to both the tenants and myself that they should stay another month in order to find another flat, however, the tenants agreed to pay the higher rent of 825pcm for jan, but would definitely leave by the end of January and were not interested in signing a new rental agreement at 825pcm. Now it is the end of January and the tenants and my agent want me to let the tenants stay without signing an agreement. I told the agent that the tenants should either sign a new agreement or get out. My agent told me that I should allow the tenants to stay without signing an agreement they made the point that if i force the tenants out I will have to give them 112 days notice, and if i let them leave when they want to they might leave earlier than the 112 days. I told my agent to follow my instructions rather than her own and give the 112 days notice. She did as instructed but she also resigned as my agent. This means I will have to manage my apartment and travel to Ireland to do so.....are agents allowed to resign when their own actions have caused problems with the tenancy. Please bear in mind that if the agent had followed my instructions in October then the tenants would be out by the end of FEB

Aka Ishur

Kicking someone out for not signing a new agreement is illegal so you better get renovation plans under way to cover yourself. It's the tenants right to choose to continue with a new lease or with out (part 4 basis)

Sounds like the agent doesn't want to be exposed by you to legal costs.

SNNUS

So everything was nice and fine for years until greed set in..

Lux23

Sounds like you should have listened to the agent.

foggy_lad

The tenant has been there 4 years so can be told to leave during the first 6 months of the next 4 year(part4) period.

mrmitty

SNNUS wrote: »

So everything was nice and fine for years until greed set in..

I know, right?


It is very unreasonable for those tenants to expect someone else to subsidize their rent

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

SNNUS wrote: »

So everything was nice and fine for years until greed set in..

The tenants said the flat wasn't worth €825 yet they couldn't find a cheaper one. It's supply and demand, if the market rate dropped and the flat wasn't worth the original €700 I doubt they'd have kept quiet and continued to pay it.

dissed doc

Their tenancy rolls on under Part 4 (assuming they notified you within the required time frame before the end of the tenancy to claim it), and you give appropriate notice of the rent increase, once per 12 months is allowed. If you agreed to 825, then that is the rent. If they do not want to pay, the must lodge a dispute with the PTRB.

My advice, lodge a dispute with the PTRB yourself. They will be liable for any backdated rents they don't pay.

Get rid of the agent, they just stung you out €3000/year assuming it is the market rate. So, take them to court and sue them for doing an incredibly bad job that was clearly against the interests of their client (you).

The tenant can choose, just like in everything in life, to do whatever they want. As long as you gave proper notice, within the law, of the rent increase which was at market value, they can leave or dispute it with PTRB. If you are within the law with your increase and it's application, you win, and the tenant will owe the back rent. What the tenants think about you, the value of the apartment or the weather doesn't matter a damn so their opinion on what is fair or not is not something to waste your breath on. If they have a dispute with the new rent, they must do it with PTRB.

The reason the agent doesn't care originally, is that the after tax, post-expenses profit from the €250 extra they get (usually they get a months rent per year right) isn't worth it. So, from their perspective, they are already getting 90% of max profit from you. For a lot of extra work they only get a small increase of €250. For you it means €3000. That is why they don't care and have FUBAR'd the situation for you, hoping you would simply roll over and suck it up, leave the tenant with cheap rent, and them with most of their max. available income from your contract with them, and you ....you don't matter.

amdublin

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

I live in England but own a flat in Dublin so I employed an agent. I have owned the flat for few years the tenants were already there when I bought it. The tenants have been there four years paying a very reasonable 700 pcm with no increases for all of their tenancy. The Tenancy contract ended December 2014. In Oct 2014 I told my agent that I wanted to refurbish the apartment and rent it out at 950pcm. My agent did not like this idea (maybe because I told her that I would seek other estimates before giving her contractors the job)and said I would be better off if I let the present tenants stay at 825 pcm;reluctantly I agreed and told her to tell the tenants the rent would be increased. In November the agent told the tenants initially they said I was being greedy and the flat was not worth 825pcm. The Tenants said they would find a cheaper flat and move out 31 dec. Late in December they told my agent that they had failed to find a cheaper flat. My agent suggested to both the tenants and myself that they should stay another month in order to find another flat, however, the tenants agreed to pay the higher rent of 825pcm for jan, but would definitely leave by the end of January and were not interested in signing a new rental agreement at 825pcm. Now it is the end of January and the tenants and my agent want me to let the tenants stay without signing an agreement. I told the agent that the tenants should either sign a new agreement or get out. My agent told me that I should allow the tenants to stay without signing an agreement they made the point that if i force the tenants out I will have to give them 112 days notice, and if i let them leave when they want to they might leave earlier than the 112 days. I told my agent to follow my instructions rather than her own and give the 112 days notice. She did as instructed but she also resigned as my agent. This means I will have to manage my apartment and travel to Ireland to do so.....are agents allowed to resign when their own actions have caused problems with the tenancy. Please bear in mind that if the agent had followed my instructions in October then the tenants would be out by the end of FEB

Imo you "reluctantly agreed" and changed your instruction/agreed to something else in October.

From what I've read here I don't blame the agent from resigning from dealing with you.

mrmitty

amdublin wrote: »

Imo you "reluctantly agreed" and changed your instruction/agreed to something else in October.

From what I've read here I don't blame the agent from resigning from dealing with you.

But the tenant (in October) didn't agree thereby voiding any idea of a contract, verbal or otherwise.


Ireland really needs to put sensible legislation into place governing these EA's and how contracts are negotiated.




Edit: btw, I'm an EA (not in Ireland)

The_Morrigan

mrmitty wrote: »

But the tenant (in October) didn't agree thereby voiding any idea of a contract, verbal or otherwise.


Ireland really needs to put sensible legislation into place governing these EA's and how contracts are negotiated.




Edit: btw, I'm an EA (not in Ireland)

Don't be ridiculous! If an offer is made by anyone a counter offer is permitted any number of times by each side before a contract is formed on mutual agreement. The landlord agreed to the counter offer thereby creating a contract on new terms.

It's standard practice here that if a landlord increases the rent, that you negotiate that increase first, then head to the PRTB if an agreement can't be made and you believe that the rent is not reflective of market rates for that property.

jeffwebb36

After writing this I will quote and answer individuals who have answered:
Nobody as such has answered the question that I wanted to be answered ie are agents allowed to resign from managing a property where problems in the property have stemmed from the agents actions

jeffwebb36

Aka Ishur wrote: »

Kicking someone out for not signing a new agreement is illegal so you better get renovation plans under way to cover yourself. It's the tenants right to choose to continue with a new lease or with out (part 4 basis)

Sounds like the agent doesn't want to be exposed by you to legal costs.

Kicking out is a little harsh as a description of my actions.

I wrote a letter to the agent a few months ago (still have it as evidence) which proves I had and still have plans for renovation
exert from letter

> > We should refurbish by way of new bathroom power
> shower
> > instead of bath. New sink, Toilet, and ceiling
> with fancy
> > lights. Tilling floor and wall replaced. The
> kitchen
> > should
> > be tarted up not renewed. The rest of the
> apartment
> > decorated. A wall mounted LED tv fitted in lounge
> will
> > make
> > the small room bigger.
> > Could you give me your thoughts on the
> above
> > ideas

Concerning part 4 basis I did not know these rules. I employed an agent so I would not have to study rental rules, but it seems that was not a good idea so today I have read said part 4 rules, but they do not exactly apply. If the agent had asked me and the tenant if we would be happy to rent on a part 4 basis and the tenant said yes I probably would have agreed. Agreeing to part 4 would have informally meant both me and the tenant would agree that the rent would be 825pcm and the tenant would be required to give 56 days notice and me give 112 days notice. However, the tenant although not able to find an apartment cheaper is/was adamant that he would, and soon-ever he did he would be out with very little if any notice. Now if the tenant had to give 56 days notice then he would be reluctant to move because he would lose rent in lieu of notice, but on the terms the agent gave him he would be able to move on a minutes notice ie he gave notice of leaving at the first of December with a vacate date of 31 dec so if he left on 29 december he would have lost 2 days in lieu of rent. Then in late december he cancelled the 31 dec vacate date and replaced it with a 31 jan vacate date under same terms could leave 30 jan giving one day notice. Then he tried to do the same for February, but i said either stay and sign a lease or go (I was not informed of part 4 and he would not have agreed to 56 days notice anyway)
As things stand he should move in may so I know where I stand. If I let the tenant and agent continue on their system then he might have left in October, and I would have used all my holidays so would not be able to refurbish the flat myself.

jeffwebb36

dissed doc wrote: »

Their tenancy rolls on under Part 4 (assuming they notified you within the required time frame before the end of the tenancy to claim it), and you give appropriate notice of the rent increase, once per 12 months is allowed. If you agreed to 825, then that is the rent. If they do not want to pay, the must lodge a dispute with the PTRB.

My advice, lodge a dispute with the PTRB yourself. They will be liable for any backdated rents they don't pay.

Get rid of the agent, they just stung you out €3000/year assuming it is the market rate. So, take them to court and sue them for doing an incredibly bad job that was clearly against the interests of their client (you).

The tenant can choose, just like in everything in life, to do whatever they want. As long as you gave proper notice, within the law, of the rent increase which was at market value, they can leave or dispute it with PTRB. If you are within the law with your increase and it's application, you win, and the tenant will owe the back rent. What the tenants think about you, the value of the apartment or the weather doesn't matter a damn so their opinion on what is fair or not is not something to waste your breath on. If they have a dispute with the new rent, they must do it with PTRB.

The reason the agent doesn't care originally, is that the after tax, post-expenses profit from the €250 extra they get (usually they get a months rent per year right) isn't worth it. So, from their perspective, they are already getting 90% of max profit from you. For a lot of extra work they only get a small increase of €250. For you it means €3000. That is why they don't care and have FUBAR'd the situation for you, hoping you would simply roll over and suck it up, leave the tenant with cheap rent, and them with most of their max. available income from your contract with them, and you ....you don't matter.

I did not know about part 4 the tenant never asked me for part 4 but he might have asked the agent....I know part 4 now but do not exactly understand it ie the tenant must tell the LL if he is claiming part4 but it is OK if he doesn't.
At present the tenants do not owe rent and I am not too concerned about the rent I want them out or agree to pay the 825 euro and allow me in the flat to repair the dampness problem.
I totally agree with the idea of getting rid of the agent but I got an agent because I cannot travel back and forth to Ireland.
Concerning the ptrb initially the tenants said they would make a complaint about the high rent, but retracted said threat after conceding the new rent was still below the market value. I believe their stance is the rent I am charging is fair but they will get a flat at below market value soon and soon-ever they do will move out.
The last paragraph you wrote sums up the situation really well.....thanks

jeffwebb36

amdublin wrote: »

Imo you "reluctantly agreed" and changed your instruction/agreed to something else in October.

From what I've read here I don't blame the agent from resigning from dealing with you.

The agent wanted me to accept 825 euro pcm rent and leave the property UN-renovated. I wanted to renovate the flat and charge 950 euro pcm. Reluctantly I agreed to take the agent's advice. So we told the tenant to pay 825 euro the tenant said no.......what did I do wrong please explain

jeffwebb36

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Don't be ridiculous! If an offer is made by anyone a counter offer is permitted any number of times by each side before a contract is formed on mutual agreement. The landlord agreed to the counter offer thereby creating a contract on new terms.

It's standard practice here that if a landlord increases the rent, that you negotiate that increase first, then head to the PRTB if an agreement can't be made and you believe that the rent is not reflective of market rates for that property.

Sorry my fault I did not fully divulge the negotiations which took place:
I asked for 825
Tenant said no and went to PRTB
Tenant said he decided not to appeal to PRTB and offered 725
I said no
Tenant said he would leave end of DEC
Agent contacted me to say tenant unable to find cheaper accommodation want to stay until end of jan and would pay 825 for january rent
I said OK but no longer
Agent contacted and said the tenant wanted to postpone leaving to end of FEB
I said no he has to go or sign a new agreement. I did not know about part4 if I had I (probably)would have agreed to an informal contract where the tenant has to give me 56 days notice of leaving

dubrov

It sounds like your agent has been incompetent and you should be glad they are gone.

Just get a new agent who can advise you and move on

The_Morrigan

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

Sorry my fault I did not fully divulge the negotiations which took place:
I asked for 825
Tenant said no and went to PRTB
Tenant said he decided not to appeal to PRTB and offered 725
I said no
Tenant said he would leave end of DEC
Agent contacted me to say tenant unable to find cheaper accommodation want to stay until end of jan and would pay 825 for january rent
I said OK but no longer
Agent contacted and said the tenant wanted to postpone leaving to end of FEB
I said no he has to go or sign a new agreement. I did not know about part4 if I had I (probably)would have agreed to an informal contract where the tenant has to give me 56 days notice of leaving

Sounds like none of you know what you are doing.

You can't evict someone who has been there for four years or more without giving them the proper notice (a month is not proper notice). You also can't threaten to have them sign a lease or get out - doesn't work that way. They are entitled to stay 'out of contract' under the Part IV rules.
You should also go and read some of the PRTB rulings when it comes to breaches of the RTA 2004, especially with regards to illegal evictions.


To answer your question - yes the agent can resign at any time and she didn't cause all this hassle - your lack of knowledge was also a factor in this, she tried to steer you into an alternative arrangement based on local factors, which you agreed with at the time.

Jack the Box

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

After writing this I will quote and answer individuals who have answered:
Nobody as such has answered the question that I wanted to be answered ie are agents allowed to resign from managing a property where problems in the property have stemmed from the agents actions

In short - YES

Arbiter of Good Taste

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Sounds like none of you know what you are doing.

That is not fair. The OP hired an agent so he would not have to become an expert in Irish landlod and tenant law. At the very least it sounds like the agent failed in her duty to properly advise her client.

amdublin

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

The agent wanted me to accept 825 euro pcm rent and leave the property UN-renovated. I wanted to renovate the flat and charge 950 euro pcm. Reluctantly I agreed to take the agent's advice. So we told the tenant to pay 825 euro the tenant said no.......what did I do wrong please explain

• You and the agent (reluctantly) agreed something.
• The agent told the tenant what was agreed.

If I am reading it correctly you now think the agent did not do what you told them to do and have caused issues?
To me they did what you agreed with them.

As I said before, I don't blame them resigning. Good luck with getting a new agent.

The_Morrigan

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

That is not fair. The OP hired an agent so he would not have to become an expert in Irish landlod and tenant law. At the very least it sounds like the agent failed in her duty to properly advise her client.

It's also not fair for a landlord to give a months notice after 4 years of tenancy.
The OP is stating that the agent didn't follow his instruction - his instructions are illegal and now the OP is annoyed.

Anyway that is neither here nor there - the answer to the question is that the agent can resign at any point. Any further discussion on how that came about is purely speculation.

jeffwebb36

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Sounds like none of you know what you are doing.

You can't evict someone who has been there for four years or more without giving them the proper notice (a month is not proper notice). You also can't threaten to have them sign a lease or get out - doesn't work that way. They are entitled to stay 'out of contract' under the Part IV rules.
You should also go and read some of the PRTB rulings when it comes to breaches of the RTA 2004, especially with regards to illegal evictions.


To answer your question - yes the agent can resign at any time and she didn't cause all this hassle - your lack of knowledge was also a factor in this, she tried to steer you into an alternative arrangement based on local factors, which you agreed with at the time.

I agree with your first sentence none of us knew what were doing, but I am learning from reading these posts. The tenant probably does not know the regulations, but the agent should of known what can and cannot be done. It seems either she did not know or she wanted to keep said info a secret.
I never said I gave them a months notice. I have given 112 days via the agent reason being refurbishment
I never knew the part 4 rules but have some knowledge of them now. The Tenant never requested part 4 rules, neither did my agent.......If they had I probably would have accepted. The agent wanted the tenant to give one month notice at the beginning of each month then move out when he found an apartment to go to. I accepted this arrangement for Dec and Jan but declined further extensions. The route of submitting notice at the beginning of each month then cancelling it at the end of each month is not part 4 rules. If the tenant was on part 4 rules and found a new apartment on feb 25 then he would have to give 56 days notice and pay until mid april whether he served his notice or not. Under the rules invented by the agent if the Tenant found a new apartment on Feb 25 then he could move out on said date only serving 2 days notice ie he had paid until the end of Feb and would not receive a refund

she tried to steer you into an alternative arrangement based on local factors, which you agreed with at the time

From the above it sounds like you are stating that I changed my mind no this is not quite true. The agent changed the arrangements and i allowed them to be changed until the last arrangement change
1) Agent told me to charge 800 to 850 PCM as revised rent. I opted for 825 but the tenant rejected this.
2) Agent asked for the end of december vacate time arranged by the tenant (tenant gave notice of one month) to be canceled and replaced by an end of january vacate time...... I agreed
3) Agent asked for end of Jan vacate date to be cancelled and replaced by an end of February vacate time, with the clause that she could change the vacate time again at the end of feb if the tenants still had not found another apartment.....i rejected this request

rubberdiddies

First off hire a new agent. There are lots and lots of them vying for business.

If what you say is correct it sounds to me like your agent and the tenants know each other or are friendly somehow and didn't agree with you increasing the rent to closer to market rate.

You are fully entitled to one increase per year up to market rate.

If your tenant refuses to pay then you can legall evict them by following the correct procedures.

Unfortunately in Ireland any tenant can decide to stop paying rent for a year or more and you have little or no chance of ever getting the money back.

But people will continue to tell you that tenants have no rights.

If I were you living abroad I would simply hire another (competent and recommended) agent asap

The_Morrigan

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

I agree with your first sentence none of us knew what were doing, but I am learning from reading these posts. The tenant probably does not know the regulations, but the agent should of known what can and cannot be done. It seems either she did not know or she wanted to keep said info a secret.
I never said I gave them a months notice. I have given 112 days via the agent reason being refurbishment
I never knew the part 4 rules but have some knowledge of them now. The Tenant never requested part 4 rules, neither did my agent.......If they had I probably would have accepted. The agent wanted the tenant to give one month notice at the beginning of each month then move out when he found an apartment to go to. I accepted this arrangement for Dec and Jan but declined further extensions. The route of submitting notice at the beginning of each month then cancelling it at the end of each month is not part 4 rules. If the tenant was on part 4 rules and found a new apartment on feb 25 then he would have to give 56 days notice and pay until mid april whether he served his notice or not. Under the rules invented by the agent if the Tenant found a new apartment on Feb 25 then he could move out on said date only serving 2 days notice ie he had paid until the end of Feb and would not receive a refund

she tried to steer you into an alternative arrangement based on local factors, which you agreed with at the time

From the above it sounds like you are stating that I changed my mind no this is not quite true. The agent changed the arrangements and i allowed them to be changed until the last arrangement change
1) Agent told me to charge 800 to 850 PCM as revised rent. I opted for 825 but the tenant rejected this.
2) Agent asked for the end of december vacate time arranged by the tenant (tenant gave notice of one month) to be canceled and replaced by an end of january vacate time...... I agreed
3) Agent asked for end of Jan vacate date to be cancelled and replaced by an end of February vacate time, with the clause that she could change the vacate time again at the end of feb if the tenants still had not found another apartment.....i rejected this request

Jeff you keep updating your story with snippets of information which is really annoying to anyone trying to give you advice. The full story would have been handy from the get go! To be quite frank with you the he said/she said stuff is irrelevant at this point.

As for part IV, at this point they have it as it can't be denied by the landlord or their agent once the lease has expired. If you had advertised the property and found new tenants etc on foot of the assumption that they were leaving on the 31st December (ignoring the fact that you had been in touch with them regarding a rent increase), then they would be liable for any costs associated with that.
You should also be aware that arrangements can be made that are less strict than the legislation by mutual agreement - it happens all the time here. For instance, if you had tenants who were purchasing a house and their timeline was a moving target to exit. You could both agree to a tentative termination date with the option to work on a month to month basis if their purchase didn't happen on time. This is what the agent was trying to achieve here. The rental market in Dublin is horrendous and finding properties is not easy.

You really need to learn this stuff if you are planning on being a landlord, you shouldn't rely on anyone else to protect your business. Fair enough if you are relying on a solr or accountant for intricate legal and tax obligations, but standard tenancy law you should know - there are plenty of resources out there for landlords to be up to date with their rights and obligations.

matrim

The_Morrigan wrote: »

It's also not fair for a landlord to give a months notice after 4 years of tenancy.
The OP is stating that the agent didn't follow his instruction - his instructions are illegal and now the OP is annoyed.

Anyway that is neither here nor there - the answer to the question is that the agent can resign at any point. Any further discussion on how that came about is purely speculation.

TBF it sounds like he didn't give the tenant one months notice. It was the tenant who gave the short notice period

Arbiter of Good Taste

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Jeff you keep updating your story with snippets of information which is really annoying to anyone trying to give you advice. The full story would have been handy from the get go! To be quite frank with you the he said/she said stuff is irrelevant at this point.

As for part IV, at this point they have it as it can't be denied by the landlord or their agent once the lease has expired. If you had advertised the property and found new tenants etc on foot of the assumption that they were leaving on the 31st December (ignoring the fact that you had been in touch with them regarding a rent increase), then they would be liable for any costs associated with that.
You should also be aware that arrangements can be made that are less strict than the legislation by mutual agreement - it happens all the time here. For instance, if you had tenants who were purchasing a house and their timeline was a moving target to exit. You could both agree to a tentative termination date with the option to work on a month to month basis if their purchase didn't happen on time. This is what the agent was trying to achieve here. The rental market in Dublin is horrendous and finding properties is not easy.

You really need to learn this stuff if you are planning on being a landlord, you shouldn't rely on anyone else to protect your business. Fair enough if you are relying on a solr or accountant for intricate legal and tax obligations, but standard tenancy law you should know - there are plenty of resources out there for landlords to be up to date with their rights and obligations.

Then what's the point of hiring an agent who supposedly should advise on these things? Do you honestly believe that,say, the property manager of a multinational that owns properties in different countries knows the details of laws in each jurisdiction? No, that's what local agents are for. Or Irish people who own properties in Dubai, France, Egypt (I'm just giving examples of people I personally know) - they hire local experts to advise and manage.

The OP asked his agent to do something. If it was illegal, the agent should have advised. If at that point the OP wanted to ignore the law, then I would agree with you. But there is no indication that the agent even provided correct advice.

OP, to answer your specific question, yes, the agent can terminate your arrange,eat. But, to be honest, I would be looking for a new agent anyway.

The_Morrigan

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

Then what's the point of hiring an agent who supposedly should advise on these things? Do you honestly believe that,say, the property manager of a multinational that owns properties in different countries knows the details of laws in each jurisdiction? No, that's what local agents are for. Or Irish people who own properties in Dubai, France, Egypt (I'm just giving examples of people I personally know) - they hire local experts to advise and manage.....

Yes.
I was at training the other day for Islamic finance because we have an office in Dubai - I don't work there, we have local agents, I still need to know about it.
I also have to learn about laws in Delaware, NY and Cayman - I don't work there either and we have local agents - still have to know it!

My point is, if it's your business then you should be protecting it - we all know about rogue professionals, we've had enough cases in Ireland to prove that you may rely on their advice, but it is in your best interest to know the basics in case they try something that could land you in trouble. Part IV tenancy and the RTA is basic and wildly known, otherwise we would not be allowed to discuss it here on Boards as it would fall under professional advice and breach the site rules.

davo10

Mod, by my reading the OP gave the correct notice, 112 days. Without him knowing the correct regulations, he actually is entitled to do that after the fourth year of a tenancy. The one month notice would seem to be a agreement between agent/LL and tenant that the tenant could stay on until they found somewhere cheaper and then leave at the end of that one month notice.

The OP has a reasonable expectation that the EA should be knowledgable in tenancy regulations and be in a position to advise the OP and to carry out his instructions assuming of course they are legal. That is the service he is paying for.

OP the EA can walk away and to be honest, you may be better off engaging a more competent one.

Mrs OBumble

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

After writing this I will quote and answer individuals who have answered:
Nobody as such has answered the question that I wanted to be answered ie are agents allowed to resign from managing a property where problems in the property have stemmed from the agents actions

Yes. AFAIK. But I'm not a lawyer.

Why don't you just hire a different agent?

But remember that of you do, you are signing up to use their maintenance contractors.

jeffwebb36

The_Morrigan wrote: »

Jeff you keep updating your story with snippets of information which is really annoying to anyone trying to give you advice. The full story would have been handy from the get go! To be quite frank with you the he said/she said stuff is irrelevant at this point.

As for part IV, at this point they have it as it can't be denied by the landlord or their agent once the lease has expired. If you had advertised the property and found new tenants etc on foot of the assumption that they were leaving on the 31st December (ignoring the fact that you had been in touch with them regarding a rent increase), then they would be liable for any costs associated with that.
You should also be aware that arrangements can be made that are less strict than the legislation by mutual agreement - it happens all the time here. For instance, if you had tenants who were purchasing a house and their timeline was a moving target to exit. You could both agree to a tentative termination date with the option to work on a month to month basis if their purchase didn't happen on time. This is what the agent was trying to achieve here. The rental market in Dublin is horrendous and finding properties is not easy.

You really need to learn this stuff if you are planning on being a landlord, you shouldn't rely on anyone else to protect your business. Fair enough if you are relying on a solr or accountant for intricate legal and tax obligations, but standard tenancy law you should know - there are plenty of resources out there for landlords to be up to date with their rights and obligations.

fair points made but I believe I should have been made aware of part 4 (by the agent)so I could make an informed decision.....it would seem the agent does not like part 4 so kept quiet about it

jeffwebb36

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Yes. AFAIK. But I'm not a lawyer.

Why don't you just hire a different agent?

But remember that of you do, you are signing up to use their maintenance contractors.

Funny you should mention maintenance contractors, last year my agent charged 100euro for an oven hob and 100euro for fitting it. I contacted power city and they charge 50 euro for fitting oven hobs so i mentioned this to my agent...maybe that is one of the reasons she resigned ie i told her not to load maintenance work fees

jeffwebb36

amdublin wrote: »

• You and the agent (reluctantly) agreed something.
• The agent told the tenant what was agreed.

If I am reading it correctly you now think the agent did not do what you told them to do and have caused issues?
To me they did what you agreed with them.

As I said before, I don't blame them resigning. Good luck with getting a new agent.

Sorry it was the tenant refusing to pay the revised rent as far as this section of the story you have quoted

jeffwebb36

The_Morrigan wrote: »

It's also not fair for a landlord to give a months notice after 4 years of tenancy.
The OP is stating that the agent didn't follow his instruction - his instructions are illegal and now the OP is annoyed.

Anyway that is neither here nor there - the answer to the question is that the agent can resign at any point. Any further discussion on how that came about is purely speculation.

The tenant gave me one month notice then changed his mind and stayed then again he gave one month notice then changed his mind and stayed. I have given the tenant 112 days notice

Graces7

Someone mentioned tax and wondering if the rule re overseas landlords and tax still applies or ?

Mrs OBumble

Graces7 wrote: »

Someone mentioned tax and wondering if the rule re overseas landlords and tax still applies or ?

It does.

Good point, too.

OP, if you take over managing this yourself, your tenant should stop paying 20% of the rent to you, and start paying it directly to Revenue.

anncoates

SNNUS wrote: »

So everything was nice and fine for years until greed set in..

Landlords are not registered charities, as far as I'm aware.

beauf

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

fair points made but I believe I should have been made aware of part 4 (by the agent)so I could make an informed decision.....it would seem the agent does not like part 4 so kept quiet about it

Probably doesn't know about it. I've had very poor experiences with agents.

You should have a contract with your agent and what are their and your responsibilities documented.

You have to know the law regardless of having an agent or not.

jeffwebb36

beauf wrote: »

Probably doesn't know about it. I've had very poor experiences with agents.

You should have a contract with your agent and what are their and your responsibilities documented.

You have to know the law regardless of having an agent or not.

I suspect they know about part 4 but they also know that their commission would be lower

jeffwebb36

Thank you all contributors taking we are now in the situation that the agent has resigned is there anything to stop me taking over management myself, of course tax payments would have to be sorted out. Having said that what I was thinking was part 4 (which I did not know about before coming on this site) seems quite appealing to me because the tenant would have to give 56 days notice of leaving. Now if I offered the tenant a discount on the rent provided he did some of the repairs the he might agree to stay on a part 4 arrangement. If he does is there any paperwork/agreements to be signed or is it all done by verbal agreement, does anyone have any advice pertaining to this idea?

beauf

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

I suspect they know about part 4 but they also know that their commission would be lower

I think you are reading too much into it. I would say they could see a lot of hassle with the tenant in the future so abandoned ship.

beauf

I would get a contract drawn up.

I wouldn't get the tenant to do repairs. They may not be qualified and it can cause disputes about the value of the work.

I wouldn't under value a long term tenant who pays on time. So meeting them half way on the rent is to be considered. I'd also consider getting another agent perhaps with a formal contract. Considering you're so far aware. Hard to fnd a good one though. many do without one.

Graces7

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

It does.

Good point, too.

OP, if you take over managing this yourself, your tenant should stop paying 20% of the rent to you, and start paying it directly to Revenue.

Wondering if the agent sorted this as if not there will be a large back payment to be made to the Revenue now...is the owner aware of this as I would think he is not from his posts...

I carried a watermelon

Revenue would have deemed the agent the collection agent.


Its the tenants who would usually deduct the tax on the payments for an overseas landlord, but if the tenants were genuinely not aware of their obligations Revenue don't usually look at the previous years.

Anyway, once the landlord is making full income tax returns to include the rental income there will be no further tax due on the rent for back years.

cerastes

I carried a watermelon wrote: »

Revenue would have deemed the agent the collection agent.


Its the tenants who would usually deduct the tax on the payments for an overseas landlord, but if the tenants were genuinely not aware of their obligations Revenue don't usually look at the previous years.

Anyway, once the landlord is making full income tax returns to include the rental income there will be no further tax due on the rent for back years.

It looks to me like the op did right, gave 112 days notice at the end of 4 years,no rent increases all along, would mean they were and are getting rent below current market value?
In the situation the op was under no obligation to give any reason like renovations, just say here's your 112 days notice, obviously the specifics of not being here makes it more difficult but the Op appears to have not done anything wrong.
As for what to do regarding rent and what revenue requires, my understanding is if I an agent manages and collects rent, its their obligation and if then landlord does it, then all that needs to be done is for the tenant to deduct 20% and nothing more is required, nothing is sent to revenue regarding the 20% as I have read suggested.
Although the tenant must give the landlord a completed form that shows the 20% was deducted so the landlord can claim it back off their tax deduction, haven't had to do it myself but I believe that's by he just of it./

I carried a watermelon

cerastes wrote: »

It looks to me like the op did right, gave 112 days notice at the end of 4 years,no rent increases all along, would mean they were and are getting rent below current market value?
In the situation the op was under no obligation to give any reason like renovations, just say here's your 112 days notice, obviously the specifics of not being here makes it more difficult but the Op appears to have not done anything wrong.
As for what to do regarding rent and what revenue requires, my understanding is if I an agent manages and collects rent, its their obligation and if then landlord does it, then all that needs to be done is for the tenant to deduct 20% and nothing more is required, nothing is sent to revenue regarding the 20% as I have read suggested.
Although the tenant must give the landlord a completed form that shows the 20% was deducted so the landlord can claim it back off their tax deduction, haven't had to do it myself but I believe that's by he just of it./

If the rent is paid to a nonresident landlord, the tenant is to deduct 20% of the rent from the landlord.
Usually the tenant would contact Revenue so Revenue can code the deduction through their tax credits - so the tenant would pay the extra 20% deduction through their wages but at the same time the tenant would keep the 20% deduction from the rent for themselves - (I hope this is making sense) - therefore the tenant is not losing out but the nonresident landlord is only receiving 80% of the rent from the tenant.
If the tax is not collected through the tenants tax credits then the tenant will need to forward the 20% deduction to Revenue at the end of the tax year.
The landlord then gets a credit for the 20% deduction when he\she files their returns.

The tenant can't just keep the 20% deduction for themselves, if they do this then they will defo have a large bill to pay to the Revenue.

cerastes

I carried a watermelon wrote: »

If the rent is paid to a nonresident landlord, the tenant is to deduct 20% of the rent from the landlord.
Usually the tenant would contact Revenue so Revenue can code the deduction through their tax credits - so the tenant would pay the extra 20% deduction through their wages but at the same time the tenant would keep the 20% deduction from the rent for themselves - (I hope this is making sense) - therefore the tenant is not losing out but the nonresident landlord is only receiving 80% of the rent from the tenant.
If the tax is not collected through the tenants tax credits then the tenant will need to forward the 20% deduction to Revenue at the end of the tax year.
The landlord then gets a credit for the 20% deduction when he\she files their returns.

The tenant can't just keep the 20% deduction for themselves, if they do this then they will defo have a large bill to pay to the Revenue.

Wasn't certain the tenant had to do anything, I read recently there was a form to fill in to supply either the landlord or revenue, thought it was for landlord so they could supply that to the revenue to claim their credit, I certainly didn't realise the tenant was paying for this via a reduced credit through their wages? I don't see the advantage in that situation for the tenant at all, especially now the tenant relief is on the way out or gone. If they are not employed then it seems they collect the value of this and pay revenue at the end of the year? I used to think it was a tidy and simple arrangement for all involved, it kind of looks like its messy, especially for tenants that might dip into it or not consider such things or have these dealings usually.
If anything, I don't see where revenue is going with the tenant relief end of things being removed, all that ever seemed to me was a very slight incentive to get cheap reporting for the revenue on who was renting (the value for the when you worked it out isntbthat much,especially if the tenant was on the lower rate of tax) add dealing with revenue and I can see even tenants making deals with landlords rather than having to bother with revenue at all. I've not had to deal with this situation but it certainly seems like its out of the landlords hands and better if their tenant in such a case is employed?
All in, it does seem like the op hasn't done any wrong as the agent would have been required to do this work on their behalf.