Lease/Licensee query

Dermo

Can a landlord rent a full property using a licensee agreement instead of a lease?

This would then allow a landlord to enter the property at any time because the licensee has given up their exclusive use of the apartment and would also mean the landlord does not need to register with the prtb. This sounds incredibly unfair, but technically legal based on the "What is a Licensee" section on the prtb website:

"persons occupying accommodation in which the owner is not resident under a formal license arrangement with the owner where the occupants are not entitled to its exclusive use and the owner has continuing access to the accommodation and/or can move around or change the occupants"
http://www.prtb.ie/media-research/publications/licensees-in-private-rented-accommodation

Michael D Not Higgins

It is a grey area which has been tested in court a couple of times with differing results.

Ms Doubtfire1

Great question. No idea but as a aspiring tenant I would never accept that.

You will get very varied replies on this op. I believe it is the case that you can run a setup where the people renting the rooms are licensees once they rent the rooms separately as none of them have exclusive access to the common areas and exclusive access is a key part of establishing if a person is a tenant or not.

Others will argue differently as it is a grey area.

Dermo

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

It is a grey area which has been tested in court a couple of times with differing results.

I hate when that happens. Why can't a ruling be definitive? A lot of the laws around renting are very ambiguous.

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

Great question. No idea but as a aspiring tenant I would never accept that.

Make sure you read the documents you are asked to sign

Lina Tight Hairdresser wrote: »

You will get very varied replies on this op. I believe it is the case that you can run a setup where the people renting the rooms are licensees once they rent the rooms separately as none of them have exclusive access to the common areas and exclusive access is a key part of establishing if a person is a tenant or not.

Others will argue differently as it is a grey area.

I understand the difference when renting a room vs renting an apartment. This is primarily related to renting a full apartment but in a licensee agreement it is generally defined that the occupation is not exclusive.

Ms Doubtfire1

Dermo wrote: »

Make sure you read the documents you are asked to sign

always do...with a magnifying glass...;):D

Michael D Not Higgins

Dermo wrote: »

I understand the difference when renting a room vs renting an apartment. This is primarily related to renting a full apartment but in a licensee agreement it is generally defined that the occupation is not exclusive.

The rulings already made determined whether the tenant was in exclusive occupation or not on the facts of the case rather than the agreement in place. In one such case, the landlord was only around once every few months and the courts decided that that was a tenancy and not a licence.

Dermo

Dermo wrote: »

I understand the difference when renting a room vs renting an apartment. This is primarily related to renting a full apartment but in a licensee agreement it is generally defined that the occupation is not exclusive.

I meant renting a full house or apartment also but not renting it to one person or group of people but rather filling all the rooms separately, all individuals pay their share of the rent individually etc and are not liable for others in the house. In this way it is in my opinion perfectly possible and reasonable to consider the people living there licensees. If you are willing to keep one room for yourself (a box room or whatever) even if you don't live there this will guarantee the people renting the rooms are licensees.

If you rent the entire place as a whole to one or more people under one agreement then you will not be able to claim they licensees imo.

Elliott S

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

Great question. No idea but as a aspiring tenant I would never accept that.

Me neither. Well, the only way I'd accept it is if the rent was much lower than normal to compensate. Normal market rent - no way. Exclusive use or nothing. I can't think many poeple would like their landlord to be able to waltz in whenever he/she pleases!

Dermo

Lina Tight Hairdresser wrote: »

I meant renting a full house or apartment also but not renting it to one person or group of people but rather filling all the rooms separately, all individuals pay their share of the rent individually etc and are not liable for others in the house. In this way it is in my opinion perfectly possible and reasonable to consider the people living there licensees. If you are willing to keep one room for yourself (a box room or whatever) even if you don't live there this will guarantee the people renting the rooms are licensees.

If you rent the entire place as a whole to one or more people under one agreement then you will not be able to claim they licensees imo.

Agreed, that would be my opinion too.

But I can't find anything that explicitly says that a landlord has to keep a room for himself; and that, technically, a landlord could rent a 1 bedroom apartment under a licensee agreement, have the licensee get all bills in their own name as long as the landlord enters the apartment on enough occasions to make it seem like a regular & needed occurrence. (under the guise of "maintenance", checking the boiler & appliances)

Michael D Not Higgins

Dermo wrote: »

Agreed, that would be my opinion too.

But I can't find anything that explicitly says that a landlord has to keep a room for himself; and that, technically, a landlord could rent a 1 bedroom apartment under a licensee agreement, have the licensee get all bills in their own name as long as the landlord enters the apartment on enough occasions to make it seem like a regular & needed occurrence. (under the guise of "maintenance", checking the boiler & appliances)

The problem you have is that there are no hard and fast rules governing this and you are leaving yourself open to the RTB and/or the courts to determine the situation.

Dermo

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

The problem you have is that there are no hard and fast rules governing this and you are leaving yourself open to the RTB and/or the courts to determine the situation.

Yeah, I know. It's just a little frustrating that to resolve any issues like this you have to go to the RTB/courts and spend anywhere from a couple of months to a couple of years in stressful limbo, for both landlord & tenant/licensee

Michael D Not Higgins

Dermo wrote: »

Yeah, I know. It's just a little frustrating that to resolve any issues like this you have to go to the RTB/courts and spend anywhere from a couple of months to a couple of years in stressful limbo, for both landlord & tenant/licensee

Until solid rules are in place to cover a licensee situation where there are no tenants and no landlord living in the place, I would operate under the assumption that the courts will find them to be tenants. It's easier to assume the worst rather than hope for the best.