Rental house left in shocking condition.

Rhys Essien

I dont know should they be called vermin rather than people.I hope the social services follow up with the three young kids they have.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/examviral/real-life/cork-landlord-warns-about-family-who-littered-house-with-dirt-and-faeces-334163.html

CaoimheSquee

Seriously, how does a home actually get to that condition?
Hows does one family block every toilet?
But then again, if you are the sort of person that can do your business in a black sack on the floor of your home then anything is possible.
This is grotesque.
The poor kids.

Stheno

How will the children cope with normality at the likes of school etc if that's how they live at home?

Feel sorry for that landlord, and whoever has to clean that up

elfy4eva

Stheno wrote: »

How will the children cope with normality at the likes of school etc if that's how they live at home?

Feel sorry for that landlord, and whoever has to clean that up

More importantly, how do children stay with parents if that is the squalor they are being brought up in.

athtrasna

Mod note Please do not bring social services etc into this thread. The state of the house is an A&P issue, the welfare of the children isn't. Thanks!

MrWalsh

It takes a long time for a property to get into that level of neglect, presumably the landlord had never inspected it in the time it was rented out - that amount of dirt doesnt accumulate in a few months.

The_Conductor

MrWalsh wrote: »

It takes a long time for a property to get into that level of neglect, presumably the landlord had never inspected it in the time it was rented out - that amount of dirt doesnt accumulate in a few months.

That amount of 'dirt' can accumulate in 4 months. Keep in mind- its 2 adults and 3 children. At least one of the children is in nappies- look at the sack of them- that sack alone could represent 2-3 weeks worth of nappies......... As for using black sacks on the floor in lieu of toilets- I want to retch at the thought.

There is no way on earth that a deposit is going to return this property to a habitable state. The landlord *needs* to lodge a PRTB case against the tenants- if only to get what happened on official record.

MrWalsh

The_Conductor wrote: »

That amount of 'dirt' can accumulate in 4 months.

From the pics there are cabinets with mould and the sheer build up alone would lead me to believe that this situation has gone on for more than a year. 4 months of neglect wouldnt have such an "accumulated" look IMO.

The_Valeyard

It's like it's from a horror film. disgusting sub human behaviour.

The_Conductor

MrWalsh wrote: »

From the pics there are cabinets with mould and the sheer build up alone would lead me to believe that this situation has gone on for more than a year. 4 months of neglect wouldnt have such an "accumulated" look IMO.

I've no reference point on which to draw (thank Christ)- so I'm not in a position to dispute this with you (not that it really matters).

MrWalsh

The_Conductor wrote: »

I've no reference point on which to draw (thank Christ)- so I'm not in a position to dispute this with you (not that it really matters).

I do (unfortunately) and I only mentioned it because from a landlords pov, reasonably regular inspections (once a year even) could prevent this kind of a shock (and expense) when a tenant leaves.

A friend of mine rented a place to people who blocked the ensuite toilet, and rather than call a plumber OR inform the landlord, they moved a wardrobe in front of the ensuite and pretended it didnt exist. People do all kinds of strange things.

Vex Willems

Jesus, and I think my place is bad with a few unwashed cups plates in the sink, a counter that could do with a wipe and a crisp bag or two not thrown in the bin!

on_my_oe

MrWalsh wrote: »

A friend of mine rented a place to people who blocked the ensuite toilet, and rather than call a plumber OR inform the landlord, they moved a wardrobe in front of the ensuite and pretended it didnt exist. People do all kinds of strange things.

The mind boggles (and the stomach heaves).

A family member used to run a company maintaining landlord properties, and once hired my sister and I to clean a rental after his cleaners refused to touch a property - desperate students eager for cash etc... They had left the soiled disposable nappies in the bath amongst other things and there were maggots crawling out as we lifted them. I was mostly disgusted but also a little sad that there were people out there who feel that's an acceptable way to live.

Unfortunately this type of behaviour encourages landlords to request massive deposits, both as a protection against damage but also as a filtering mechanism

Hollister11

This happened to my parents. Now it wasn't as bad as this but it was quite bad. She wouldn't leave the house, we called the prtb and were told to give her the deposit back of 1k. She left. There was then no rent for 4 months another bill 4k and the house had to be totally done up. All the appliances had to be new and we threw out all the furniture and rented it in furnished. The re ovation cost 10k

whippet

just brings back memories of one of my lovely tennants.

they managed to destroy my former family home in more or less the same manner (grant it without the sh1te on the floor), tore apple trees out of the ground .. it took two long wheelbase sprinter vans full of broken furniture, scrap and rubbish and the guts of €5000 to get it ready for the next tenant. This all on top of the tenants looking for me to pay them a couple of grand to get out of the house as they need a deposit on a caravan before they would leave.

hense I am no longer in the rental game .. tenants can do too much damage without any recourse ..

If only the PRTB could use the PPS numbers to garner damages from peoples social welfare / wages to ensure that all the risk isn't on the one side of the deal.

murphaph

whippet wrote: »

If only the PRTB could use the PPS numbers to garner damages from peoples social welfare / wages to ensure that all the risk isn't on the one side of the deal.

It could be even easier (though your suggestion is sound). If we had a reliable way to identify delinquent landlords and tenants then that's all you need as the first house a person ruins or the first deposit a landlord unfairly withholds will be their last as they become easily identifiable pariahs.

kidneyfan

murphaph wrote: »

It could be even easier (though your suggestion is sound). If we had a reliable way to identify delinquent landlords and tenants then that's all you need as the first house a person ruins or the first deposit a landlord unfairly withholds will be their last as they become easily identifiable pariahs.

Data protection doesn't allow absurdly. Tenants and landlords should both be registered with PRTB.

Cuddlesworth

I've seen this before when the tenants didn't feel like paying bin charges. In reality I doubt this landlord had costs close to 5k, its superficial damage. All that could be cleaned, no real damage to the furniture, appliances or walls from what I can see in the pictures. 1k for a proper deep clean and waste removal, 200 for a un-block of the toilets(who do people flush nappies?) and 400 for a quick paint job on the walls of the house.

You can get far worse than this, I have seen full on structural damage due to neglect and it can happen in a short space of time especially where water is concerned. I think the no recourse from anything social welfare related really starts to hit home with any long term landlords after a while. Although I am aware of 1 instance of a corporate let with 35k in damages that got interesting.

Moonbeam

eugh I didn't get past the 1st paragraph.
I had my house wrecked my tenants but at least it was clean:)

handlemaster

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I've seen this before when the tenants didn't feel like paying bin charges. In reality I doubt this landlord had costs close to 5k, its superficial damage. All that could be cleaned, no real damage to the furniture, appliances or walls from what I can see in the pictures. 1k for a proper deep clean and waste removal, 200 for a un-block of the toilets(who do people flush nappies?) and 400 for a quick paint job on the walls of the house.

You can get far worse than this, I have seen full on structural damage due to neglect and it can happen in a short space of time especially where water is concerned. I think the no recourse from anything social welfare related really starts to hit home with any long term landlords after a while. Although I am aware of 1 instance of a corporate let with 35k in damages that got interesting.

400 euro to paint the house... Is this the 1970's. And painting isnt a quick job if your doing it yourself

murphaph

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I've seen this before when the tenants didn't feel like paying bin charges. In reality I doubt this landlord had costs close to 5k, its superficial damage. All that could be cleaned, no real damage to the furniture, appliances or walls from what I can see in the pictures. 1k for a proper deep clean and waste removal, 200 for a un-block of the toilets(who do people flush nappies?) and 400 for a quick paint job on the walls of the house.

You can get far worse than this, I have seen full on structural damage due to neglect and it can happen in a short space of time especially where water is concerned. I think the no recourse from anything social welfare related really starts to hit home with any long term landlords after a while. Although I am aware of 1 instance of a corporate let with 35k in damages that got interesting.

Please. The photos don't show the whole house. Do you think these animals spared the soft furnishings from their filth? New sofa, new curtains and blinds, new carpets presumably. Quite likely any laminate or wood flooring was water (best case!) damaged as well. 5k is probably conservative I reckon!

sReq | uTeK

murphaph wrote: »

Please. The photos don't show the whole house. Do you think these animals spared the soft furnishings from their filth? New sofa, new curtains and blinds, new carpets presumably. Quite likely any laminate or wood flooring was water (best case!) damaged as well. 5k is probably conservative I reckon!

Scum...it's the poor kids I feel sorry for, insurance I hope covers the ll

Cuddlesworth

handlemaster wrote: »

400 euro to paint the house... Is this the 1970's. And painting isnt a quick job if your doing it yourself

There are two ways to paint a rental house, emphasis on the rental part. The right way and the way everybody else does it.

The first and most important thing to realize is that a rental house is empty. There are a few large items of furniture and nothing else. You also don't need to Taj Mahal finish on the bloody thing.

Secondly, the painter should have rollers, sleeves and buy their filler and masking, bought from trade and in bulk. You're paying for paint, in large quantities at simple colors and labour.

Third is that the more money you put into something as simple and regular as painting a rental property is significant on profit margins. Even in Dublin, a quoted paint job could be close to 12% of gross yearly Revenue. In rural areas it can be much much higher.


The right way is to clear the first room, move anything you can out. Whip out quick dry filler and put 1 swipe across any large obvious marks. Mask the light switches, sockets and glossing(if its good). Put decent canvas drop sheets down(none of your plastic crap) and put a thick layer of quick drying white emulsion on the ceiling and top of the walls with the roller. Loads of paint on the roller, no paint tray. Dip it into the bucket and don't be afraid of doing that. Get it right into those corners, don't be worried about getting it on the wall.Then clear the second room, same deal as above.

Head back into the first room, buzz the filler with a sand block, hit the walls with the roller quickly. Same as above with the roller and paint application. Get it right into those corners, door frames, skirting boards. The only thing your edging with a brush is where the ceiling hits the walls. The gloss/windows will either be masked with thick masking tape(not being painted) or you get paint on them. The idea is to cover the old paint to the gloss, not get a line. The masking tape or gloss roller does that.

Edging is done with a lot of paint on a big thick 3 inch brush, none of this pissy 1cm crap. Rolling is done with a high quality thick pile, lots of paint. Don't care about being neat, that's what the drop sheets are for. The colours are white and magnolia, 10 liter trade drums of something half decent(macPhersons for example). They sell reasonably cheap, spread well and are usually stacked by the door on offer. Large Tubs of Woodies/B&Q paint are a waste of time and are usually only marginally cheaper than a quality alternative bought in bulk.

If the gloss has to be redone(it can usually be washed to a good finish surprising to a fair number of people). Glossing is done using a mini gloss roller for 95% of it, large roller for a large door surface with a gloss pile if needed. Quick buzz with some sandpaper, strip of cardboard on the floor, even quick coat with the roller. Trays in this case. Let the roller do the work. If you're using a brush for more than deep curves and recesses, you're probably doing it wrong.

A normal sized double room should take about an hour of your time in total, give or take. Most of that is glossing and or masking/repairing. A 3 bed semi, 2 days to paint. The guy doing it in reality is being paid about 80 quid a day, maybe a little more these days if he speaks decent English. I'm a bit out of buying materials, but cost shouldn't exceed 70-80 if you're not heading into woodies and picking up their latest 2 liter can of designer Dulux eggshell pastel with a hint of something they made up, which 99.9% of people couldn't distinguish from magnolia if their arse depended on it.

If your reasonable and clear in what you want which is a quick paint job without the bells and whistles, the house is empty and you can present the possibility of repeat business those prices are more than achievable.

This was one of the trades I was expected to be competent in and this was the process for me to do a house on my own. Prices and timescales were adjusted for the size of the house and the type of let, eg a 4-5k a month corporate let would get a vastly different treatment with expanded colors, coats of paint and more attention paid to glossing/edging/repair work. But not much more then you would think.

Cuddlesworth

murphaph wrote: »

Please. The photos don't show the whole house. Do you think these animals spared the soft furnishings from their filth? New sofa, new curtains and blinds, new carpets presumably. Quite likely any laminate or wood flooring was water (best case!) damaged as well. 5k is probably conservative I reckon!

Look at the top of the table, the chairs, the work counters, the actual fridge in the pictures that you can see. No damage, actually reasonably clean(at least the table/counter). The stove is contentious but since its a glass top, it can be cleaned. Some serious cleaning solution on it for a hour or two is what it needs and a bit of elbow grease. I've never done one that bad but my experience is that their isn't as much adhesion to the glass as your think.

Sofa should be faux leather, not cloth. Carpets in a rental house?

What I'm trying to say is that if those are the cherry picked pictures showing the worst of the damage, it can't actually be that bad.

Thargor

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Look at the top of the table, the chairs, the work counters, the actual fridge in the pictures that you can see. No damage, actually reasonably clean(at least the table/counter). The stove is contentious but since its a glass top, it can be cleaned. Some serious cleaning solution on it for a hour or two is what it needs and a bit of elbow grease. I've never done one that bad but my experience is that their isn't as much adhesion to the glass as your think.

Sofa should be faux leather, not cloth. Carpets in a rental house?

What I'm trying to say is that if those are the cherry picked pictures showing the worst of the damage, it can't actually be that bad.

If theres sh1t walked into the floor covering it might have to all come up, theres no way the carpets escaped unscathed...

jmayo

The_Conductor wrote: »

I've no reference point on which to draw (thank Christ)- so I'm not in a position to dispute this with you (not that it really matters).

The FBI/US unversities have sites for monitoring decomposing bodies, they could use someplace like this.

whippet wrote: »

just brings back memories of one of my lovely tennants.

they managed to destroy my former family home in more or less the same manner (grant it without the sh1te on the floor), tore apple trees out of the ground .. it took two long wheelbase sprinter vans full of broken furniture, scrap and rubbish and the guts of €5000 to get it ready for the next tenant. This all on top of the tenants looking for me to pay them a couple of grand to get out of the house as they need a deposit on a caravan before they would leave.

hense I am no longer in the rental game .. tenants can do too much damage without any recourse ..

If only the PRTB could use the PPS numbers to garner damages from peoples social welfare / wages to ensure that all the risk isn't on the one side of the deal.

This is why there is a necessity for some kind of database maintained by an independent third party.
Normally it is mooted to protect tenants, but it could also be used to
protect landlords as in this type of case.

And I don't care about bloody data protection.
How come it can work with financial information and credit rating ?

A tenant should be asked to have their data released in the event of looking for rental property.
And because the landlord is providing a business they should have no problem having their service rated.

The thing is because the councils don't really provide social housing where will these people end up.

The longer I live the sadder I find the human race.

gaius c

That's pretty horrendous.

groovyg

How the hell could anybody live like that! the occupants must have no sense of smell. sickening

mel123

Coming from a family of builders, some of the stories I have heard are shocking
Feel really sorry for the Landlord

TheMilkyPirate

I can't sit down and eat my breakfast in the morning unless downstairs is clean and tidied. How could anybody live like that

Chemical Byrne

whippet wrote: »

just brings back memories of one of my lovely tennants.

..... they need a deposit on a caravan before they would leave.......

That is terrible but to be honest with you man, my sympathy is a bit limited. If they were moving on to a caravan then its pretty certain they are, er, "members of a certain community" and, rights and wrongs of it aside, in most cases they can be identified a mile off. You should have been on your game and vetted them properly.

My sister rents out a few places and she is rigorous in vetting tenants. She only rents to actual professionals who have a bit of responsibility. She makes this quite clear and she won't touch those in manual occupations let alone RA tenants. Of course there are exceptions but in general she would be of the opinion that those from a lower socioeconomic stratum have a greater tendency to antisocial behaviour of all types.

athtrasna

Mod note: A&P is not the place for mental health discussions please.

Tow

See and cleaned worse... Brings back memories of used tampons under the beds.

Stepping Stone

Years ago, I rented an apartment on the ground floor under a family that I can only describe as living hell. The noise, the hours, the violence (you could hear the beatings and crying) was nothing on the smell when the windows were open. They used to drop rubbish down from the balcony and windows.

I was blue in the face from complaining to the management company, the landlord and the Gardai. Nobody wanted to know.

I came back from holiday to find that they had been in a massive fight and moved out in the middle of the night. They had left behind something similar and they had left the taps running.

awec

I can't get my head around the logistics of taking a crap on the floor.

Cuddlesworth

awec wrote: »

I can't get my head around the logistics of taking a crap on the floor.

Drop kaks. Squat. At that point it's quite natural. Then stand up, pick up a towel or something close, wipe and throw the towel on top of the poop. Sorted.

CollyFlower

awec wrote: »

I can't get my head around the logistics of taking a crap on the floor.

They blocked the 3 toilets, they had to use something. I wonder how that works (****ting into a plastic bag) would one person have to hold the bag while the other one did their business.?

pwurple

That's pretty bad. you feel you need a fully ventilated hazmat suit to even go in the door there.

Mine have never been that bad, thank feck. Plenty of damage done... Doors torn off hinges and smashed... Walls damaged from furniture being thrown at them etc. but no bodily fluids so far.

That family has only reinforced some landlord's view of rent allowance anyway.

Chloris

Chemical Byrne wrote:

My sister rents out a few places and she is rigorous in vetting tenants. She only rents to actual professionals who have a bit of responsibility. She makes this quite clear and she won't touch those in manual occupations let alone RA tenants. Of course there are exceptions but in general she would be of the opinion that those from a lower socioeconomic stratum have a greater tendency to antisocial behaviour of all types.

Stand back. We've got a graduate on our hands.

whippet

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

That is terrible but to be honest with you man, my sympathy is a bit limited. If they were moving on to a caravan then its pretty certain they are, er, "members of a certain community" and, rights and wrongs of it aside, in most cases they can be identified a mile off. You should have been on your game and vetted them properly.
.

to be fair it was the first time I let it out and I had trusted an EA with the whole thing .. I didn't know who the tenant was.

After that experience I became the polar opposite and was very selective with my tenants .. probably could be accused of being racist, stereotyping, bigoted etc .. but I was protecting my asset. Didn't have any more real problems after that.

gaius c

Landlord has to ship some blame for this. Did they meet the tenants before they moved in? Did they carry out proper checks? Did they inspect their property at all during the tenancy?

Cold War Kid

What responsibility the landlord has is minimal IMO. They have the right to inspect the property (with advance notice given, and at time that suits the tenant(s)) every three to four months, and I guess they should, but I don't think they *have* to.

Chloris

Our landlord hasn't visited our property in the last year. We had some repairs done about three months ago and he called the builder to arrange the repair, notified us that the builder would be coming and the builder called him to tell him that the repairs had been done. We haven't interacted with him other than that since our one-year contract elapsed eight months ago and I texted to tell him we'd extend it for three years. It suits us perfectly; we take excellent care of the house for him and he leaves us alone. He determined that we were trustworthy tenants; although we have the odd mad party, nothing is ever damaged and we don't cause any trouble.

If you somehow bring in a bunch of hoodlums who you have to babysit, you'll know within the first two months. Start the eviction process immediately then! There are so many excellent tenants who are desperately seeking a house. It's a property owner's market, not a renter's one. I don't know how these tenants get away with it, to be honest - isn't there a risk of becoming homeless because you haven't got a reference?

gaius c

Cold War Kid wrote: »

What responsibility the landlord has is minimal IMO. They have the right to inspect the property (with advance notice given, and at time that suits the tenant(s)) every three to four months, and I guess they should, but I don't think they *have* to.

Would you give your car to somebody for 12 months and not check up on it at any stage over the 12 months?

So why then would you give an asset worth at least 10 times what your car is worth to somebody and not check the condition of it at regular intervals?

You also ignored my point about vetting the tenants properly. With tenants this bad, it is impossible that there could have been no warning signs beforehand.

MrWalsh

Cold War Kid wrote: »

What responsibility the landlord has is minimal IMO. They have the right to inspect the property (with advance notice given, and at time that suits the tenant(s)) every three to four months, and I guess they should, but I don't think they *have* to.

They dont *have* to but if you ignore the welfare of your asset then you cant really complain when you find it destroyed.

murphaph

gaius c wrote: »

Landlord has to ship some blame for this. Did they meet the tenants before they moved in? Did they carry out proper checks? Did they inspect their property at all during the tenancy?

Only in Ireland would the landlord get even a fraction of the blame for his tenants decision to defaecate into a bin bag rather than use the toilets provided.

murphaph

MrWalsh wrote: »

They dont *have* to but if you ignore the welfare of your asset then you cant really complain when you find it destroyed.

Of course you can complain. It takes a few minutes to destroy a house if the malicious intent is there so you could check it once a day and still be caught. The tenant is responsible. End of story.

MrWalsh

murphaph wrote: »

Of course you can complain. It takes a few minutes to destroy a house if the malicious intent is there so you could check it once a day and still be caught. The tenant is responsible. End of story.

Please, those photos show a pattern of neglect. Going on months if not years.

MarkAnthony

I'm sorry but the landlord does shoulder some of the blame. Mod warnings stop me from passing certain comments but what's clear is that living next door to those pigs couldn't have been pleasant. If the LL can't be arsed properly vetting tenants and doing proper inspections they can expect problems.

Now do I think there is any justification for the mess the house was left in, of course not.

Lux23

Chloris wrote: »

There are so many excellent tenants who are desperately seeking a house. It's a property owner's market, not a renter's one. I don't know how these tenants get away with it, to be honest - isn't there a risk of becoming homeless because you haven't got a reference?

I am looking the last three weeks for a place - myself and my partner both have 'professional' jobs and we have references, yet finding a decent place has so far eluded us. I was out of work last year and I found a place much faster, I am convinced this was because I was able to attend viewings straight away and I suited letting agents that couldn't be bothered to do viewings after 6pm.

So maybe some landlords are just taking the first people who come along and not bothering to do any proper checks.

murphaph

MarkAnthony wrote: »

I'm sorry but the landlord does shoulder some of the blame. Mod warnings stop me from passing certain comments but what's clear is that living next door to those pigs couldn't have been pleasant. If the LL can't be arsed properly vetting tenants and doing proper inspections they can expect problems.

Now do I think there is any justification for the mess the house was left in, of course not.

The landlord remains blameless. Possibly he was naive, but we can't know that for sure. He may or may not have "properly vetted" the tenants. There's only so much one can do. Some of the most shocking tenants were apparently like butter wouldn't melt in their mouths when they initially met their landlords. These people don't go around with "slob" tattooed on their foreheads. How often do people think landlords should be inspecting? The tenant is entitled to some peaceful enjoyment of their home as well.

I agree that any LL should be extremely thorough when vetting tenants but even if he is not, he is not to blame when those tenants treat a property like that one. The landlord should be pitied, but that is anathema to most Irish, who generally try to ascribe some wrongdoing to the landlord wherever possible...even if totally unreasonably.

You can be sure the poor sod is blaming himself for not checking the place more often or asking for bank statements or requiring a 3 month deposit and so on. He will next time and so will more and more landlords as the system does basically nothing to protect them from tenants like these. The decent tenants (the vast majority) will suffer unfortunately but what can you do.