Rent increase megathread

4ensic15

The_Conductor wrote: »

A Fixed Term lease can only clarify the terms of a tenancy and any provisions of it can impart conditions at least as favourable to a tenant as those specified in the Residential Tenancies Act (as amended). It is however a civil agreement between a landlord and a tenant- and if either side breach their obligations in the fixed term lease- it would be a civil matter between the parties. With respect of notice- if it is provided for in the fixed term lease, notice would be made as prescribed under the act- and as specified under the Act.

Also- I would seriously suggest people stop relying on Threshold for legal interpretations of the Act- or legal advice- they are on the record providing illegal advice and guidance to tenants, frankly how or why they continue to receive substantial state funding, is beyond me.

Read what the articles and terms in your fixed term lease say. If it isn't clear- your fall-back is the Residential Tenancies Act.

Residential Tenancies Act 2004
58.—(1) From the relevant date, a tenancy of a dwelling may not be terminated by the landlord or the tenant by means of a notice of forfeiture, a re-entry or any other process or procedure not provided by this Part.

(2) Accordingly, the termination by the landlord or the tenant of—

(a) more beneficial rights referred to in section 26 that the tenant enjoys under a tenancy than those created by Part 4, or

(b) a tenancy to which section 25 applies,

must be effected by means of a notice of termination that complies with this Part.

(3) Each of the following—

(a) a tenancy referred to in subsection (2)(a) (unless it expressly excludes this means of termination),

(b) a tenancy referred to in subsection (2)(b), and

(c) a tenancy of a dwelling created before or after the relevant date in so far as its operation is not affected by Part 4,

shall be construed as including a term enabling its termination by means of a notice of termination that complies with this Part (but, in the case of a tenancy that is for a fixed period, unless it provides otherwise, only where there has been a failure by the party in relation to whom the notice is served to comply with any obligations of the tenancy).


This is taken to mean that unless there is a break caluse, notice can't be given during the fixed period even if it expires on or after the end of the fixed period. Termination for breach of condition is the same whether a fixed period lease or not.

Fian

fjon wrote: »

Sorry, I know variations of this get asked a lot on this thread! I read back through the last 5 pages of the thread and found some useful information.
I am meeting with my LL in a few weeks to renew lease and discuss rent. I want to make sure I have my facts right before I talk to him.
We moved into our house in a RPZ in May 2015, and had no rent increase in May 2016.
Am I right in thinking that the increase in 2017 can't be more than 4% (24/24*4)? Also, that if this increase is sought that it can't take effect until August 2017? (90 days)

Yes you are correct - 4% increase on 2015 rent with 90 days notice from the anniversary date in May. Landlord cannot conduct review until May - he can't do it in a few weeks.

Fian

LFC Murphy wrote: »

This tells me max rent increase, which is no help as surly rent can also decrease... the PRTB rent index for Q3-2016 tells me that rent for my area is actually below my current rent.

So would we have a case if such a situation exists, can we argue a rent review downwards?

Also what is the new notice period, as the previous was 90 days?

Are you kidding?

Do you actually believe market rents have decreased over 24 months since yours was last set?

I rent out a 1 bedroom apartment - rent was last set (at full market rent on a new tenancy) in April 2015. Looking at rents for a 1 bed apartment in local area now there are 2 advertised on Daft atm. One is 28% above my rent, other is 36% above my rent as set in 2015.

Claw Hammer

LFC Murphy wrote: »

This tells me max rent increase, which is no help as surly rent can also decrease... the PRTB rent index for Q3-2016 tells me that rent for my area is actually below my current rent.

So would we have a case if such a situation exists, can we argue a rent review downwards?

Also what is the new notice period, as the previous was 90 days?

The rent for your area is an average. You can have modern apartments in the same district as grotty bedsits. Not surprisingly those living in the apartments will be paying above average for the area.

Fian

Here is an example of a rent that is obviously dictated by the new rent control laws, which explains the odd number (€1442):

http://www.daft.ie/dublin/apartments-for-rent/dundrum/wyckham-point-dundrum-dublin-1721572/

I expect the demand for this apartment will be enormous, there is another apartment advertised in the same block on daft for an additional €160 per month rent - almost 10% higher.

_Kaiser_

It's getting beyond a joke. I moved about an hour outside Dublin 2 years ago but even here the rents are starting to push close to a grand for an apartment and over that for a standard 3 bed I'm on what would be considered "good money" too but when you add in the commuting costs, there's not much left.

My own rent is up for review at the end of the month and I dread to think what they'll look for.

Claw Hammer

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's getting beyond a joke. I moved about an hour outside Dublin 2 years ago but even here the rents are starting to push close to a grand for an apartment and over that for a standard 3 bed I'm on what would be considered "good money" too but when you add in the commuting costs, there's not much left.

My own rent is up for review at the end of the month and I dread to think what they'll look for.

This is the inevitble consequence of the failure to address the supply issue in Dublin. Nobody had any sympathy for landlords when rents were falling 5 years ago so tenants can hardly complain now.

fjon

Had a meeting with my LL. He lives in a non RPZ, they put his rent up 13% in January.
He has stated that he can't afford to rent out to us and pay his rent, so he will need to give us 2 months notice and move back into the house, or else pass some of the increase on to us (around 8%).
I know the 8% increase is not legal, but if we don't pay it I guess there is no option but to move out?

Ms Doubtfire1

He'#s making his problem your problem, which is understandable.And yes, he can, under part 4, request the house back for own use - unless you have a fixed term lease.In that case he can't. So a lot depends on what kind of lease you have.
Also, the notice period depends on how long you are there for.

fjon

It's a fixed term (2 years) and the term is up shortly. He has given us 2 months, which seems to be the right period of time for between 2-3 years, which we are.
We like the house, our kid is in school nearby and we don't want to move. It's not a nice decision - pay an illegal increase and stay or look for something new.

Ms Doubtfire1

You could be making all kinds of fuzz if the notice was invalid etc etc and you don't HAVE to accept the increase as you're in a RPZ.You have security of tenancy, but under the Part4 act he can ask you to leave.As such, in my eyes it's just a case of doing the math: how much is the increase in total (mount of money) how much does a similar house in the area cost you, whats the costs of moving etc. I'd be pretty sure you'll be better off accepting the increase - but I would ask for a 4 year fixed term lease.

The_Conductor

fjon wrote: »

Had a meeting with my LL. He lives in a non RPZ, they put his rent up 13% in January.
He has stated that he can't afford to rent out to us and pay his rent, so he will need to give us 2 months notice and move back into the house, or else pass some of the increase on to us (around 8%).
I know the 8% increase is not legal, but if we don't pay it I guess there is no option but to move out?

Realistically- as valid notice has been served- you are going to have to move.
He was being stupid mentioning a higher increase- it is illegal- however, even if you did pay it, and subsequently dispute it- all you'd be doing is facing the exact same conundrum down the road- and having to move anyway- as he'll still need it for his own use.........

I don't see that you're going to get out of having to move- sooner or later- bite the bullet and move now?

fjon

The_Conductor wrote: »

Realistically- as valid notice has been served- you are going to have to move.
He was being stupid mentioning a higher increase- it is illegal- however, even if you did pay it, and subsequently dispute it- all you'd be doing is facing the exact same conundrum down the road- and having to move anyway- as he'll still need it for his own use.........

I don't see that you're going to get out of having to move- sooner or later- bite the bullet and move now?

We DO want to move, but not yet. We are aiming to get a mortgage in the next year, so am not that concerned about facing the issue down the road.
He also offered a fixed term 2 year lease if we took the increase.
He hasn't officially served the notice yet, I think he's seeing how we would react to his proposal.
I guess there's really no way around it, the two options are exactly as he says.

Ms Doubtfire1

well, take the increase for one year or move out.

pilly

fjon wrote: »

We DO want to move, but not yet. We are aiming to get a mortgage in the next year, so am not that concerned about facing the issue down the road.
He also offered a fixed term 2 year lease if we took the increase.
He hasn't officially served the notice yet, I think he's seeing how we would react to his proposal.
I guess there's really no way around it, the two options are exactly as he says.

Yeah, I think if you're only planning on staying there another while I think you'll just have to take it on the chin, consider the costs and hassle of moving.

Browney7

The_Conductor wrote: »

Realistically- as valid notice has been served- you are going to have to move.
He was being stupid mentioning a higher increase- it is illegal- however, even if you did pay it, and subsequently dispute it- all you'd be doing is facing the exact same conundrum down the road- and having to move anyway- as he'll still need it for his own use.........

I don't see that you're going to get out of having to move- sooner or later- bite the bullet and move now?

Could they accept the increase and then dispute it a few months before intending to move out anyways (12 months down the line) and get the extra illegal amount refunded?

The_Conductor

Browney7 wrote: »

Could they accept the increase and then dispute it a few months before intending to move out anyways (12 months down the line) and get the extra illegal amount refunded?

Sure they could- I feel for everyone here- the landlord is getting reefed elsewhere........ This whole situation where you have people letting out their sole property- while renting elsewhere- is nuts- and by rights, should be dealt with for once and for all. It is illegal to seek an initial increase of >4% if the last review was within the 2 year window (if it was outside the 2 year window- obviously the pro-rata rule applies).

The whole situation is messy- I can't honestly say how I'd handle it, or what I'd do- but it is illegal to seek >4% p.a. in a control zone.

pilly

The_Conductor wrote:

Sure they could- I feel for everyone here- the landlord is getting reefed elsewhere........ This whole situation where you have people letting out their sole property- while renting elsewhere- is nuts- and by rights, should be dealt with for once and for all. It is illegal to seek an initial increase of >4% if the last review was within the 2 year window (if it was outside the 2 year window- obviously the pro-rata rule applies).

How do you suggest the issue of people renting out their property and renting elsewhere though? I've had to do this because of negative equity and a need to move. It's better than leaving the place empty because we're gonna get taxed for that next!

The_Conductor

pilly wrote: »

How do you suggest the issue of people renting out their property and renting elsewhere though? I've had to do this because of negative equity and a need to move. It's better than leaving the place empty because we're gonna get taxed for that next!

What I'd suggest for people who rent out their sole property- and have to rent property elsewhere themselves (for whatever reason- negative equity and they can't sell, proximity to work, property unsuitable because they have children- whatever.......)- is they should be allowed to offset their rental income against their rental outgoings- wholly. It beggars belief that someone with a single property- has to pay tax on their rental income- and then has to rent elsewhere- from their net after tax income. For crying out loud- let them offset one against the other.......

Thats what I'd do.

As for the wider market- its become so hopelessly distorted from a tax perspective with all manner of groups and companies getting away with paying absolutely no tax- while smaller landlords can end up having to pay up to 56.25% (or even a little higher if you factor RTB fees, LPT and other indirect costs into the equation) - that it is patently inequitable and in need of reform. I'd suggest ringfencing the residential rental market in its entirety from the rest of the tax regime- and simply applying a flatrate deduction on gross rental income from all landlords- 20%-25% seems fair to me. No deductions for anything- at all- just a flatrate deduction on gross rent. It would level the playing field at one foul swoop.

The Ministers (it would be both Housing and Finance Departments) could sit down and come up with schemes that vastly increased the tax take from the sector- but leveled the playing field- and made everything fairer- without really thinking too hard- but they don't have the gonads to do so.......

pilly

The_Conductor wrote:

What I'd suggest for people who rent out their sole property- and have to rent property elsewhere themselves (for whatever reason- negative equity and they can't sell, proximity to work, property unsuitable because they have children- whatever.......)- is they should be allowed to offset their rental income against their rental outgoings- wholly. It beggars belief that someone with a single property- has to pay tax on their rental income- and then has to rent elsewhere- from their net after tax income. For crying out loud- let them offset one against the other.......

Great idea! I wish you were in government. There used to be tax credits for rent paid, don't know if anyone remembers that but some relief should definitely be brought back.

kieran26

Hi I have looked this up online but still require some clarification on the matter. I received a letter on friday last from our letting agent notifying me of a rent increase that is to occur on the 23rd of june this year. I live in Galway city centre. We are in the place 2 years and currently pay 900pm. This wasn't increased last year. The new rent has been calculated at 972per month. The new lease is a two year lease

So my two questions are as follows.
Have the letting agents adhered to the correct notice period? My understanding was they can't issue a rent increase notice until the current lease is up. I could be wrong on this I just want to get my facts straight before I ring them.
And is the rent increase the correct amount? I thought 4% was the max increse allowed in a rent pressure zone but this seems to be an 8% increase.
I have no problem with the increase in general but I just want to make sure the rules are being followed. Thanks in advance for any help

CIARAN_BOYLE

kieran26 wrote: »

Hi I have looked this up online but still require some clarification on the matter. I received a letter on friday last from our letting agent notifying me of a rent increase that is to occur on the 23rd of june this year. I live in Galway city centre. We are in the place 2 years and currently pay 900pm. This wasn't increased last year. The new rent has been calculated at 972per month. The new lease is a two year lease

So my two questions are as follows.
Have the letting agents adhered to the correct notice period? My understanding was they can't issue a rent increase notice until the current lease is up. I could be wrong on this I just want to get my facts straight before I ring them.
And is the rent increase the correct amount? I thought 4% was the max increse allowed in a rent pressure zone but this seems to be an 8% increase.
I have no problem with the increase in general but I just want to make sure the rules are being followed. Thanks in advance for any help

Not sure about 1 but for 2 the rule is 4% per year maximum and you are only allowed increase every two years so if you are there two years that's 8% as far as I understand.

He has to give you 90 days notice. He has given you this.

Michael D Not Higgins

Since you're only there 2 years and this is your first rent increase, the value of m in the RPZ formula is 24 meaning 4%, not 8%, is applicable. The notice is fine if you're there 2 years but if you're only there 2 years in June then it's wrong. The rent review can only be done after 2 years have elapsed, not in advance to have the new rent start at the 2 year mark.

kieran26

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Since you're only there 2 years and this is your first rent increase, the value of m in the RPZ formula is 24 meaning 4%, not 8%, is applicable. The notice is fine if you're there 2 years but if you're only there 2 years in June then it's wrong. The rent review can only be done after 2 years have elapsed, not in advance to have the new rent start at the 2 year mark.

OK, thanks for that, yes will have been here two years in June so it would appear they're 3 months early with the increase notice. i'll give them a call and see what they say, they've been very fair to deal with so far so i hope they'll be reasonable with this too.

athtrasna

kieran26 wrote: »

OK, thanks for that, yes will have been here two years in June so it would appear they're 3 months early with the increase notice. i'll give them a call and see what they say, they've been very fair to deal with so far so i hope they'll be reasonable with this too.

Anecdotally on here, as they've served an invalid rent increase notice the clock on when they can next have a rent review may be reset. Research your rights fully. Threshold is a good starting point but don't take their word as Gospel.

OkeyDoke12

Myself and my partner have been renting a house in Louth since November 2014. We signed a years lease at 150 euro a week. At the end of that lease we signed another 2 year lease at 160 a week. Our current lease is up in November. Our landlord called a few weeks back and said we can sign another lease as we are good tenants but there would be a rent increase. He said he will get the house valued by a auctioneer at the end of Oct/Sep and see what they say he should be getting weekly. This potentially left us with 4-6 weeks to find a new house if the increase is too high. We explained this to him and he said he would get the auctioneer out sooner. He called out a few days ago and when I asked him about the auctioneer he side stepped the question and basically said that ‟the rent increase wont be what you think it will be‟. He later went on to say that the other house he has he increased the rent from 750 - 950 euros.

I am not in the rent pressure zone so do I basically have to suck it up and pay whatever he asks or look elsewhere?

punisher5112

OkeyDoke12 wrote: »

Myself and my partner have been renting a house in Louth since November 2014. We signed a years lease at 150 euro a week. At the end of that lease we signed another 2 year lease at 160 a week. Our current lease is up in November. Our landlord called a few weeks back and said we can sign another lease as we are good tenants but there would be a rent increase. He said he will get the house valued by a auctioneer at the end of Oct/Sep and see what they say he should be getting weekly. This potentially left us with 4-6 weeks to find a new house if the increase is too high. We explained this to him and he said he would get the auctioneer out sooner. He called out a few days ago and when I asked him about the auctioneer he side stepped the question and basically said that ‟the rent increase wont be what you think it will be‟. He later went on to say that the other house he has he increased the rent from 750 - 950 euros.

I am not in the rent pressure zone so do I basically have to suck it up and pay whatever he asks or look elsewhere?

One you don't need yo sign a new lease as you stay on part 4.

Make sure correct notice is given to increase.

If you know it is too much and know similar property in the area is rented for less bring a case to the RTB.

gizmo81

You could take a case if you feel what he asks is above market rent.

I looked on Daft and one house is available for €700 or under. However, i'd advise checking with neighbours as if you take a case to the RTB this can be considered.

Best of luck

OkeyDoke12 wrote: »

Myself and my partner have been renting a house in Louth since November 2014. We signed a years lease at 150 euro a week. At the end of that lease we signed another 2 year lease at 160 a week. Our current lease is up in November. Our landlord called a few weeks back and said we can sign another lease as we are good tenants but there would be a rent increase. He said he will get the house valued by a auctioneer at the end of Oct/Sep and see what they say he should be getting weekly. This potentially left us with 4-6 weeks to find a new house if the increase is too high. We explained this to him and he said he would get the auctioneer out sooner. He called out a few days ago and when I asked him about the auctioneer he side stepped the question and basically said that ‟the rent increase wont be what you think it will be‟. He later went on to say that the other house he has he increased the rent from 750 - 950 euros.

I am not in the rent pressure zone so do I basically have to suck it up and pay whatever he asks or look elsewhere?

Claw Hammer

gizmo81 wrote: »

You could take a case if you feel what he asks is above market rent.

I looked on Daft and one house is available for €700 or under. However, i'd advise checking with neighbours as if you take a case to the RTB this can be considered.

Best of luck

You have to get 90 days notice in writing of a new rent.

Donie75

My tenant signed a lease in August 2013. I have not given the tenant a new lease to sign since then.
I want to increase the rent now and it is in a rent pressure zone. I looked at the RTB calculator and it says I can increase from €850 to €913.75. Do I need to give 90 or 28 days notice seeing as it's been a long time since the rent was increased and it was before the new legislation?