Accidental Landlord!

Randomswinger

With all the talk of how difficult it is for renters and crisis in housing in the press at the moment I'm getting more and more peeved at the lack of perspective and advocacy for landlords like me.

I bought an apartment on my own in 2007, life moves on I started a relationship, got married and now have kids. My circumstances have changed and my apartment is not suitable for me and my family to live in.

I bought in a mature area in Dublin with excellent public transport and amenities. Thinking I was prudent, I did not borrow the (which I thought at the time were excessive based on my single salary) higher mortgage amounts I was offered

I'm not complaining about negative equity or the banks but the fact of life is that I'm left with an apartment which is worth less than I paid for it and as a result I'm an accidental landlord. This was never the plan. I made the mistake thinking that this would be my first rung on the ladder and could use it to trade up later in life.

Since 2010 when I first rented it out, I've been through three tenants and each one has shirked there responsibilities in some form or another

Tenant 1 - Broke a fixed term lease left the apartment in a filthy state. I needed to buy new carpets and clean over and above what I'd expect from someone living there for six months

Tenant 2 - After 3 yeas of no issues suddenly stopped paying rent (which at the time was below market rate). After 3 months of no rent simply vanished leaving the apartment furniture and fittings in an appalling state. Up until this point there had been no issue at any stage even when the property was inspected by me

Tenant 3 - Has just informed me they're breaking a fixed term lease

Not including the mortgage or usual maintenance fees as a result of the behaviour of 3 individuals, who were all vetted and signed leases I'm out of pocket to the tune nearly €10K over the last 5 years. The PRTB is useless and of no help to landlords looking to recoup looses despite having rulings in their favour

Why any individual would choose to be a landlord is beyond me when tenants can simply walk away, leaving you to pick up the pieces. The negative equity is preventing me from providing a larger more suitable family home - fair enough this will change over time but until then I've to play some pretty sh*tty cards with a deck loaded against me

lima

Are there any good stories regarding landlords?

it seems that it's just the people who have bad luck writing on here

Surely not all tenants are evil and from hell

It would be good to hear some nice stories from landlords where everything is working out

Lux23

But what exactly do you expect someone to do for you? I am sure there are probably more dodgy tenants out there than landlords because of the numbers and I don't really think vetting can really protect from someone leaving your place looking a mess. Did you arrange regular inspections?

Randomswinger

I'm sure there are many great tenants out there but I guess you don't hear tenants opening threads to sing the praises of a landlord on boards either.

To answer the other question - yes I inspected my property. You'd be surprised how quickly it can get into a state though!

I'm not looking for anyone to do anything for me. I'm simply pointing out that as a landlord in reality there is no recourse when something goes wrong. I'm of the opinion that it should be an even playing field, as a tenant if you don't live up to your side of the bargain you should face the financial implication of doing so and there should be proper mechanism for enforcement.

I Am The Law

If you don’t want to be a landlord, your only option is to sell and face your losses, IMO the days of assisting BTL investors (intentional or otherwise) is over and the loss will have to be carried by the original purchaser of the property.

murphaph

Lux23 wrote: »

But what exactly do you expect someone to do for you?

Simply follow the lead of some other developed countries and equip the PRTB to be fit for purpose. The first step would be a register of tenants and landlords, with judgements registered against them. We could, with a little bit of effort, ensure that bad tenants find bad landlords and good tenants find good landlords and vice versa.

Throwing our hands in the air is not a solution. The rental sector in Ireland is a mess and the system lets both landlords and tenants down, but it could be fixed. Other countries have managed it

Silverbling

I was renting for 6 years, in that time I maintained the house as if it was my own, it was not painted in all of that time, all of the original appliances were still there in great working order, when I left it looked like it did when I moved in apart from a few scuffed skirting boards.

I would still be there if the landlord had not needed it for his son. I have excellent references.

As I am self employed I have had to look for some help as my business is not yet in profit. I am looking for a long term landlord near enough to the green luas line so my kids can go to school.

I cannot find a landlord who is happy to reduce the rent a couple of hundred euros a month in return for a reliable tenant who will look after their property because I am now on rent allowance for 2 years.

If any of you know anyone who has a 3 bed house or apartment (or even 2 bed at this stage I will share with my daughter) for €1200 a month please contact me.

My furniture is in storage, I am happy to take on an empty house that has been damaged by previous tenants, I will get it painted and supply appliances, saving a landlord the costs in return for the lower rent and most importantly look after it

Geuze

There is a new business idea: somehow deliver high quality, no messing tenants to landlords, backed by some sort of guarantee.

LL would offer lower rent, and get lower costs/hassle in return.

Tenants save rent each month.

This example costs 10,000 over 60 months, that's 167 pm.

Randomswinger might accept 100 less pm, if guaranteed good tenants.

Potatoeman

Leases don't provide either party that much security. Peoples lives change, a landlord can decide to sell and a tennant might have to move due to work/life issues. I know people that have left properties in better condition than they received them in and had to jump through hoops to get their deposit back.

Renting in Ireland is a bad deal. I'm in the process of buying at the moment and my mortgage (20 years) is going to be less than my current rent. I know you paid more than your property is worth but your tennant would probably buy the apt for less than current rents. Renting is a bad long term plan.

Gmaximum

I Am The Law wrote: »

If you don’t want to be a landlord, your only option is to sell and face your losses, IMO the days of assisting BTL investors (intentional or otherwise) is over and the loss will have to be carried by the original purchaser of the property.

As far as I can see the only assistance ever provided for BTL investors has been financial in terms of tax breaks/relief which the OP was unable to avail of as it was originally a home

spaceHopper

At guess you've collected 60+ K in rent after you losses due to damage.... that's not to bad. Look for a bigger deposit and get the number of a good cleaner give it to tenants and tell them either clean the place themselves or get the cleaner in before they hand back the place.

Is the apartment worth less than the mortgage, is not then you are at a loss but not in NE, why not sell it and accept your loss.

Mrs OBumble

Randomswinger wrote: »

I bought in a mature area in Dublin with excellent public transport and amenities.
...

Tenant 3 - Has just informed me they're breaking a fixed term lease

Given the current state of the rental market, you are likely to have the property re-tenanted, at a higher rate than the existing tenant is paying, very quickly.

You were unlucky with the first two tenants for sure (though if you were doing quarterly inspections, I've have expected the problems to come to light sooner.).

But I don't see the current situation as a problem.

Potatoeman

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Given the current state of the rental market, you are likely to have the property re-tenanted, at a higher rate than the existing tenant is paying, very quickly.

You were unlucky with the first two tenants for sure (though if you were doing quarterly inspections, I've have expected the problems to come to light sooner.).

But I don't see the current situation as a problem.

Wouldn't quarterly inspections be too invasive. I have never heard of them more than annually.

pwurple

You're correct, the current setup leaves you vunerable.

But, as you're in this situation, you have to try to mitigate as much as possible.

Interview your tenants thoroughly, in person, in the property if you can. I take at least 30 minutes with each of them, try to get to know them a bit.

It's really important to build a decent relationship, so getting along with them from the start will help there. People are less likely to mess you about if they know you as a human being. Share a bit about yourself as well. I tell them why I bought the place, what I like about the area, about my family etc. I find I get pretty good results with this, but life can still throw a spanner in the works.

Along with the regular written or called references, talk these things through with them, keeping an eye on the details.

-Ask about where they have rented before. Watch their face for any signs of previous conflict.
-Ask about where they work, what they do there. I prefer tenants with stable local employers.
-Ask about their family, if anyone lives nearby and if they know the area already. Some tenants are so new to a place you end up being their mammy when they phone you about sourcing things like batteries for smoke alarms. They will be more confident and less likely to move on if they are living in the area for a few years already.

When you pick a tenant then, be very clear on their responsibilities and what you expect to do for them. So, what they should call you about and when, etc. Let them know what you expect them to do, like keeping themselves safe and secure, letting you know in advance if something is coming up in their life that may change their living arrangements (job change, family changes etc).

Potatoeman

Potatoeman wrote: »

Wouldn't quarterly inspections be too invasive. I have never heard of them more than annually.

Id be inclined to inspect after the first month and then after another 2 months before settling into inspecting every 3 months.

If you know the neighbours I'd ask them to let you know about anything going on too that's stands out to them.

It's only a couple of mins, hardly being too invasive with your property worth 100's of thousands.

Potatoeman

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

Id be inclined to inspect after the first month and then after another 2 months before settling into inspecting every 3 months.

If you know the neighbours I'd ask them to let you know about anything going on too that's stands out to them.

It's only a couple of mins, hardly being too invasive with your property worth 100's of thousands.

It's a hassle. Are you sending written notice in advance?

Mrs OBumble

Potatoeman wrote: »

It's a hassle. Are you sending written notice in advance?

So what if it's a hassle!

The LL is giving the tenant 24x7 access to an asset worth hundreds of thousands. A few minute supervision after one month, and then every three months after that that is hardly invasive. And that is the regime that professional property managers have recommended to me as a property owner.

Potatoeman

Potatoeman wrote: »

It's a hassle. Are you sending written notice in advance?

I'm not a LL but if I was I would inspect regularly.

Why would you send written notice? Just ring them up and arrange a time and date and let them know to expect regular inspections. Hardly hassle keeping an eye on your property.

Written notice is not required.

Potatoeman

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

So what if it's a hassle!

The LL is giving the tenant 24x7 access to an asset worth hundreds of thousands. A few minute supervision after one month, and then every three months after that that is hardly invasive. And that is the regime that professional property managers have recommended to me as a property owner.

The ll is charging to lease the property, not giving anything. I don't see how the tenant could do hundred of thousands of damage short of a fire which would be covered by insurance. How would you like your bank manager dropping in to check on you because you have a mortgage?

I notice you didn't reply about the letter of notice.

Mrs OBumble

Potatoeman wrote: »

The ll is charging to lease the property, not giving anything. I don't see how the tenant could do hundred of thousands of damage short of a fire which would be covered by insurance. How would you like your bank manager dropping in to check on you because you have a mortgage?

I notice you didn't reply about the letter of notice.

Of course notice has to be given as per the law, that's taken as read.

If you don't understand how much damage a tenant can do, then you are lacking imagination. Try reading a few more threads here. Or google "Guidelines for cleaning up former meth labs" - where I come from, some properties have even had to be demolished because they were so badly contaminated.

And trust me, the bank manager will be keeping an eye on the mortgage. I used to work with a guy who got a phone call from his bank's case-manager every payday, because of the extent of his debt problems.

pinkyponk2

I know a tenant who is ideal, would be long term, would take care of a property like its her own and leave it the same way she found it. But because she's a Rent Allowance tenant no landlord will take her. It's a completely ridiculous situation that this country is in.

Potatoeman

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Of course notice has to be given as per the law, that's taken as read.

If you don't understand how much damage a tenant can do, then you are lacking imagination. Try reading a few more threads here. Or google "Guidelines for cleaning up former meth labs" - where I come from, some properties have even had to be demolished because they were so badly contaminated.

And trust me, the bank manager will be keeping an eye on the mortgage. I used to work with a guy who got a phone call from his bank's case-manager every payday, because of the extent of his debt problems.

That bank manager was making those calls because of arrears, a ll would be issuing an eviction notice.

I wouldn't be staying very long in a property where the ll was arranging inspections every three months. Seems like something someone on RA with few options would put up with.

Potatoeman

Potatoeman wrote: »

That bank manager was making those calls because of arrears, a ll would be issuing an eviction notice.

I wouldn't be staying very long in a property where the ll was arranging inspections every three months. Seems like something someone on RA with few options would put up with.

If you won't put up with it there will be a queue at the door waiting to move in.
I don't see how meeting the LL for 10 mins every 3 months is any sort of a big deal and it also give the tenant the advantage of pointing out issues in person rather than over the phone etc.

Silverbling

If any of you can rent me a property you can inspect it once a month, bring the family and I will cook you all dinner!

Tiddlypeeps

Potatoeman wrote: »

Wouldn't quarterly inspections be too invasive. I have never heard of them more than annually.

It's very invasive. I personally wouldn't be willing to put up with it and I'd just look elsewhere. I've never had any complaints from landlords and I've never had much difficulty finding somewhere to live.

I can see the appeal of regular inspections for landlords perspective, renting is risky business, but at the same time I'd be pretty concerned that doing this would limit you to prospective tenants that don't have much choice.

Tiddlypeeps

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

It's very invasive. I personally wouldn't be willing to put up with it and I'd just look elsewhere. I've never had any complaints from landlords and I've never had much difficulty finding somewhere to live.

I can see the appeal of regular inspections for landlords perspective, renting is risky business, but at the same time I'd be pretty concerned that doing this would limit you to prospective tenants that don't have much choice.

I can't see why anyone would have a problem with the LL visiting every three months. Unless you have something to hide of course.

If you want total control buy your own house.

Tiddlypeeps

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

I can't see why anyone would have a problem with the LL visiting every three months. Unless you have something to hide of course.

If you want total control buy your own house.

Nothing to hide I just value my privacy. I don't need to buy my own house renting suits me just fine, as I said it's never been an issue for me.

pwurple

Inspections every 3 months? Talk about getting people's backs up. I'd only consider that with students...

CollyFlower

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

I can't see why anyone would have a problem with the LL visiting every three months. Unless you have something to hide of course.

If you want total control buy your own house.

You do know that it's not easy to buy an house nowadays?

LL's should have one 'uninvited' inspection, that would revel a lot.

SpaceRocket

Im in the same position as you op, except I'm the tenant. I've been renting from accidental landlords for the past five years. The first place I lived in for three years until the landlord decided to sell up.

The place in currently renting, I recently found out that the landlord only rented the place out so that they could move back into their parents home for a year or so to save. They have the intention of moving back in in a while, so I'll have to move again.

It's awkward for me having to move around so often. I would happily stay in the one place for years. Unfortunately there are so many accidental landlords out there at the minute that the days of moving into a place, and only moving back out when you have enough saved for a mortgage yourself are gone. These days a lot of landlords are renting out their homes solely as a stop gap temporary solution.

The market is unstable at the moment no matter what angle you're coming at it from.

It's just a pity that long term landlords like yourself can't be matched with long term tenants like myself from the get go, saving both parties so much hassle.

mdebets

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

If you won't put up with it there will be a queue at the door waiting to move in.

And how will you enforce this?
Refuse to let the landlord in for inspection is not a reason for eviction, neither is it a reason to refuse part 4 tenancy at the end of the fixed lease, so you are stuck with the tenant for at least 4 years, if they continue to pay the rent.
If they are clever, they'll probably agree to the 3 months inspections, but 'sorry, I can't at your proposed time, I'm working, please provide a new time, sorry working then as well' and so on.

Three monthly inspection will also be of no good for you, because you can't evict a tenant for being untidy or even having a dirty apartment, unless it's permanent damage or a health hazard and then the damage is already done and it's too late for you to do anything against it.

mdebets

mdebets wrote: »

And how will you enforce this?
Refuse to let the landlord in for inspection is not a reason for eviction, neither is it a reason to refuse part 4 tenancy at the end of the fixed lease, so you are stuck with the tenant for at least 4 years, if they continue to pay the rent.
If they are clever, they'll probably agree to the 3 months inspections, but 'sorry, I can't at your proposed time, I'm working, please provide a new time, sorry working then as well' and so on.

Three monthly inspection will also be of no good for you, because you can't evict a tenant for being untidy or even having a dirty apartment, unless it's permanent damage or a health hazard and then the damage is already done and it's too late for you to do anything against it.

A tenant must allow inspections, what makes you think they should be allowed to refuse them. Id have it in the lease and point it out to the person when signing.

I have no idea why anyone would have a problem with it anyway. It wouldn't bother me in the least, in fact I'd rather if the LL called regularly rather then once a year to weed the garden when I've never been able to meet him and just tell him to let himself into the house.

Mrs OBumble

pwurple wrote: »

Inspections every 3 months? Talk about getting people's backs up. I'd only consider that with students...

Rubbish.

My professional property managers insist on it, and are clear with potential tenants at the outset that this is how they operate. In seven years, I've only had good tenants.

The other side is that the tenant gets a responsive property manager who fixes stuff, and who also looks at the overall state of the property and makes medium/long term maintenance recommendations as well as break-fix work. Eg recently mine suggest that I consider installing a heat pump, and that I get this done over summer, when the install is cheaper.

Tarzana2

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

A tenant must allow inspections, what makes you think they should be allowed to refuse them. Id have it in the lease and point it out to the person when signing.

I have no idea why anyone would have a problem with it anyway. It wouldn't bother me in the least, in fact I'd rather if the LL called regularly rather then once a year to weed the garden when I've never been able to meet him and just tell him to let himself into the house.

You said here that you like the absentee LL set-up:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=96808501&postcount=57

Lux23

My landlord is in my flat every bloody week! Three months would be a dream.

Tarzana2

Tarzana2 wrote: »

You said here that you like the absentee LL set-up:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=96808501&postcount=57

Well I do in general but it wouldn't really bother me too much if he called a bit either mostly for pointing out stuff that needs fixing rather than trying to explain it over the phone to him.

Tarzana2

Lux23 wrote: »

My landlord is in my flat every bloody week! Three months would be a dream.

That's excessive. Unfortunately, if notice is given, they're within their rights.

mdebets

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

A tenant must allow inspections, what makes you think they should be allowed to refuse them. Id have it in the lease and point it out to the person when signing.

Yes, but the time has to be agreed between the tenant and the landlord and there is plenty of ways to delay the inspection (from having long unpredictable working hours to an unexpected emergency at the time the meeting was scheduled). What are you going to do, if the tenant delays the meeting again and again?
On the other hand, what is this inspection going to achieve? If you have a good tenant, it will only annoy him and he might look for somewhere else to live.
If you have a bad tenant, you will only see the damage once it's done and then it's too late to do anything against it, he might even do more damage, just for being annoyed of being found out early? The inspections also only show you the past and not the future and a model tenant can change suddenly from one day to the other (see OP's 2nd tenant who stopped paying rent after 3 years without problems).

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

I have no idea why anyone would have a problem with it anyway. It wouldn't bother me in the least, in fact I'd rather if the LL called regularly rather then once a year to weed the garden when I've never been able to meet him and just tell him to let himself into the house.

I would have a major problem with it, as I value my privacy and it would show me that the landlord wouldn't trust me (if you don't trust your tenant, don't rent to him).
I lived in an apartment in Dublin for 16 years and I only saw the rental agent in my apartment 3 times in these 16 years (once on the day I moved in, once when I had a larger problem that needed fixing, and once when I moved out).

testaccount123

Tarzana2 wrote: »

That's excessive. Unfortunately, if notice is given, they're within their rights.

No chance, the tenant is entitled to peaceful enjoyment of the property, having some clown calling every week is way out of order.

If my landlord wanted to inspect my home once every three months he'd be obliged and sent on his way with an itemised list of minor repairs and upkeep for his trouble to keep him nice and busy.

Fortunately he is not an idiot so leaves me alone to enjoy the property I pay him 13 grand a year for.

testaccount123

testaccount123 wrote: »

No chance, the tenant is entitled to peaceful enjoyment of the property, having some clown calling every week is way out of order.

He is collecting the rent if I remember correctly from a previous thread.

mdebets wrote: »

Yes, but the time has to be agreed between the tenant and the landlord and there is plenty of ways to delay the inspection (from having long unpredictable working hours to an unexpected emergency at the time the meeting was scheduled). What are you going to do, if the tenant delays the meeting again and again?

I wouldn't stand for it and begin motions to have the tenant evicted.

mdebets wrote: »

On the other hand, what is this inspection going to achieve? If you have a good tenant, it will only annoy him and he might look for somewhere else to live.
If you have a bad tenant, you will only see the damage once it's done and then it's too late to do anything against it, he might even do more damage, just for being annoyed of being found out early? The inspections also only show you the past and not the future and a model tenant can change suddenly from one day to the other (see OP's 2nd tenant who stopped paying rent after 3 years without problems).

It will tell the LL how the property is being treated and allow him to nip problems in the bud rather than finding out after a year or more that the place is wrecked.

As I said if I were a LL, I'd inspect after the first month to see how the tenant is treating the place and if they show signs of being a disaster immediately begin to take action. If the place was ok I'd inspect again after 2 months and then settle into a 3 month inspection cycle, possibly moving to less often if the tenant shows themselves to be trustworthy.

mdebets wrote: »

I would have a major problem with it, as I value my privacy and it would show me that the landlord wouldn't trust me (if you don't trust your tenant, don't rent to him).
I lived in an apartment in Dublin for 16 years and I only saw the rental agent in my apartment 3 times in these 16 years (once on the day I moved in, once when I had a larger problem that needed fixing, and once when I moved out).

Value your privacy? Come on, how on earth is a LL having a quick look around the property every once in a while having any impact on your privacy? Its just being awkward for the sake of it. I don't think any sensible person would have any issue with it at all.

_Kaiser_

Charli Helpless Trek wrote: »

Value your privacy? Come on, how on earth is a LL having a quick look around the property every once in a while having any impact on your privacy? Its just being awkward for the sake of it. I don't think any sensible person would have any issue with it at all.

Disagree. Renting involves trust and goodwill on both sides - if you're not prepared to do that, don't rent or become a landlord!

I moved into a place earlier this year via an EA (have never met or spoken to the LL). About 3 months in I get a note in the letterbox saying they'll be doing an inspection <48 hours later and if I was not available they could let themselves in instead.

Nothing to hide, never had a problem renting and have always treated a place like it's my own.. but I'm also a professional, with references, and work full-time as middle/upper management so this did irk me somewhat to be honest.

In any event I worked from home on the day and there was no issues (nor any need to do a massive clean-up! ) but if they try it again this quarter I may take a different attitude - again not because there's anything to hide but I resent the implication or indeed disruption.

pooch90

We have point blank turned down houses based on the quarterly inspections. Fair enough have an initial one but once the rent is paid on time, leave the tenant in peace. We can be messy buggers at times but never have we damaged anything. We are private people and are perfectly entitled to be so.

athtrasna

pooch90 wrote: »

We have point blank turned down houses based on the quarterly inspections. Fair enough have an initial one but once the rent is paid on time, leave the tenant in peace. We can be messy buggers at times but never have we damaged anything. We are private people and are perfectly entitled to be so.

That's well and good when it's a tenant's market. In the major cities and commuter towns these days it's not. If a landlord wants quarterly inspections and agreeing to that will get you decent accommodation then most would be tenants would jump at it these days.

Mrs OBumble

testaccount123 wrote: »

If my landlord wanted to inspect my home once every three months he'd be obliged and sent on his way with an itemised list of minor repairs and upkeep for his trouble to keep him nice and busy.

If you'd managed to amass a list of minor repairs in three months, and hadn't notified me when they need for them arose, then that would be a major red-flag to me: you are expected to report maintenance issues as they arise.

mmarley

Hiya Randomswinger
Would you be interested in letting your apartment to me longterm. I'm looking for somewhere a while now and have found nothing.. thinking of relocating and all please pm me if your interested for more details.
thanks hon.

testaccount123

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

If you'd managed to amass a list of minor repairs in three months, and hadn't notified me when they need for them arose, then that would be a major red-flag to me: you are expected to report maintenance issues as they arise.

Im not sure what the colour of flags have to do with anything. I look after minor maintenance issues myself, as do most people I imagine. If my landlord decided to start inspecting my home every three months Id stop and let him do it, seeing as he was coming for a nose around anyway.

Paulj

I'm not a landlord but seeing how it's done in other countries i wonder why more rental properties in Ireland don't come un-furnished. If the property was provided unfurnished then it limits the amount of damage that the tenant can do to the property.
It also requires the tenant to provide more "investment" into the property. They would have to go to a lot of effort just to move in. It would mean they would think twice before moving out in a rush.

I think it would make sense for a property to come unfurnished IF the landlord couldn't kick the tenant out unless they were a bad tenant. As i understand it, in Ireland a tenant can be kicked out for any old reason. So therefore a tenant would be very much against making any sort of investment into their rental property (in terms of time or money). In other words it's very hard for a tenant to see the property as a home worth investing any time or effort in because it is always seen as temporary due to the risk of being kicked out for no reason.

The laws really fail everyone here. It really baffles me how the government can't take what works well in other countries and apply it here.

athtrasna

Paulj wrote: »

I'm not a landlord but seeing how it's done in other countries i wonder why more rental properties in Ireland don't come un-furnished. If the property was provided unfurnished then it limits the amount of damage that the tenant can do to the property.
It also requires the tenant to provide more "investment" into the property. They would have to go to a lot of effort just to move in. It would mean they would think twice before moving out in a rush.

I think it would make sense for a property to come unfurnished IF the landlord couldn't kick the tenant out unless they were a bad tenant. As i understand it, in Ireland a tenant can be kicked out for any old reason. So therefore a tenant would be very much against making any sort of investment into their rental property (in terms of time or money). In other words it's very hard for a tenant to see the property as a home worth investing any time or effort in because it is always seen as temporary due to the risk of being kicked out for no reason.

The laws really fail everyone here. It really baffles me how the government can't take what works well in other countries and apply it here.

The first bolded quote shows you don't really know the laws you slag off in the second. The circumstances under which a landlord can terminate a lease are few and landlords have next to no power to actually evict a tenant.

Paulj

athtrasna wrote: »

The first bolded quote shows you don't really know the laws you slag off in the second. The circumstances under which a landlord can terminate a lease are few and landlords have next to no power to actually evict a tenant.

Ok, i admit i haven't read the laws. So educate me, say my landlord wants to sell the house i'm renting. Can he kick me out?

Say his son is moving to the city and he'd like him to move into the house i'm renting, can he then kick me out?

Under what circumstances can he kick me out?

athtrasna

The relevant act is here http://www.prtb.ie/docs/default-source/acts/residential-tenancies-act-2004.pdf?sfvrsn=4

Start a new thread if you have specific queries, to discuss that here would drag this thread off topic.