Overstaying tenants *Mod warning in post 1

airy fairy

Unpaid rent with 6 months.
Notice to terminate lease given, we have to sell, up to eyeballs in debt.
Prtb court ruling, tenant to be out after 28 days in determination order given.
No sign of them going.
Now what?

MOD: Advocating illegal evictions or other illegal methods will continue to attract cards.

Wexfordboy89

airy fairy wrote: »

Unpaid rent with 6 months.
Notice to terminate lease given, we have to sell, up to eyeballs in debt.
Prtb court ruling, tenant to be out after 28 days in determination order given.
No sign of them going.
Now what?

Guessing go bck to court and try n get bailiffs to get them out for you.someone else might have a better idea than me though

airy fairy

Wexfordboy89 wrote: »

Guessing go bck to court and try n get bailiffs to get them out for you.someone else might have a better idea than me though

That's what I suspect, but I'm not sure of the way it works. We are thousands in arrears, prtb ruled that tenant owes us and should vacate.
They are still in the house.

Anyone know how long this process takes?
Are Irish bailiffs like the English system? Change locks and they are out?
Loosing sleep over this. My heart is broken.
We now have to sell due to arrears.

Wexfordboy89

airy fairy wrote: »

That's what I suspect, but I'm not sure of the way it works. We are thousands in arrears, prtb ruled that tenant owes us and should vacate.
They are still in the house.

Anyone know how long this process takes?
Are Irish bailiffs like the English system? Change locks and they are out?
Loosing sleep over this. My heart is broken.
We now have to sell due to arrears.

Thats bad im sorry to hear that some people dont want to pay for anything.I would assume so citizens advice would they be able to give u advice.either that or your solicitor might know.I hope u get the situation sorted out

airy fairy

Wexfordboy89 wrote: »

Thats bad im sorry to hear that some people dont want to pay for anything.I would assume so citizens advice would they be able to give u advice.either that or your solicitor might know.I hope u get the situation sorted out

Thank you.
My solicitor away, I guess I'm trying to piece together what may happen.
It's frustrating.
I'm an accidental landlord.
Tenants have more rights than my right to pay a mortgage.
Another night awake!
Thanks again

handlemaster

Its a broken system one trip to court should have all this sorted. All you can do is wait for the solicitor to come back.

airy fairy

handlemaster wrote: »

Its a broken system one trip to court should have all this sorted. All you can do is wait for the solicitor to come back.

Yes, it's broken, both the laws and the prtb.

The very strong anti-LL contingent on this forum could do with reading this thread a few times to see why LLs are doing what ever they can to mitigate risk in the places they let.

All the power is with the tenants and it's very wrong.

handlemaster

Liana Late Somebody wrote: »

The very strong anti-LL contingent on this forum could do with reading this thread a few times to see why LLs are doing what ever they can to mitigate risk in the places they let.

All the power is with the tenants and it's very wrong.

Im sure they will be crying out that the tenant should be followed for all that is owned. On this note is it possible to attach an legal order to their payements be that salary or social welfare that X % is paid to the landlord first before the X tenant receives it ?

airy fairy

handlemaster wrote: »

Im sure they will be crying out that the tenant should be followed for all that is owned. On this note is it possible to attach an legal order to their payements be that salary or social welfare that X % is paid to the landlord first before the X tenant receives it ?

We've been told we'll never see the money that is owed. Not to mention the state of the property when the tenant eventually goes and the cost that will incur.

Both myself and my spouse living on the edge.
We were good landlords, perfect property, anything that was needed was given.
We are being treated like we owe the tenant, that it's ok to stay for free for as long as the tenant wishes. Does the prtb and the system not realise we deserve rights.
There are rouge landlords out there, but there are also Joe Blogs landlords who own a second property, a lot because of negative equity, that are simply trying to keep afloat.
The bank will take the property soon, along with the one we're living in.
We can't take.much more.
Don't know where to turn.

Michael D Not Higgins

handlemaster wrote: »

Im sure they will be crying out that the tenant should be followed for all that is owned. On this note is it possible to attach an legal order to their payements be that salary or social welfare that X % is paid to the landlord first before the X tenant receives it ?

I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I understand they can make an attachment of earnings to social welfare payments under certain circumstances. These can be quite low, like €5 a week, so a debt of thousands could take many years to pay back.

GGTrek

Liana Late Somebody wrote: »

The very strong anti-LL contingent on this forum could do with reading this thread a few times to see why LLs are doing what ever they can to mitigate risk in the places they let.

All the power is with the tenants and it's very wrong.

Have you noticed how they disappeared from this thread? Especially the one who wants to ban everything (ban deposits, ban landlords that discriminate based tenant economic conditions, ...). You look at the RTB adjudications database and you see that the vast majority of cases nowadays are: overholding combined with non-payment of rent, hardly the kind of problems the particular poster is worried about. The problem is ideology: if you are a communist/socialist at heart then your view is totally biased and no serious discussion can be had.

Wanderer78

Wow, what a train wreck of a system! Best of luck with it op

Squatter

Wexfordboy89 wrote: »

Thats bad im sorry to hear that some people dont want to pay for anything.I would assume so citizens advice would they be able to give u advice.either that or your solicitor might know.I hope u get the situation sorted out

"Citizens Advice" is the UK version. In Ireland, it's called "Citizens Information" - a small but important difference.

I suspect that, given the tendency of some Irish people to sue for everything, it was decided that calling a service "Advice" might lead to it being sued if any of its clients received what they thought was bad or incomplete advice. Hence information is provided, based largely on what is available on the excellent CI website, not advice - just in case!

In the case of this unfortunate landlord, I suspect that CI would simply refer them to the PRTB (as the "experts") or inform them of the existence of two Irish landlord bodies that might be able to advise them:

Irish Property Owners Association or https://www.irishlandlord.com

airy fairy

Squatter wrote: »

"Citizens Advice" is the UK version. In Ireland, it's called "Citizens Information" - a small but important difference.

I suspect that, given the tendency of some Irish people to sue for everything, it was decided that calling a service "Advice" might lead to it being sued if any of its clients received what they thought was bad or incomplete advice. Hence information is provided, based largely on what is available on the excellent CI website, not advice - just in case!

In the case of this unfortunate landlord, I suspect that CI would simply refer them to the PRTB (as the "experts") or inform them of the existence of two Irish landlord bodies that might be able to advise them:

Irish Property Owners Association or https://www.irishlandlord.com

The tenant is now not my tenant, I assume, as he has ignored the rtb determination order, has not appealed and not paying rent. I assume he cannot ring the rtb for his advice as to what to do now.
I do know he is playing the system, and one housing advisory board gave him the tools of information so he could do so.
My next port of call... can I go straight to appoint a sheriff or bailiff?

GGTrek

airy fairy wrote: »

Squatter wrote: »

"Citizens Advice" is the UK version.   In Ireland, it's called "Citizens Information" - a small but important difference.

I suspect that, given the tendency of some Irish people to sue for everything, it was decided that calling a service "Advice" might lead to it being sued if any of its clients received what they thought was bad or incomplete advice.   Hence information is provided, based largely on what is available on the excellent CI website, not advice - just in case!

In the case of this unfortunate landlord, I suspect that CI would simply refer them to the PRTB (as the "experts")  or inform them of the existence of two Irish landlord bodies that might be able to advise them:

Irish Property Owners Association    or   https://www.irishlandlord.com

The tenant is now not my tenant, I assume, as he has ignored the rtb determination order, has not appealed and not paying rent. I assume he cannot ring the rtb for his advice as to what to do now.
I do know he is playing the system, and one housing advisory board gave him the tools of information so he could do so.
My next port of call... can I go straight to appoint a sheriff or bailiff?

IPOA and Irish landlord are useless. A landlord in Ireland is on his/her own. To save money on solicitor costs you can enforce the order on your own by following this process:
https://www.rtb.ie/docs/default-source/de---dispute-enforcement/circuitcourtenforcement-2016.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Skip the pre-litigation letter, niceties should be off by this time. All the samples and District Court procedure are there, the enforcement case is pretty slam dunk case if you can fill in all the forms and follow procedure (you will save around 1.5-2k on solicitor and barrister).

As I said if you are in Dublin and push the District Court officer, in 3 months you will get an hearing and after you get the judge eviction summons you call the Sheriff (pay his high fees) requesting Garda assistance since force will be probably needed and you pay for the locksmith for the day (have one ready yourself, do not expect the Sheriff to provide a locksmith)

Even the RTB can enforce it for you (at their own expense), but expect massive delays in such case (it is not their money at stake), in December 2016 they were enforcing the determination orders of Feb-May 2016 (RTB is a real joke on landlords!):
http://www.rtb.ie/docs/default-source/de---dispute-enforcement/enforcement-request-form-20-june-20177B302BE93945.pdf?sfvrsn=2
https://www.rtb.ie/media-research/court-decisions/enforcement-of-orders/2016

As you can see more than 90% of the cases of enforcement are non-paying or overholding tenants, proving again that the communist posters issues with deposits in this forum are rare cases not worth of building their great guarantee scheme. What is needed is a fast eviction process like in the US to kick out non-paying/anti-social tenants. Reality has always got the bad habit of kicking the teeth of ideology.


Without saying in which county the property is located it is difficult to provide further help.

GarIT

airy fairy wrote: »

The tenant is now not my tenant, I assume, as he has ignored the rtb determination order, has not appealed and not paying rent. I assume he cannot ring the rtb for his advice as to what to do now.
I do know he is playing the system, and one housing advisory board gave him the tools of information so he could do so.
My next port of call... can I go straight to appoint a sheriff or bailiff?

One mistake here, the tenant is your tenant and retains all the rights of a tenant. If you fail to fulfil your duties as a landlord you can still be sued just like you would if your tenant was paying rent. The tenant can ring the rtb for advice and all of the normal rules apply.

airy fairy

GarIT wrote: »

One mistake here, the tenant is your tenant and retains all the rights of a tenant. If you fail to fulfil your duties as a landlord you can still be sued just like you would if your tenant was paying rent. The tenant can ring the rtb for advice and all of the normal rules apply.

Typical isn't it.
And people wonder why there are less and less rental properties around!

LuckyLloyd

GGTrek wrote: »

Have you noticed how they disappeared from this thread? Especially the one who wants to ban everything (ban deposits, ban landlords that discriminate based tenant economic conditions, ...). You look at the RTB adjudications database and you see that the vast majority of cases nowadays are: overholding combined with non-payment of rent, hardly the kind of problems the particular poster is worried about. The problem is ideology: if you are a communist/socialist at heart then your view is totally biased and no serious discussion can be had.

I would have no problem supporting a change of law to expedite the evictions process in cases of overholding / non payment.

PhoenixParker

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I would have no problem supporting a change of law to expedite the evictions process in cases of overholding / non payment.

Neither would I. I don't think I know of a poster on the forum who doesn't think what airy fairy is going through simply should never happen.

I don't engage with nox as a matter of principle so I stayed away.

GGTrek

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

GGTrek wrote: »

Have you noticed how they disappeared from this thread? Especially the one who wants to ban everything (ban deposits, ban landlords that discriminate based tenant economic conditions, ...). You look at the RTB adjudications database and you see that the vast majority of cases nowadays are: overholding combined with non-payment of rent, hardly the kind of problems the particular poster is worried about. The problem is ideology: if you are a communist/socialist at heart then your view is totally biased and no serious discussion can be had.

I would have no problem supporting a change of law to expedite the evictions process in cases of overholding / non payment.

It wasn't you I was referring to. There is a particular poster who is a social welfare tenant.

4ensic15

GGTrek wrote: »

IPOA and Irish landlord are useless. A landlord in Ireland is on his/her own. To save money on solicitor costs you can enforce the order on your own by following this process:
https://www.rtb.ie/docs/default-source/de---dispute-enforcement/circuitcourtenforcement-2016.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Skip the pre-litigation letter, niceties should be off by this time. All the samples and District Court procedure are there, the enforcement case is pretty slam dunk case if you can fill in all the forms and follow procedure (you will save around 1.5-2k on solicitor and barrister).

As I said if you are in Dublin and push the District Court officer, in 3 months you will get an hearing and after you get the judge eviction summons you call the Sheriff (pay his high fees) requesting Garda assistance since force will be probably needed and you pay for the locksmith for the day (have one ready yourself, do not expect the Sheriff to provide a locksmith)

Even the RTB can enforce it for you (at their own expense), but expect massive delays in such case (it is not their money at stake), in December 2016 they were enforcing the determination orders of Feb-May 2016 (RTB is a real joke on landlords!):
http://www.rtb.ie/docs/default-source/de---dispute-enforcement/enforcement-request-form-20-june-20177B302BE93945.pdf?sfvrsn=2
https://www.rtb.ie/media-research/court-decisions/enforcement-of-orders/2016

As you can see more than 90% of the cases of enforcement are non-paying or overholding tenants, proving again that the communist posters issues with deposits in this forum are rare cases not worth of building their great guarantee scheme. What is needed is a fast eviction process like in the US to kick out non-paying/anti-social tenants. Reality has always got the bad habit of kicking the teeth of ideology.


Without saying in which county the property is located it is difficult to provide further help.

When was the District Court given this jurisdiction?

GGTrek

Sorry should have said Circuit court. It is clear however from all the links provided.

Klonker

Was this tenant getting any state help with their rent payments?

jamesthepeach

Reading this thread is exactly the risk I was trying to avoid when I stopped renting in Ireland and went to short term let's.

I feel for you op.
The govt have put you on this situation.
Totally screwed you. You are on the road out of the situation and Once you get it though at least you will be done with it. Look on the bright side.

Imagine all the other or suckers who are still exposed to the chances of this happening.

The_Conductor

GGTrek wrote: »

It wasn't you I was referring to. There is a particular poster who is a social welfare tenant.

I know who you have in mind.
They earned themselves a 1 week ban a few days back- thats why they haven't been around.

airy fairy

Yes, the tenant was getting state help. Literally.
Money is allowed be lodged to tenants account for rent, unfortunately with the screwed system the way it is, the tenant decided to keep the money and not pass it on.
As a landlord, I gave the tenant respect. The tenant wanted for nothing in this property. Everything was above board and legal.
I'm being punished for owning a second property ( although owing it won't be a term I'll be using soon when the bank take it, and my family home with it).

c montgomery

airy fairy wrote: »

Yes, the tenant was getting state help. Literally.
Money is allowed be lodged to tenants account for rent, unfortunately with the screwed system the way it is, the tenant decided to keep the money and not pass it on.
As a landlord, I gave the tenant respect. The tenant wanted for nothing in this property. Everything was above board and legal.
I'm being punished for owning a second property ( although owing it won't be a term I'll be using soon when the bank take it, and my family home with it).

This is why I won't rent to a rent allowance person directly, too much risk.

On a side note I applied to the long term rental scheme last month and was told by cork co. Council that they don't need the house, crises must be over.

davo10

airy fairy wrote: »

Yes, the tenant was getting state help. Literally.
Money is allowed be lodged to tenants account for rent, unfortunately with the screwed system the way it is, the tenant decided to keep the money and not pass it on.
As a landlord, I gave the tenant respect. The tenant wanted for nothing in this property. Everything was above board and legal.
I'm being punished for owning a second property ( although owing it won't be a term I'll be using soon when the bank take it, and my family home with it).

Surely that is theft by the tenant? Have you been in touch with the CoCo? The gardai should be involved here.

airy fairy

davo10 wrote: »

Surely that is theft by the tenant? Have you been in touch with the CoCo? The gardai should be involved here.

Unfortunately, due to FOI we cannot do a thing because the social welfare cannot comment whether the money was given or how much. We couldn't even ask for receipts to prove tenant was paid from social welfare to show in the rtb case.

davo10

airy fairy wrote: »

Unfortunately, due to FOI we cannot do a thing because the social welfare cannot comment whether the money was given or how much. We couldn't even ask for receipts to prove tenant was paid from social welfare to show in the rtb case.

This is head wrecking, the tenant is stealing from the state by keeping the money, and from you by not paying, yet is protected by tenancy law.

pwurple

Sorry airy fairy... this is a story I've heard so many times it isn't even shocking anymore. It's just awful for you and your family.

The only people I've ever known to get out of it quickly, have taken the law into their own hands in some form.
I've known people who arranged some scary looking buddies with baseball bats to go have a chat, or people who threaten to go rat them at their workplace asking for paycheques to be trimmed. All completely illegal no doubt.

Between the inability to evict delinquents, and the black market created by rent caps, people climbing all over each other to get in the door of a place, and others thinking it's their god given right to destroy someone else's house... the property market in Ireland is like the wild west at the moment.

windmilllane

I really hope you get rid of them soon op. It's beyond disgraceful now property owners are treated in this country. I too had a horror tenant and luckily they moved on but I've sworn I'll never get stung again.

beauf

Could you sell and leave the tenant there. It would obviously hurt the price you get. But you wouldn't be spending money on talking them to court.

I assume if you report them to the local authority they will stop their dole.

jamesthepeach

beauf wrote: »

Could you sell and leave the tenant there. It would obviously hurt the price you get. But you wouldn't be spending money on talking them to court.

I assume if you report them to the local authority they will stop their dole.

Nothing will be stopped on them bar their rent allowance, which they don't need if they aren't paying rent anyway. In fact it is a desirable situation for social welfare. The tenant is free to fcuk the landlord all they want and no government agency will step in. It keeps them off the hands of the government and saves social welfare money, all the while making the landlord take all the pain.

aLou991

I'm sorry to hear this OP.

I had a nightmare tenant myself - more or less the same situation and it was the most stress I can ever remember being under in my whole life.

Hope you get sorted soon!

neris

davo10 wrote: »

This is head wrecking, the tenant is stealing from the state by keeping the money, and from you by not paying, yet is protected by tenancy law.

yep, i had a tenant years ago on social welfare, was getting the money from SW office but not paying me, I rang the person in SW and explained the tenant was pocketing the money and was basically told nothing to do with SW, was between me and tennant and that I should go to PRTB to get the money from the scrote of a tenant

mugsymugsy

Simple system needs to be introduced if rent not paid.

2 weeks arrears notice issued.
4 weeks - prtb case created.
4-8 weeks - prtb decision made.
8-12 weeks - bailiffs allowed to enter and change locks.

This would mean worse case landlord is 3 months out of pocket. Why can't the government bring in simple legislation with time frames of the above that are clearly set out.

beauf

We've been asking for this for a decade or more now. No interest from any party to change it.

awec

I guess the government's problem is what to do with the tenants after they have been evicted. It's a zero sum game for them.

Michael D Not Higgins

awec wrote: »

I guess the government's problem is what to do with the tenants after they have been evicted. It's a zero sum game for them.

This is the nub of it. If you have an efficient system evicting low income and social welfare tenants during a housing crisis, the housing services are going to be swamped with homeless cases. The government have effectively burdened private landlords with the housing crisis while they get their own house in order.

angiogoir

Not a lot you can do other than await the legal proceedings. Depends though on how they are, ie are there any other ways you could encourage them out?

airy fairy

angiogoir wrote: »

Not a lot you can do other than await the legal proceedings. Depends though on how they are, ie are there any other ways you could encourage them out?

I have no way of getting them out. The tenant is unapproachable and we can't even call to the property because of tenants rights.

The tenant is playing the game that the state is allowing to be done.

I am doing what I've always done, above board and legally.
I will go through the process of eviction, if my bank allows for the next few months.
There's nothing else I can do.
It's a dark hole I'm in. It takes my breath away.

mugsymugsy

mugsymugsy wrote: »

Simple system needs to be introduced if rent not paid.

2 weeks arrears notice issued.
4 weeks - prtb case created.
4-8 weeks - prtb decision made.
8-12 weeks - bailiffs allowed to enter and change locks.

This would mean worse case landlord is 3 months out of pocket. Why can't the government bring in simple legislation with time frames of the above that are clearly set out.

3 months out of pocket is unacceptable. If rent isn't paid for a full month the tenant should be out before the end of the next month and the rent money should simply be forcefully removed from them in full, be that taking it from their wages or dole or from their bank account if they have it. I don't mean 5 euro a week either I mean a significant percentage of their dole/wages.

airy fairy

Liana Late Somebody wrote: »

3 months out of pocket is unacceptable. If rent isn't paid for a full month the tenant should be out before the end of the next month and the rent money should simply be forcefully removed from them in full, be that taking it from their wages or dole or from their bank account if they have it. I don't mean 5 euro a week either I mean a significant percentage of their dole/wages.

This scenario would be ideal compared to what happens in reality.
It took 4/5 months before I got a date from rtb for a hearing as the tenant failed to show for a mediation. So regardless of who was right or wrong, the time lapse is significant.
Going into my 7th month of no rent. And looks like the same amount of time again before courts appoint a sheriff and the expense that entails, for me. The tenant gets off free.

karenalot

neris wrote: »

yep, i had a tenant years ago on social welfare, was getting the money from SW office but not paying me, I rang the person in SW and explained the tenant was pocketing the money and was basically told nothing to do with SW, was between me and tennant and that I should go to PRTB to get the money from the scrote of a tenant

Thankfully the new system HAP goes directly to the landlord. So while not a perfect setup it's improved somewhat.

Absolute lunacy that rent allowance was being paid directly to tenants. The reason why the tenants are on benefits in the first place is because they don't have a huge amount of money. A cheque then going to them for hundreds each month is obviously going to be tempting for some to pocket.

CeilingFly

Why would anyone be a small time landlord when this type of situaltion is all too prevalent.

If it was a commercial premises you can simply change the locks.

If the government really wanted the thousands of empty homes to go into the rental market they would introduce a very simple 3 months of non-payment and non communcation for automatic eviction without recourse to a lenghty legal process.

The 3 months would allow for a new agreement or pl;an or arbitration.


Sanme with those refusing to pay mortgage - 12 months of non payment / non communication / non new payment plan and banks should be allowed to repossess without a 2 year court process.

Make it easy to get rid of scum non payers and you'll see thousands of homes suddenly become available

The_Conductor

karenalot wrote: »

Thankfully the new system HAP goes directly to the landlord. So while not a perfect setup it's improved somewhat.

Absolute lunacy that rent allowance was being paid directly to tenants. The reason why the tenants are on benefits in the first place is because they don't have a huge amount of money. A cheque then going to them for hundreds each month is obviously going to be tempting for some to pocket.

No- its not an improvement.
If a tenant doesn't pay their share of the rent to the local authority- the local authority doesn't pay anything at all to the landlord- they get cut-off.
In addition- the local authority won't discuss the reason the landlord isn't getting paid, with the landlord, on data-protection grounds.

So- yes, its good that the landlord gets paid directly- however, its deeply unfair and inequitable- that the carpet gets yanked from under landlords- if the tenant doesn't pay their share to the local authority.

Its a heads-I-win, tails-you-loose for the local authority- absolutely every smidgen of risk is batted back to the landlord- they are the ones left carrying the can.

jamesthepeach

CeilingFly wrote: »

Why would anyone be a small time landlord when this type of situaltion is all too prevalent.

If it was a commercial premises you can simply change the locks.

If the government really wanted the thousands of empty homes to go into the rental market they would introduce a very simple 3 months of non-payment and non communcation for automatic eviction without recourse to a lenghty legal process.

The 3 months would allow for a new agreement or pl;an or arbitration.


Sanme with those refusing to pay mortgage - 12 months of non payment / non communication / non new payment plan and banks should be allowed to repossess without a 2 year court process.

Make it easy to get rid of scum non payers and you'll see thousands of homes suddenly become available

Not only have the government made it impossible to be a landlord without huge, and I mean HUGE, risk, but they are also now trying to force people who don't want to be landlords into it. Airbnb and people in nursing homes to name two groups.

Michael D Not Higgins

CeilingFly wrote: »

Why would anyone be a small time landlord when this type of situaltion is all too prevalent.

If it was a commercial premises you can simply change the locks.

If the government really wanted the thousands of empty homes to go into the rental market they would introduce a very simple 3 months of non-payment and non communcation for automatic eviction without recourse to a lenghty legal process.

The 3 months would allow for a new agreement or pl;an or arbitration.


Sanme with those refusing to pay mortgage - 12 months of non payment / non communication / non new payment plan and banks should be allowed to repossess without a 2 year court process.

Make it easy to get rid of scum non payers and you'll see thousands of homes suddenly become available

And where do the evicted people go? The government don't have the homeless services to deal with them as well so you still have the same problem, demand outstrips supply and you've just shuffled the deck.

beauf

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

And where do the evicted people go? The government don't have the homeless services to deal with them as well so you still have the same problem, demand outstrips supply and you've just shuffled the deck.

The issue is the people (Govt) who are meant to be providing supply are the ones restricting it.