how landlord can safely rent out individual rooms at his home?

estee11

This is a new completely different scenario, currently hypothetical:

I refer to the issue (yet not exactly this one however similar, as Abigail Huge Shipwreck most likely was talking about a scenario where a landlord is renting out all of the individual rooms at the property, however i would like to focus on slightly different scenario where the guest starts living in a house where landlord is living and continue to be living) original issue raised in the following thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102991914&postcount=22

where Michael D Not Higgins replied to Abigail Huge Shipwreck and stated that RTB does not support Abigail Huge Shipwreck's interpretation that certain group are a licensee. Michael D Not Higgins wrote: " The RTB do not support Abigail Huge Shipwreck's interpretation of them (individuals) as licensees, as has been demonstrated in tribunal and court decisions repeatedly to you. The accepted definition from those outcomes is renting the room exclusively with non-exclusive use of shared facilities like bathroom and kitchen constitutes the self-contained residential unit. A dwelling is defined in the RTA as this same self-contained residential unit (Section 4). The RTA doesn't apply to dwellings shared with the landlord (Section 3)." -

I would like to breakdown Michael D Not Higgins' post into two sections and look closer at one of these sections:

so:

1)

" The RTB do not support Abigail Huge Shipwreck's interpretation of them (individuals) as licensees, as has been demonstrated in tribunal and court decisions repeatedly to you. The accepted definition from those outcomes is renting the room exclusively with non-exclusive use of shared facilities like bathroom and kitchen constitutes the self-contained residential unit. A dwelling is defined in the RTA as this same self-contained residential unit (Section 4). "

- i believe we are all satisfied that these are the current outcomes where it comes to situation that landlord did not ever reside in the property.

2) this one is the one that I would like to focus on and form our discussion on:

"The RTA doesn't apply to dwellings shared with the landlord (Section 3)."

in the above 2) scenario where a landlord has one home, lives in this home alone, works long hours and have a busy private life (by socializing with friends or by being outdoors/travelling) which virtually means that the landlord is out of the house for the most of the time so wishes to avail of RAR and license spare room to a stranger.

so:

a) landlord wants to use the remaining rooms and invites licensees as guests to his home in exchange for a license fee
b) and be able to return to his home at anytime at his will

therefore the question arises: would a landlord be still able to safely go on with all his life plans without telling guests where he is and why he only sleeps there when he wishes? Again I will reiterate. The landlord still lives at his home and has no intention of leaving.

So, if the landlord invites a prospect guest to his home and this guest becomes a licensee, would signing a licensee agreement which agreement would state the following: that any bed room which a licensee uses is not for his/her exclusive use (meaning - licensing a room is for non-exclusive use) would this aforementioned line in the agreement be a safe way of inviting a total stranger to become a licensee at a landlord home?

Could someone help to re-word above lines to make it a 100% clear to the guests that he or she is not exclusively going to license his/her new room, and that the said room is not a self-contained residential unit ?

I hope that all above makes sense.

Samuel T. Cogley

No one can clearly state it for you as it will depend on what actually happens if a dispute arises. i.e. does it become clear, on the balance of probabilities, the LL was simply trying to defeat the RTA or the situation was actually that of licencees.

Edit: Sorry in relation to your focus, the LL is perfectly safe if it's his principle private residence. There are tax issues with RAR, so residence comes into if the LL is abroad but the LL might only weekends there, sometimes not even that, as long as it's where people 'expect to find the person'. So if I live in Sligo and work in Dublin people would still expect to 'find me' in Sligo, my post would still go to Sligo etc.

Claw Hammer

How many more of these keep a room posters are going to appear? There is a serarch facility which appears to have been used.

Spanish Eyes

I think the bottom line is to look at the Revenue legislation re RAR Scheme.

If the house is owned and is the PPR of the owner there is no issue.

Many people I know have let out rooms in their own house while they were working elsewhere for a while. But it is their PPR and that is where all their bills go along with Revenue etc contacts.

There doesn't seem to be any onus on the ppr owner to live in ppr full time.

The OP is confusing tbh,,

Claw Hammer

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I think the bottom line is to look at the Revenue legislation re RAR Scheme.

If the house is owned and is the PPR of the owner there is no issue.

Many people I know have let out rooms in their own house while they were working elsewhere for a while. But it is their PPR and that is where all their bills go along with Revenue etc contacts.

There doesn't seem to be any onus on the ppr owner to live in ppr full time.

The OP is confusing tbh,,

The PPR is a tax issue. The RTB is a tenancy issue. The two are not equivalent. It is possible to qualify for rent a room tax relief even though the occupiers are tenant under the RTB. The O/P is to avoid the RTB. It is the usual convoluted scenario in the threads.

4ensic15

estee11 wrote: »

This is a new completely different scenario, currently hypothetical:



I hope that all above makes sense.

It makes no sense. It is not the landlords home. He is obviously living elsewhere. Must try harder.

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

It makes no sense. It is not the landlords home. He is obviously living elsewhere. Must try harder.

Why do you say it is not his "home". If the LL has a busy social life and travels a lot, that doesn't mean his "home" is his partners house or a hotel room. In the past I traveled a lot on business, that didn't mean my home was not my primary place of residence. A property owner does not have to inform a licensee of his/her social life nor travel schedule. The OPs scenario states the owner still lives there, as long as it is his/her primary residence, what's your problem?

You must try harder.

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

Why do you say it is not his "home". If the LL has a busy social life and travels a lot, that doesn't mean his "home" is his partners house or a hotel room. In the past I traveled a lot on business, that didn't mean my home was not my primary place of residence. A property owner does not have to inform a licensee of his/her social life nor travel schedule. The OPs scenario states the owner still lives there, as long as it is his/her primary residence, what's your problem?

You must try harder.

The whole thing is obviously contrived. The fact that is his only dwelling is not decisive. He is hardly ever there to the point that the RTB will say the occupants have in reality got exclusive use of their own bedrooms. Bang goes the licence agreements. It does not matter what people sign up to, it is all about how it works in reality.

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

The whole thing is obviously contrived. The fact that is his only dwelling is not decisive. He is hardly ever there to the point that the RTB will say the occupants have in reality got exclusive use of their own bedrooms. Bang goes the licence agreements. It does not matter what people sign up to, it is all about how it works in reality.

Ah here, if the owner's only home is the property, how can the RTB say it isn't. Have the RTB ruled that an owner can't have a social life or can't travel for business/pleasure?.

C'mon, try harder. The OP's scenario states he lives there, he just isn't home that much. This is a hypothetical scenario, there are no definites, but if I travel for business, that does not mean the house I own and live in is not my home.

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

Ah here, if the owner's only home is the property, how can the RTB say it isn't. Have the RTB ruled that an owner can't have a social life or can't travel for business/pleasure?.

C'mon, try harder. The OP's scenario states he lives there, he just isn't home that much. This is a hypothetical scenario, there are no definites, but if I travel for business, that does not mean the house I own and live in is not my home.

It may be your "home" but if you are away so much it may be inferred that your residence is not significant enough to avoid the act.

4ensic15

4ensic15 wrote: »

The whole thing is obviously contrived. The fact that is his only dwelling is not decisive. He is hardly ever there to the point that the RTB will say the occupants have in reality got exclusive use of their own bedrooms. Bang goes the licence agreements. It does not matter what people sign up to, it is all about how it works in reality.

Why would they gain exclusive use of their own bedrooms if the LL sleeps their twice a week but not if he sleeps there 7 nights a week. Does a LL enter their room if they live there full time but stay out if they also have another residence/travel a lot for business etc?

Exclusive use of a bedroom is a nonsense argument as in any scenario, full house, house share, renting in house here LL lives etc it is assumed a persons bedroom is private.

4ensic15

Maddox Polite Dough wrote: »

Why would they gain exclusive use of their own bedrooms if the LL sleeps their twice a week but not if he sleeps there 7 nights a week. Does a LL enter their room if they live there full time but stay out if they also have another residence/travel a lot for business etc?

Exclusive use of a bedroom is a nonsense argument as in any scenario, full house, house share, renting in house here LL lives etc it is assumed a persons bedroom is private.

Exclusive use of a bedroom is the key issue if there is a non resident landlord. How many times do you have to be told?

4ensic15

4ensic15 wrote: »

Exclusive use of a bedroom is the key issue if there is a non resident landlord. How many times do you have to be told?

You keep telling me but I don't see any basis for what I'm being told.

4ensic15

Maddox Polite Dough wrote: »

You keep telling me but I don't see any basis for what I'm being told.

There are none so blind as those who will not see!

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

It may be your "home" but if you are away so much it may be inferred that your residence is not significant enough to avoid the act.

You are trying to hard now.

My business keeps me away from my bedroom but I come home to my house when not away on business, does this make it not my home? No it doesn't, it just means I have to travel because of my job. This is a different scenario from the one where I have another house where I live the rest of the time.

The OP is just looking for a way to word the agreement that allows for these absences so as not to fall foul of the RTB. In essence, not every social life/job allows you to spend every night, or even most nights at home, in cases like this the owner's circumstances would surely need to come into the equation. Unless of course the RTB are in the habit of interfereing in the social/work lives of property owners.

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

You are trying to hard now.

My business keeps me away from my bedroom but I come home to my house when not away on business, does this make it not my home? No it doesn't, it just means I have to travel because of my job. This is a different scenario from the one where I have another house where I live the rest of the time.

Unless of course the RTB are in the habit of interfereing in the social/work lives of property owners.

Of course they are. They don't like them. Ever read the determinations?

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

There are none so blind as those who will not see!

In prose and verse, was own'd, without dispute
Through all the realms of Non-sense, absolute.

athtrasna

Mod note

Enough is enough. This constant sniping is monopolising not only this thread but others. Take it to pm guys please.