Tenants out, owner moving back in. How long take

harry999

Hi

I want to move back into my house, so gave tenants 84days notice as there 3 years. They say they will not leave without a court order as council will then house them. So after PTRB judgement, I will likely have to go to court. Anybody recent experiences with this and how long this is likely to take me???.. Thanks

CIARAN_BOYLE

A year or two.

Hopefully they continue paying rent. It won't really change the process if they don't.

punisher5112

harry999 wrote: »

Hi

I want to move back into my house, so gave tenants 84days notice as there 3 years. They say they will not leave without a court order as council will then house them. So after PTRB judgement, I will likely have to go to court. Anybody recent experiences with this and how long this is likely to take me???.. Thanks

They have you snookered and they may even stop paying rent altogether.
Could take up to a year to get it all sorted.

The_Conductor

harry999 wrote: »

Anybody recent experiences with this and how long this is likely to take me???.. Thanks

If they decide to drag out the court process- and it reaches the stage that you have to get the sheriff to enforce a court judgement- you are looking at up to 2 years...........

The system is stacked against you- it really is..........

harry999

Thks for replies.

They have told me they will stop paying rent and will need a court order.

I know could take 2 years on the old PTRB process, but I have heard the PTRB process has got much faster. Anybody have any recent dealing with PTRB to verify this ? Thanks

punisher5112

Really only 2 options 1 pay them to leave or 2 go the legal route.

Obviously there are other avenues but they will most likely have you in court and end up getting even more money.

Never heard of anyone needing a court order to get a house.
All they need to do is present themselves to the housing section office.

Mad they can get away with it though.

The_Conductor

harry999 wrote: »

Thks for replies.

They have told me they will stop paying rent and will need a court order.

I know could take 2 years on the old PTRB process, but I have heard the PTRB process has got much faster. Anybody have any recent dealing with PTRB to verify this ? Thanks

The RTB adjudication hearings are a lot faster in cases like this- however, having a hearing, and getting an enforcement order- means nothing. The tenant is free to ignore it. You'll then have to go to court- where the court may or may not put a stay on the order. After this- if they still don't leave- you go back to court and apply for a sheriff's order of repossession- to get the property back- its at this point that tenants often vanish into the night.

Its a mess- and the tenant is deliberately abusing process- because they know they can get away with it.

Realistically- I would offer the tenant a cash sum- say 2 grand, to hand back the keys, and vacate the property- and get a locksmith there and then to change the locks- it'll probably cost a couple of hundred to get all the doors done- but do it......

quadrifoglio verde

punisher5112 wrote: »

Really only 2 options 1 pay them to leave or 2 go the legal route.

Obviously there are other avenues but they will most likely have you in court and end up getting even more money.

Never heard of anyone needing a court order to get a house.
All they need to do is present themselves to the housing section office.

Mad they can get away with it though.

It's why some decide to change the locks and although illegal and you risk facing fines, it's understandable as works out cheaper in the long run

Samuel T. Cogley

There were a couple of 'creative' solicitors floating about. Whether they're still on the roll or not...

endacl

Wait till they leave for the day. Knock the house down. It'll be cheaper in the long run...

harry999

I would definitely offer them 2k to leave - but I would doubt if they would accept - as this is just 2 months rent, and if they stay in house they will have it rent free for up to two years..

Browney7

You say they are there three years - is it as difficult to remove a tenant after the four year part four expires if they refuse to go? I'd guess it is.

As someone who rents, it's disgusting conduct from the tenant and the payment of PFO (please find off) money has been the cause of huge problems in insurance but it may be your only option. Government have failed everyone by the total lack of forward planning when it comes to housing - both public and private.

dolallyoh

The_Conductor wrote: »

If they decide to drag out the court process- and it reaches the stage that you have to get the sheriff to enforce a court judgement- you are looking at up to 2 years...........

The system is stacked against you- it really is..........

It's absolutely incredible. And we wonder why there isn't more supply.

Gumbo

Scum bag tenants. They give the decent tenants a bad name.

Mrs OBumble

They do not need to be put out by court order in order for ths council to house them. They just need to be homeless.

I really don't see how people can bring themselves to pay off scum tenants like this. Id rather face the consequences of throwing them out than pay them off.

Claw Hammer

harry999 wrote: »

Thks for replies.

They have told me they will stop paying rent and will need a court order.

I know could take 2 years on the old PTRB process, but I have heard the PTRB process has got much faster. Anybody have any recent dealing with PTRB to verify this ? Thanks

It has got slower since the 2015 Act. Overholding cases get priority adjudication but appeals are slow. You had better be sure your notice is correct or it will be rejected.

harry999

Thks for replies.

So anybody actually gone through this process, got order from PTRB and then had to get court order. How long from when gave them notice to getting them out, did it take you ?

GGTrek

harry999 wrote: »

Thks for replies.

So anybody actually gone through this process, got order from PTRB and then had to get court order. How long from when gave them notice to getting them out, did it take you ?

Many people in this forum do not have much experience on this. 2 years can only happen if the tenants have money to get legal advice, since your type of welfare tenants usually go to Threshold which is a very inept organization w.r.t. legal advice, they just tell the tenant to overhold or keep the case with RTB for as long as possible (they have absolutely no idea of when a notice is valid or invalid). Not paying rent and overholding is taken as a high priority case at RTB now which means that between first petition -> 3-4 weeks -> adjudication -> 10 days -> appeal time 3 weeks -> appeal petition -> 3 months -> appeal hearing -> 14 days -> final determination so you are looking at 6 months.

Once the RTB process is done, no more RTB bias that favours the tenants, the system is slow but fair to the parties (i.e. proper courts). I have never reached the court stage, but my solicitor told me that Circuit Court takes around 3 months to issue summons from initial petition in Dublin and 6 weeks to 3 months for Sheriff accompanied by Garda to kick them out for good although once summons are issued, tenants usually disappear very quickly because then force will be applied and almost no one likes to be arrested by Garda or being literally thrown out of the place. So realistically you are looking at 1 year from start to finish.

A tenant that earns a salary (i.e. non-welfare) will get out as soon as RTB process is over and will pay the rent, because he/she knows that court costs, will be taken from his assets and/or attachment of earnings, that is why it is always better to have a tenant that has a job, because he has a lot to loose if he misbehaves.

Obviously this state of affairs is not a problem for the Irish govvie or the Irish TDs, don't be fooled by the latest govvie BS that they have reduced the appeal delay at RTB (the appeal should really be abolished and the tenant should sustain court  and legal costs if he wants to delay, since it is the major bottleneck and the RTB tribunal has issued many scandalous pro-tenant interpretations of the RTA). What they have done in the RTA 2016 is just change the time allowed for appeal from 21 calendar days to 14 working days (which if you do the maths it is a minimum of 18 calendar days or more if there are bank holidays :P) and the jokers at Threshold were screaming in the media and to the Oireachtas that this was a serious infringement of tenant's rights (look at their public consultation submissions for the RTA 2016). I mean these guys at Threshold are a shining example of bad faith!

enricoh

A mate of mine had this problem a couple of years ago, he sent a few big lads up to have a chat with the tenant.
The tenant wasn't laughing down the phone at my mate after it as he was before. It cost him a few quid for the chat but he got his house back pronto.

Samuel T. Cogley

enricoh wrote: »

A mate of mine had this problem a couple of years ago, he sent a few big lads up to have a chat with the tenant.
The tenant wasn't laughing down the phone at my mate after it as he was before. It cost him a few quid for the chat but he got his house back pronto.

Filmed on the mobile phone convertly - KERRRRR CHING!!!!!

Spanish Eyes

What are the consequences of a LL changing the locks when tenants are out. After the notice period expires I mean?

I suppose LL will be taken to court and convicted of some crime. What is that crime does anyone know?

Just curious. If anyone knows.

enricoh

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Filmed on the mobile phone convertly - KERRRRR CHING!!!!!

Who's to say what the chat was about!
Still the thoughts of paying someone a few grand and them laughing at you would do my nut in. Plus it guarantees he does it to the next landlord and tells his mates to do the same. If he gets a good scare he'll think twice the next time!

4ensic15

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What are the consequences of a LL changing the locks when tenants are out. After the notice period expires I mean?

I suppose LL will be taken to court and convicted of some crime. What is that crime does anyone know?

Just curious. If anyone knows.

There is no crime. It is unlikely the tenant even has a case in civil law even if he could get a solicitor to take it without huge money up front.

Spanish Eyes

4ensic15 wrote: »

There is no crime. It is unlikely the tenant even has a case in civil law even if he could get a solicitor to take it without huge money up front.

Seriously? If that's the case, why don't more LLs take this approach, instead of letting the PRTB take over their property on behalf of an overholding and non paying tenant then?

Shakes head. There must be more to this!

4ensic15

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Seriously? If that's the case, why don't more LLs take this approach, !

Ignorance and meanness. There are very few lawyers who know anything about this area. Most landlords are tight gits and won't hire them.

Spanish Eyes

4ensic15 wrote: »

Ignorance and meanness. There are very few lawyers who know anything about this area. Most landlords are tight gits and won't hire them.

Why would you need a solicitor/lawyer to change the locks at the expiry of the notice period?

Simple enough I would have thought, if the circumstances were right, i.e. tenants who were overholding were out at the time, and possessions put outside for collection.

There is more to this. Really there has to be.

4ensic15

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why would you need a solicitor/lawyer to change the locks at the expiry of the notice period?

Simple enough I would have thought, if the circumstances were right, i.e. tenants who were overholding were out at the time, and possessions put outside for collection.

There is more to this. Really there has to be.

The solicitor/lawyer is needed to provide the advice to ensure it doesn't go wrong.

Mrs OBumble

Patrick Fit Greengrocer wrote: »

I really don't see how people can bring themselves to pay off scum tenants like this. Id rather face the consequences of throwing them out than pay them off.

Professional landlords weigh up the likely costs, factoring in things like lost rent while things go through the legal process, and the greater maintenance costs to fix up damage done in the last part of the overholding by p*ssed off tenants.

So they pay PFO money - and get their properties back in reasonable shape.

No different to paying off "squatters" who happen to have parked their vehicles on your land, really.

James 007

Five Options:

1. Do you have any further information on the tenants, where they work even if they do work. CC their workplace with copies of letters etc. Are they Irish, of so do they have family elsewhere.

2. Change the locks, face the consequences if they take case against you. Can you make more back in rent.

3. Do nothing follow the letter of the law, and let them screw you over and laugh in your face.

4. Be the good samarathan, try and pay them off at a min. to get them out.

5. Bulldoze the house.

Spanish Eyes

4ensic15 wrote: »

The solicitor/lawyer is needed to provide the advice to ensure it doesn't go wrong.

Lay people can read the law aswell. It should be easy enough. And if it is easy everyone would be doing it too. So it is not easy QED.

if a solicitor is required it ain't an easy gig. Back it up please. Thanks.

Samuel T. Cogley

enricoh wrote: »

Who's to say what the chat was about!
Still the thoughts of paying someone a few grand and them laughing at you would do my nut in. Plus it guarantees he does it to the next landlord and tells his mates to do the same. If he gets a good scare he'll think twice the next time!

Well fair enough. Hoping to be in the profession one day when I grow up so I don't know why I keep trying to stop people needing their services.

4ensic15

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Lay people can read the law aswell. It should be easy enough. And if it is easy everyone would be doing it too. So it is not easy QED.

if a solicitor is required it ain't an easy gig. Back it up please. Thanks.

It is far from easy. people can read but not understand. Most don't even know where to look
This is what Judge laffoy, who is now a Supreme Court judge and a leading expert on landlord and tenant law said in the case of Canty v PRTB on 8th August, 2007


He has raised technical points in relation to the Act of 2004 which, in my view, is an extremely complex piece of legislation. He has advanced interpretations of some of the provisions of that Act which are contorted in the extreme.

Samuel T. Cogley

I'd be very interested to see what would happen if a LL, once valid notice was properly issued and expired forced 'tenants' out. I'd be very dubious that it would end well for the landlord I have to admite, but I can certainly understand why someone would resort to self help in the current climate.

4ensic15

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see what would happen if a LL, once valid notice was properly issued and expired forced 'tenants' out. I'd be very dubious that it would end well for the landlord I have to admite, but I can certainly understand why someone would resort to self help in the current climate.

That is not what I have been talking about. I am talking about a situation where there has been a determination order by the RTB which the tenant has ignored.
This is the danger with this topic. people misunderstand what is being discussed constantly.

Spanish Eyes

4ensic15 wrote: »

That is not what I have been talking about. I am talking about a situation where there has been a determination order by the RTB which the tenant has ignored.
This is the danger with this topic. people misunderstand what is being discussed constantly.

Well would you ever give up yer oul sins, and say it out and loud and proud for the benefit of those lay litigants (OMG no, not them again) and be clear about it.

FGS another Law Library wannabe.

As someone who has been through this before: My 2 cents is give the required notice period. Then get a locksmith in and have a friend film the whole thing. Once the locks are changed get a nice big dog and stick him/her in the back garden and then politely tell the tenants to F off. You then tell them you will arrange a time for them to collect their stuff. Simple as that. They are on the social so they won't have any money to sue you.

Spanish Eyes

4ensic15 wrote: »

It is far from easy. people can read but not understand. Most don't even know where to look
This is what Judge laffoy, who is now a Supreme Court judge and a leading expert on landlord and tenant law said in the case of Canty v PRTB on 8th August, 2007


He has raised technical points in relation to the Act of 2004 which, in my view, is an extremely complex piece of legislation. He has advanced interpretations of some of the provisions of that Act which are contorted in the extreme.

You are a messer.

Judge Laffoy is a female. Mary Laffoy to be exact. Back in yer box.

4ensic15

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

You are a messer.

Judge Laffoy is a female. Mary Laffoy to be exact. Back in yer box.

She was referring to the litigant who was a lay litigant. It might have been you.

Paulw

Mod Post: Ok, thread closed. Going all over the place. If you want a legal discussion on evictions, take it to the Legal Discussion section.