Rent review in tenancy with a new landlord

Dinny Byrne has Angina

If a landlord purchases a rental property with tenants in-situ, is there a new lease created between the new landlord and the existing tenants? I would have thought so, but the landlord claims otherwise.

The new landlord bought the property 9 months ago. He now proposes to increase the rent, commencing july 1st.

Is this in contravention of the new legislation on rent reviews?

The rent was never reviewed under the old landlord, but can the new landlord avail of that fact?

Surely he had his opportunity to amend the rent when he bought the property last summer, or prior to the new legislation taking effect?

It's a 50% increase in the rent, so it's a substantial hike (although, in fairness, it is approximately the market rate)

davo10

Dinny Byrne has Angina wrote: »

If a landlord purchases a rental property with tenants in-situ, is there a new lease created between the new landlord and the existing tenants? I would have thought so, but the landlord claims otherwise.

The new landlord bought the property 9 months ago. He now proposes to increase the rent, commencing july 1st.

Is this in contravention of the new legislation on rent reviews?

The rent was never reviewed under the old landlord, but can the new landlord avail of that fact?

Surely he had his opportunity to amend the rent when he bought the property last summer, or prior to the new legislation taking effect?

It's a 50% increase in the rent, so it's a substantial hike (although, in fairness, it is approximately the market rate)

Are you saying that he should have raised your rent last summer?

Your tenancy rights continue under the new LL and unless you have a fixed term contract stating that the rent is set for a defined period, there is no reason why the LL can't raise the rent if it hasn't been raised for two years. If the market rate is 50% higher and the LL can provide the necessary proof, then he is entitled to raise it to that level. You can raise an objection with the PRTB but bare in mind that if you are unsuccessful, you will have to pay the increased rent backdated to the date the increase was to come into effect.

4ensic15

Your landlord is correct. There is not a new tenancy. You were not given a notice of termination of a tenancy. All that has happened is that your new landlord purchased your old landlord's interest in the lease. The only quibble you might have is if you are being asked for more than market rent.

Dinny Byrne has Angina

4ensic15 wrote: »

There is not a new tenancy.

I suppose that is the one positive piece of information here.

After all, a tenancy is a relationship involving rights and obligations.

My ex landlord, prior to his bankruptcy, omitted to execute a wide variety of his obligations, including paying for energy and waste disposal, as provided for under the lease.

Does it follow that I can therefore pursue the new landlord for these charges? Even if the new landlord was unaware that he was liable for these? The new landlord has always claimed ignorance of the obligations of the previous landlord.

So can I therefore chase the new landlord for energy bills, waste disposal, and indeed, my deposit? if so I probably stand to benefit, or at the least I won't lose money.

If the tenancy is the same tenancy, does he have no defence to these bills?

Stheno

Your deposit I would imagine yes.

The others are obligations of the old landlord however.

Dinny Byrne has Angina

Stheno wrote: »

Your deposit I would imagine yes.

The others are obligations of the old landlord however.

How's that?

They were part of the lease contract.

Either the lease continues, or it does not.

They cannot have it both ways.

You cannot seek to benefit from the continuation of a lease, whilst seeking to repudiate your obligations under that lease.

4ensic15

Dinny Byrne has Angina wrote: »

I suppose that is the one positive piece of information here.

After all, a tenancy is a relationship involving rights and obligations.

My ex landlord, prior to his bankruptcy, omitted to execute a wide variety of his obligations, including paying for energy and waste disposal, as provided for under the lease.

Does it follow that I can therefore pursue the new landlord for these charges? Even if the new landlord was unaware that he was liable for these? The new landlord has always claimed ignorance of the obligations of the previous landlord.

So can I therefore chase the new landlord for energy bills, waste disposal, and indeed, my deposit? if so I probably stand to benefit, or at the least I won't lose money.

If the tenancy is the same tenancy, does he have no defence to these bills?

The lease will refer to Landlord and Tenant, not the named individuals who are for the time being the landlord and the tenant. Anybody who accepts an assignment of the interest of one or other assumes all obligations, rights and entitlements whenever they accrued. There are PRTB cases on the deposit point. The person who is receiving the rent at the end of the tenancy has to refund the deposit even if they were not the person who originally received it.

Gatling

Stating the obvious why would the landlord be responsible for paying for energy (electric /gas)??

The_Conductor

Gatling wrote: »

Stating the obvious why would the landlord be responsible for paying for energy (electric /gas)??

Or indeed refuse- or water etc.
The user pays- is the principle in place.
It seems bizarre that a landlord would randomly include utilities etc in the rent.

TheChizler

Gatling wrote: »

Stating the obvious why would the landlord be responsible for paying for energy (electric /gas)??

Sometimes bills are included as part of the tenancy agreement.

The_Conductor

TheChizler wrote: »

Sometimes bills are included as part of the tenancy agreement.

Very limited circumstances- and very rare- if someone was renting a whole property- as opposed to rooms in a property- it may have been more common in the past- but its almost unheard of anymore.

TheChizler

The_Conductor wrote: »

Very limited circumstances- and very rare- if someone was renting a whole property- as opposed to rooms in a property- it may have been more common in the past- but its almost unheard of anymore.

I know it's uncommon but it does happen. A search on Daft brings up a good few.

Mrs OBumble

It's quite common for refuse, in complexes where bins are part of what the management company provides. Less so for other utilities, but some old fashioned LL's do.

newacc2015

dreamerb wrote: »

TBH I'm surprised more landlords don't offer that, given that it's fully tax deductible.

It is tax deductible, as it assumes you are not making money on it. If you charging €1500 including gas and electricity (assuming bills are costing €300 per month). You are no better off than charging €1200 a month without bills. Except there is now no incentive for tenants to keep their bill to a minimum. Tenants will be far more conservative with their energy usage if they pay for their own bills.

newacc2015

Dinny Byrne has Angina wrote: »

How's that?

They were part of the lease contract.

Either the lease continues, or it does not.

They cannot have it both ways.

You cannot seek to benefit from the continuation of a lease, whilst seeking to repudiate your obligations under that lease.

I imagine you could have listed yourself on the least of creditors during the bankruptcy. But I seriously doubt you have gotten anything after the secured creditors, revenue were paid.

How long was your most recent lease for? I imagine it has long since expired

dreamerb

.

Scarab80

dreamerb wrote: »

Um, yes I am. My marginal tax rate is over 50%. I get to deduct the cost of utilities as a cost from the gross rent, which means I don't have to pay tax on that cost. That means I should be able to rent my property - including bills - at market rate plus about 50% of the cost of bills without being out of pocket. But you're right about the incentive for a tenant to be conservative on energy usage - one way to deal with that is to charge a premium, another is to bundle a specified value of energy in rent, with tenant to pay full cost of any balance. It's possible to account for all of this fully in tax returns, and very little effort.

You might want to recheck your maths there, simple example

Rent 1,000 = profit before tax of 1,000 - tax 500 (at 50%) = 500 profit after tax

Rent 1150 - utilities 300 = profit before tax of 850 - tax 425 = 425 profit after tax.

You only break even if you get fully reimbursed for the utilities costs.