Any dangers in this scenario re tenant notice to quit.

Spanish Eyes

Property to be sold. Tenants have been given proper notice and statutory declaration.

Can LL allow tenants to stay on for a few weeks after quit day as they cannot get another place to rent.

Just wondered about any pitfalls. Do not want them homeless.

My mum is LL

Thanks.

Gumbo

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Property to be sold. Tenants have been given proper notice and statutory declaration.

Can LL allow tenants to stay on for a few weeks after quit day as they cannot get another place to rent.

Just wondered about any pitfalls. Do not want them homeless.

My mum is LL

Thanks.

Both parties should sign a short term letting agreement.

Spanish Eyes

kceire wrote: »

Both parties should sign a short term letting agreement.

Thanks.

Just concerned if this type of arrangement would give long term rights to stay on!

Tenants are on a part 4 and the next cycle would start in January 2017. Great tenants, don't anticipate any issues, but you never know!

GGTrek

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

kceire wrote: »

Both parties should sign a short term letting agreement.

Thanks.

Just concerned if this type of arrangement would give long term rights to stay on!

Tenants are on a part 4 and the next cycle would start in January 2017. Great tenants, don't anticipate any issues, but you never know!

I shall give you my strong opinion: don t do it! If they change their mind and take you to RTB the adjudicator will very likely construe it as a tool to circumvent part 4 guarantees of the tenant, declare termination notice that you gave invalid and royally s..w you! The only good tool you have on your side is that the tenant part 4 rights are ending in Jan 2017, which means you can give 112/224 days notice to terminate with no reason in the first 6 months of 2017, which can really save you. The law and RTB adjudicators are totally pro-tenant and they will stretch the interpretation of the law to the maximum for the benefit of the tenant!
It is not your problem if the tenant could not find accommodation, being so close to part 4 cycle termination they had months of notice to look for some place: their excuses are honestly a joke!

Spanish Eyes

GGTrek wrote: »

I shall give you my strong opinion: don t do it! If they change their mind and take you to RTB the adjudicator will very likely construe it as a tool to circumvent part 4 guarantees of the tenant, declare termination notice that you gave invalid and royally s..w you! The only good tool you have on your side is that the tenant part 4 rights are ending in Jan 2017, which means you can give 112/224 days notice to terminate with no reason in the first 6 months of 2017, which can really save you. The law and RTB adjudicators are totally pro-tenant and they will stretch the interpretation of the law to the maximum for the benefit of the tenant!
It is not your problem if the tenant could not find accommodation, being so close to part 4 cycle termination they had months of notice to look for some place: their excuses are honestly a joke!

Yikes.

I just was wary. Acting for Mum who is ill. Don't really know what to do now.

But maybe I am over thinking it. They might have found something by quit day.

If they don't, it could be a problem if they plead to stay, then we would have to evict. OMG. :eek:

pilly

I would be very wary of it too OP, ask PRTB for advice maybe?

Don't do it, at the end of the day it's not the LL's problem. Your mother has to look after herself first and having the house vacant is more than likely essential. If you extend now the situation will be the same come the end of the extension (them saying they can't find somewhere) and if they dig their heels in then when you really really need it vacated it could mess up all your sale plans etc.

spaceHopper

I'm in the same boat as you my father rents a place and he's ill, I'm managing it. I had to call the RTB for advice about a tenant, they are very straight forward to deal with, just call them.

could let them over hold and not take rent if you feel bad for them, or wound that open you up too?

GGTrek

spaceHopper wrote: »

I'm in the same boat as you my father rents a place and he's ill, I'm managing it. I had to call the RTB for advice about a tenant, they are very straight forward to deal with, just call them.

could let them over hold and not take rent if you feel bad for them, or wound that open you up too?

RTB will not provide legal advice on the issue. Again letting the tenants overhold is not a good idea especially if there are two or more of them (one is going to be witness of the other) and your word against theirs is going to be worth nothing in front of an RTB adjudicator. If you feel that you can wait an extra 28 days, provide them a written warning that they are overholding and that after 28 days they will be taken to RTB for eviction proceedings. Don't say anything that you are fine with them overholding a bit! I would not give them any warning: they received termination notice so they already know they have to leave and they had plenty of time to leave possession.

Claw Hammer

Accepting any kind of rent or allowing the tenant to remain in possession is fraught with error. If the tenants are still there at the expiry of the notice open a dispute with the RTB. Explain that if they go before the hearing you will withdraw the dispute. If not, you will need to get the determination order. Explain that their names will show up on searches in future and it may prejudice their chances of securing accommodation in future.

The_Conductor

pilly wrote: »

I would be very wary of it too OP, ask PRTB for advice maybe?

Residential Tenancies Board do not give advice- they will advise a landlord contact their solicitor in instances like this.

OP- while its admirable that you're trying to help the tenants in any way possible- the potential for this to blow up in your face is just enormous.

antoinolachtnai

Your mother needs a solicitor to sell the property. You and she need to consult her solicitor on this matter. In my view you should help if you can, but you need to be sure your mother'/s position is protected.

Spanish Eyes

The_Conductor wrote: »

Residential Tenancies Board do not give advice- they will advise a landlord contact their solicitor in instances like this.

OP- while its admirable that you're trying to help the tenants in any way possible- the potential for this to blow up in your face is just enormous.

Thanks. I had a gut feeling, but just wanted to hear other views on such a scenario.

Spanish Eyes

Thanks for all your help/replies.

Will think it over but I don't think I will be offering (on mum's behalf) those extra weeks after all.

I have to take the sentiment out of it and look at the bigger picture here.

Clampdown

Can someone explain how this opens the OP up to whatever you think it opens them up to? It's not apparent to me and I'm pretty familiar with this situation, having been in it. What could the tenant possibly file for to enact a PRTB case, om what grounds, and why would they when you're doing them a favor? I don't see it.

If for example, you had a text from a tenant asking to stay on a few extra weeks to get sorted, and you agreed, the tribual would simply look at the new date as the agreed upon quit date. When tenants and landlords agree to something between themselves and there is poof of that, the tribunals are generally happy enough with that. (I've been to 2 of them)

Alternatively you could simply discuss it with them and after finding out what date they need to extend to, issue a letter by registered post saying that 'as requested we have agreed to amend your date to quit to _______, to allow you more time to find new accommodation. The tenancy will terminate on that date.

As you said OP they are excellent tenants, I don't see there being any legal can of worms opened by doing a nice thing and giving them extra time. If you're in Dublin it is very hard to find places at the moment. Having your home, rented or not, taken out from under you is very stressful and this is a crap time of year to have to move. You've done everything above board and have a good relationship with the tenants, it's very unlikely they would have any reason to take a PRTB case. It's not an illegal eviction, it's a legal eviction with a date changed to accommodate the tenanta finding a place, that's all.

But of course on boards you get a load of people saying throw them out on their ear in the dead of winter with the holidays coming up and no place lined up.

The_Conductor

The tenant wouldn't necessary file for anything with the RTB- they'd simply draw out the process- and if a tenant does not want to leave (for whatever reason- but including the fact that they are having difficulty finding alternate accommodation)- it would endanger the OP's sale, as no prospective purchaser could get a mortgage on the property- unless they had vacant possession.

Yes- the tenant may be finding it difficult to get alternate accommodation now- however, who is to say if they are given an extension on the end of their tenancy- that on the elapse of the extention that they will have found alternate accommodation.

The tenant is entitled to over 3 month's notice- if they are unable to find alternate accommodation in this period of time- why do you imagine that they are miraculously going to get accommodation in the couple of weeks thereafter?

Its not nice that the tenant is having trouble finding alternate accommodation- however, the landlord is not running a charity either- and here they are legitimately trying to sell the property- it is not that the tenancy is being ended on spurious grounds, its entirely legitimate.

I get what you're saying, and I do sympathise- however, where do you draw the line? A residential letting should be a business transaction between the landlord and the tenant- and both should accept this first and foremost. Once you view it other than as a business transaction- you cross a boundary that should not be crossed.

The OP needs to issue the tenant with a valid notice of the end of the tenancy. What happens thereafter- is in the lap of the gods- however, if the tenant does not vacate the property- it could take over a year to evict them.

Cuddlesworth

Didn't the part 4 reset thing get scrapped late last year?

Spanish Eyes

The_Conductor wrote: »

The OP needs to issue the tenant with a valid notice of the end of the tenancy. What happens thereafter- is in the lap of the gods- however, if the tenant does not vacate the property- it could take over a year to evict them.

That was done. No problems there.

Getting texts now to say they cannot go on the quit day.

Feck sake.

Spanish Eyes

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

That was done. No problems there.

Getting texts now to say they cannot go on the quit day.

Feck sake.

This would really re-enforce the advice of not giving an inch. If they don't go on the allocated day you need to immediately go down the official route for an over holding tenant and let them know this now too to show you mean business.

If you let them stay now you will get the same text in 1 month or 2 months or 6 months. I would imagine that you are a little away from putting the house on the market now so if they over hold now you still have time to get them out before it starts to have an impact on the sale but if you allow them stay and they overhold closer to when you really need the place empty then its a much bigger deal.

Edit: I just wanted to add that I also do feel for these people and know its difficult but you have to look after yourself first and you can't let sentiment get in the way of correctly running your business.

4ensic15

Clampdown wrote: »

Can someone explain how this opens the OP up to whatever you think it opens them up to? It's not apparent to me and I'm pretty familiar with this situation, having been in it. What could the tenant possibly file for to enact a PRTB case, om what grounds, and why would they when you're doing them a favor? I don't see it.

Accepting rent after issuing a notice or allowing tenants stay is often deemed to be a retraction of the notice. That is the risk the o/p runs. The RTB will accept settlements agreed between LLs and TTs but that is after a dispute started. The o/p can start a dispute and then get a ruling from the RTB by agreement that the tenant vacate by a particular date. The RTB is so tenant friendly that only an idiot landlord would deviate from the strict letter of the law.

Clampdown

From the original post it sounded like you were happy enough to accommodate a short extension and were just enquiring about legal potential pitfalls. Now your tone has changed quite a bit. If you don't want to give the extension then just stick to the quit date.

Spanish Eyes

Clampdown wrote: »

From the original post it sounded like you were happy enough to accommodate a short extension and were just enquiring about legal potential pitfalls. Now your tone has changed quite a bit. If you don't want to give the extension then just stick to the quit date.

Thanks.

My tone has changed because of the potential legal pitfalls. Surely that's obvious.

I was happy enough to extend the quit date, but had reservations. Seems those reservations were somewhat justified, judging by the responses so far.

pilly

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Thanks.

My tone has changed because of the potential legal pitfalls. Surely that's obvious.

I was happy enough to extend the quit date, but had reservations. Seems those reservations were somewhat justified, judging by the responses so far.

Have you actually asked the PRTB though? They are the experts after all.

The_Conductor

pilly wrote: »

Have you actually asked the PRTB though? They are the experts after all.

The RTB (they've changed their name) are a regulatory body- and do not offer advice or opinions- if you push them they will simply refer you to your own solicitor.

Their function is not to offer advice (to anyone).

pilly

The_Conductor wrote: »

The RTB (they've changed their name) are a regulatory body- and do not offer advice or opinions- if you push them they will simply refer you to your own solicitor.

Their function is not to offer advice (to anyone).

So what are the fees they charge for?

The_Conductor

pilly wrote: »

So what are the fees they charge for?

To register tenancies for landlords- and to adjudicate and issue judgements in cases of dispute between landlords and tenants. They are not an advisory body. They are also now sharing their databases with Revenue- as per the 2012 government decision- and also supply statistics to the CSO and two other bodies.

antoinolachtnai

pilly wrote: »

So what are the fees they charge for?

The fees are to fund the service they provide, which is registering tenancies and dispute resolution. Some money goes to local authorities to fund inspections.

http://www.rtb.ie/about-rtb/who-we-are/annual-reports

There is a limited situation in which the RTB can give very limited advice, i.e., they will advise you if they believe prima facie that your complaint has no merit.

pilly

pilly wrote: »

Have you actually asked the PRTB though? They are the experts after all.

Even if they did give advice what good is it, someone else in the RTB could still decide differently in a tribunal.

If in any ounce of doubt don't do it would be my advice and there is a lot more than an ounce of doubt here.

antoinolachtnai

Gunnar Red Stabilizer wrote: »

Even if they did give advice what good is it, someone else in the RTB could still decide differently in a tribunal.

If in any ounce of doubt don't do it would be my advice and there is a lot more than an ounce of doubt here.

The problem is that the OP could find themselves in practical difficulties if the situation gets confrontational and the tenant digs in. There is an amicable way to resolve this to everyone's advantage. The OP needs to talk to his mother's solicitor.

Claw Hammer

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The problem is that the OP could find themselves in practical difficulties if the situation gets confrontational and the tenant digs in. There is an amicable way to resolve this to everyone's advantage. The OP needs to talk to his mother's solicitor.

In what amicable way can it be resolved. The longer the o/p hangs around the longer it will take to get possession. The tenant is already digging in and preparing to ignore the notice to quit.

antoinolachtnai

Claw Hammer wrote: »

In what amicable way can it be resolved. The longer the o/p hangs around the longer it will take to get possession. The tenant is already digging in and preparing to ignore the notice to quit.

Up to the solicitor to find the best resolution. keeping the tenant on side and keeping the relationship friendly is the best chance of getting the tenant to vacate. If the tenant digs in, it will take months to get possession. The solicitor can protect her position whilst keeping communications open and friendly.

the_syco

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Acting for Mum who is ill.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Property to be sold. Tenants have been given proper notice and statutory declaration.

Can LL allow tenants to stay on for a few weeks after quit day as they cannot get another place to rent.

Just wondered about any pitfalls. Do not want them homeless.

The few weeks could be another few months. If they know that your mum is ill, they could be taking their sweet time.

Go with your gut. If you think that they're taking the piss regarding being unable to find another place, don't give them a day longer.

pilly

Don't forget folks there is a human element here. It's a terrible time of the year for anyone to move. Really cold and coming up to Christmas. Some flexibility may have to be allowed. I agree with other posters though, put whatever you do on a legal footing.

In reality I have heard of Councils telling people not to move out of a place until they have somewhere else so this is being encouraged as well.

Very difficult situation and I hope it's resolved. If the tenants have been there a good while and you do think they're decent people then there should be some hope of a peaceful solution.

Michael D Not Higgins

pilly wrote: »

Don't forget folks there is a human element here. It's a terrible time of the year for anyone to move. Really cold and coming up to Christmas. Some flexibility may have to be allowed. I agree with other posters though, put whatever you do on a legal footing.

In reality I have heard of Councils telling people not to move out of a place until they have somewhere else so this is being encouraged as well.

Very difficult situation and I hope it's resolved. If the tenants have been there a good while and you do think they're decent people then there should be some hope of a peaceful solution.

The Council don't want people turning up homeless because there's a week between their rentals. They're already overstretched as it is let alone having to house people short term because they didn't sort their rental out on time. They're not proposing people overhold but rather organise contingency (even if that means having two tenancies overlap for a week).

Threshold on the other hand, actively tell people to overhold, with the knowledge of the speed of the system working against landlords. I have no time for them.

The OP has given them several months notice as per the RTA, that was plenty of time for them to organise alternative accommodation. There's the human element and there's being taken for a mug.

PhoenixParker

The_Conductor wrote: »

The tenant wouldn't necessary file for anything with the RTB- they'd simply draw out the process- and if a tenant does not want to leave (for whatever reason- but including the fact that they are having difficulty finding alternate accommodation).

This could happen whether an extension is given by op or not. It's probably less likely to happen if op shows some goodwill and allows an extension. If OP says no tenant may well overstay and then he has an annoyed tenant overstaying vs a tenant grateful for a favour looking to move out. If it gies to the rtb it will be a long drawn out process with or without an extension to muddy the waters.

Being accommodating won't make the situation riskier to my mind, if anything it reduces the risk.

The_Conductor

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Being accommodating won't make the situation riskier to my mind, if anything it reduces the risk.

But what do you mean by 'being accommodating'?
They've already got in excess of 3 month's notice- why do you imagine setting some other abitrary point in time in the future will mean anything at all?

Michael D Not Higgins

The_Conductor wrote: »

But what do you mean by 'being accommodating'?
They've already got in excess of 3 month's notice- why do you imagine setting some other abitrary point in time in the future will mean anything at all?

What's likely to have happened is the blinkers went on when they received the notice considering they had three months to move. They then started looking about a week or two before the actual termination date and realised the current state of the rental market. If their part 4 recurs in January, that means they moved in January 2013 which was only a little bit above the bottom of the rental market in 2012. According to the latest daft report the rental index has increased by nearly 50% since then, and the stock on the market is a third of that in early 2013. It's unlikely their own rent has followed this rise and they're likely to have to pay a good bit more for the same type of accommodation.

Giving them a point in the future to work to will just delay them looking for somewhere until that point.

The_Conductor

All of which means- is they will simply be back at this point in time- down the road..........

I accept its crap giving someone their notice in the runup to Christmas etc- however, you could similarly say- its crap having to move at pretty much any stage.........

If the tenant has not proactively sought alternate accommodation thus far- who is to say they will (ever)- unless the implications of their inaction are spelt out to them in capital letters?

The OP needs to sell the property- and has been accommodating and given correct notice etc.

Where do you draw the line between the relationship a landlord has with a tenant being a business transaction- and one in which the landlord is effectively being asked to provide a welfare and/or social service to the tenant?

The system, patently, is broken- is dysfunctional, and does not work.

Claw Hammer

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Up to the solicitor to find the best resolution. keeping the tenant on side and keeping the relationship friendly is the best chance of getting the tenant to vacate. If the tenant digs in, it will take months to get possession. The solicitor can protect her position whilst keeping communications open and friendly.

So you don't know what the "amicable resolution" is. You are assuming that a solicitor can find one. Solicitors deal with the law and may get into mediation if it can help but ultimately they tell their clients whast they need to do legally to protect themselves. The o/p does not want to lose any time. Trying to be Mr Nice Guy is likely to waste time as the tenant will be in no hurry to move at all and will keep stalling. In all likelihood the tenant is faced with paying higher rent on moving and therefore has an incentive to stay put and string things out.
The o/p can open a dispute with the RTB and then have an "amicable resolution"
by withdrawing the complaint when the tenant leaves.

antoinolachtnai

The problem is if the tenant decides not to leave voluntarily. The solicitor will go to RTB, certainly but will avoid antagonising the tenant. There is nothing to be gained by antagonising the tenant.

the_syco

OP; do they have the xmas decorations up yet? If their notice is up shortly, and they have the xmas decorations up, it shows that they're not planning to leave anytime soon, imo.

The_Conductor

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The problem is if the tenant decides not to leave voluntarily. The solicitor will go to RTB, certainly but will avoid antagonising the tenant. There is nothing to be gained by antagonising the tenant.

It really comes down to- what is antagonising the tenant- moving, or the prospect of having to pay significantly higher rent than they currently are doing so. Given the length of their tenure- and the strong probability that their rent may not have been increased, or if it has- only at a vastly lower level than current rates- moving- as in, moving at all, is antagonising the tenant.

This is moot to the OP though- they don't want to retenant the property- or charge the tenant market rates- they want the property back, so they can sell it, to pay for the medical needs of their mother, the owner of the property.

This really is a situation- where there are no winners (perhaps aside from the person who ultimately purchases the property). Drawing out this process- while the intent of the tenant may not be vexatious in nature- is simply prolonging the inevitable, and is concurrently putting the OP under an unfair burden- given the medical needs of their mother (the owner of the property in the first instance).

Its a mess- which the tenant seems to be playing ostrich over- sticking their head in the sand, hoping it'll go away- while the OP is trying to play nice with them- but may have to resort to official routes, just because of how the law is stacked.

Claw Hammer

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The problem is if the tenant decides not to leave voluntarily. The solicitor will go to RTB, certainly but will avoid antagonising the tenant. There is nothing to be gained by antagonising the tenant.

What is the difference between the solicitor going to the RTB and the o/p. How does one antagonise the tenant and the other not?

Head Wreck

Sympathy and business don't mix.

antoinolachtnai

Try to make contact with the tenant. Try to get them to agree a departure timetable. Try to get them to sign some sort of agreement making clear that their overholding does not waive the notice. Listen to their story. Warn that you're going the PRTB route. Keep communications open. Try to constantly ascertain the tenants' situation.

It is great to go the PRTB route and the option has to be kept open but if the tenant gets bloody minded and digs in, the landlord will be a loser. Courtesy, professionalism and respect are the order of the day.

The_Conductor

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Courtesy, professionalism and respect are the order of the day.

Antoin- I agree 100% with you- to a point........
The tenant had 3 months to get their alternate accommodation sorted- and blanked it.
I honestly don't see how sitting down with them- and giving them a fresh 'leave date' is going to make any difference.
Irrespective of how the OP wishes to proceed with the tenant- they must go down the RTB route- and they must alert the tenant that unfortunately this is quite simply the only avenue open to them. They might agree to drop the RTB case, write a reasonable recommendation for the tenant, and refund their deposit to them in cash when they hand over the keys- perhaps pay their first month's rent in their new property as an inducement- it may be what needs to be done- but unfortunately the system quite simply doesn't work a landlord.

You can do absolutely everything by the book- and still find that the system is stacked against you- regardless of how reasonable and fair you may be.

If the tenant decides to dig their heels in- goes through the RTB process- and then to the district court- and appeals it to the high court- presumably with Free Legal Aid etc- in all honesty- you could be two years down the road, and still not have the property back..........

Keeping the tenant onside- but making them aware that you *have* to follow the process as set up in the Act- and simultaneously offering small inducements- probably culminating in the OP agreeing to pay the tenant's first month's rent in their new property- providing they keep to a set date to vacate- is most probably the way to go.............

You shouldn't have to do things like this- but unfortunately- the cards are stacked in favour of a tenant who decides to overhold...............

A small amount of carrot- with an impending stick for non-compliance?

Spanish Eyes

Thanks for all your considered replies.

I visited tenants earlier. They have packed up a lot of stuff alright and not a Christmas deco in sight yet.

They are a couple in their late thirties with two kiddies.

They have a chance of an apartment when their friends apartment becomes vacant as they are buying. Sale due to close in the New Year. The LL of the apartment is to contact me for refs etc.

My mother, although ill, is all there with her faculties, and she is adamant that she does not want tenants out over Christmas.

It's a hard one. Who would want to put a family into emergency accommodation at any time, but particularly Christmas time.

Tenants are agreed that us allowing them to stay is merely an extension of the notice period by mutual agreement, on humanitarian grounds.

I have pointed out that RTB may have to become involved if they overhold after Christmas.

They have also agreed to allow viewing of the property if it goes on the market before they leave after Christmas. Realistically, the property will not go for sale until the New Year.

We have known the tenants for 4 years. It is risky, yes, but mother rules the roost, and I think I will give them a period of grace until the New Year.

A signed agreement to that effect may have no legal standing whatsoever, I acknowledge that completely, but it is something if RTB needs to get involved. But honestly, I don't see that happening if the friends sale closes in January. We have evidence of this sale, and have the LL's contact details, as he will need refs.

Heart or head here? I'll sleep on it again tonight.

antoinolachtnai

Get something in writing. Ideally you would get the solicitor's help here.

Not a lot of sales close in the first week of January.

If you have it in writing that they are moving out, and if you can show it, and you will get the month's rent, and you have the tenant's goodwill you have nearly everything you need.

It is good to get it on the market, but December is not a great month for selling property.

pilly

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Get something in writing. Ideally you would get the solicitor's help here.

Not a lot of sales close in the first week of January.

If you have it in writing that they are moving out, and if you can show it, and you will get the month's rent, and you have the tenant's goodwill you have nearly everything you need.

It is good to get it on the market, but December is not a great month for selling property.

Yeah I would agree, it doesn't really serve a purpose to put a house up for sale now. Very very few people will look in December.

Claw Hammer

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Get something in writing. Ideally you would get the solicitor's help here.

Not a lot of sales close in the first week of January.

If you have it in writing that they are moving out, and if you can show it, and you will get the month's rent, and you have the tenant's goodwill you have nearly everything you need.

It is good to get it on the market, but December is not a great month for selling property.

The only thing he needs is the tenants out. Pieces of paper don't mean a thing. Goodwill only comes from tenants who are getting what they want. The RTB may now find that the Notice to Terminate was withdrawn and replaced with an invalid one. If that happens the O/P will still be on here in 12 months time trying to get the tenants out.

antoinolachtnai

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The only thing he needs is the tenants out. Pieces of paper don't mean a thing. Goodwill only comes from tenants who are getting what they want. The RTB may now find that the Notice to Terminate was withdrawn and replaced with an invalid one. If that happens the O/P will still be on here in 12 months time trying to get the tenants out.

If the tenants really decide not to leave they will most likely be in the house for 12 months whatever you do. The RTB is just not an open and shut guaranteed way to get rid of a troublesome tenant.

Good point re the legal risk. To mitigate that the OP needs a solicitor.