Tenant damages property that they are renting - Criminally liable?

Kevin3

I would always have thought that a tenant damaging the contents or the fittings of a property, well beyond normal wear and tear, in a property that they are renting would be criminal damage but I've heard others arguing that it is a civil matter.

The relevant legislation states:

Section 2 of the Criminal Damage Act 1991
2 - A person who without lawful excuse damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be damaged shall be guilty of an offence.

Property belonging to another is defined under section 1 as:

(2) Property shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as belonging to any person

(a) having lawful custody or control of it,

(b) having in it any proprietary right or interest (not being an equitable interest arising only from an agreement to transfer or grant an interest), or

(c) having a charge over it.

My understanding is that while the property 'belongs' to the tenant in the sense that they have 'lawful custody or control of it' it also belongs to the property owner.

Criminal damage to the property can be committed by either party against the other surley?

Victor

Kevin3 wrote: »

I would always have thought that a tenant damaging the contents or the fittings of a property, well beyond normal wear and tear, in a property that they are renting would be criminal damage but I've heard others arguing that it is a civil matter.

That somewhat depends on how the damage was caused.

Imagine, on landlord inspection, there is a hand-sized hole in a timber / plasterboard partition. For purposes of the Residential Tenancies Act, this would be considered beyond normal wear and tear. However, Criminal Damage Act, being a penal act, applies a much higher standard (intent or recklessness) and mens rea would apply. It might be a good defence to say the hole can caused when someone fell or was moving furniture or indeed it was caused by someone else.

Note that some people genuinely don't have housekeeping skills - this is why some people are homeless or desire to be homeless. It would be incompetence, not intent or recklessness.

coylemj

Kevin3 wrote: »

I would always have thought that a tenant damaging the contents or the fittings of a property, well beyond normal wear and tear, in a property that they are renting would be criminal damage but I've heard others arguing that it is a civil matter.

'Criminally liable' as you put it would render them liable to a criminal prosecution which would involve the Gardai and for which the court could impose a fine or imprisonment.

But to make it a crime, there would need to be a specific event where someone deliberately or recklessly carried out an act that resulted in the damage. Damaging the contents of a house or apartment over time, even if that was 'well beyond normal wear and tear' would not meet that test.

Further, in order to sustain a criminal charge, you or the cops would be required to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) who actually did the damage. The tenant could simply claim that he invited a few friends back to the house/apartment and one of them must have done the damage. End of criminal case.

In civil law, the tenant would be liable for the damage but without a specific incident and witnesses to say who did the damage, you would not have a basis for a criminal prosecution.

Mr. Incognito

How are you going to prove they caused it beyond all reasonable doubt and not a visitor.

There is a difference between being responsible for as a tenant and being guilty of as a criminal defendant