Landlord evicted us for family member, now AirBNBing it

manualskeleton

Hi folks, we were evicted for the landlord's son on Jan 31st (all done by the book). The house needed vital repairs such as heaters broken, mould problems, cooker and we think we were really evicted so that they didn't have to fix anything.

I've kept an eye on the address with a Google alert because it was so suspicious to me and I've just seen it go up on a few accommodation websites.

What is the legal situation here? I'll have to find the letter we got, but I'm pretty sure only the person named on the court order we received was allow to live there for the first six months.

piplip87

Is it the whole place on Air BnB or is it the son renting out a room on it.

manualskeleton

piplip87 wrote: »

Is it the whole place on Air BnB or is it the son renting out a room on it.

The whole place as a holiday home

davo10

manualskeleton wrote: »

The whole place as a holiday home

But he isn't re-letting it to a tenant, Airbnb are guests, not covered by RTB.

I'm not certain, but I suspect that family member must live there for a period before it could be let to another tenant.

manualskeleton

davo10 wrote: »

But he isn't re-letting it to a tenant, Airbnb are guests, not covered by RTB.

I'm not certain, but I suspect that family member must live there for a period before it could be let to another tenant.

I found the letter, it says they should have offered it back to us in the first six months if he decided not to live there. This stinks as far as can see.

davo10

manualskeleton wrote: »

I found the letter, it says they should have offered it back to us in the first six months if he decided not to live there. This stinks as far as can see.

You could be right, but does that apply if the owner wants to re-let, it has to offered back to you.

The son could be the one offering it on AIRBNB, not the owner.

manualskeleton

davo10 wrote: »

You could be right, but does that apply if the owner wants to re-let, it has to offered back to you.

The son could be the one offering it on AIRBNB, not the owner.

Still breaking Section 34 of the tenancies act, no? It was never offered back to us.

I'm wondering now what action I can take.

davo10

manualskeleton wrote: »

Still breaking Section 34 of the tenancies act, no? It was never offered back to us.

I'm wondering now what action I can take.

I suspect you will find that the son still "lives" there, but let's guests/Airbnb stay there occasionally. You can of course open a dispute with RTB, but they are not re-letting it so RTB might not be able to do anything.

manualskeleton

manualskeleton wrote: »

I'm wondering now what action I can take.

Find somewhere nicer to live. That house sounds horrible

manualskeleton

davo10 wrote: »

I suspect you will find that the son still "lives" there, but let's guests/Airbnb stay there occasionally. You can of course open a dispute with RTB, but they are not re-letting it so RTB might not be able to do anything.

Gonna do the RTB. This seems like reletting to me, it's the whole house up.

manualskeleton

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Find somewhere nicer to live. That house sounds horrible

I did I just don't like being pushed around or letting assholes get away with it.

davo10

manualskeleton wrote: »

I did I just don't like being pushed around or letting assholes get away with it.

Life's to short. Airbnb isn't a tenancy, they are guests in your house.

pablo128

davo10 wrote: »

Life's to short. Airbnb isn't a tenancy, they are guests in your house.

He was evicted under spurious circumstances. You can try to down play it all you want.

Graham

Gather as much evidence as you can that it's the entire property being offered for short-term lettings and register a dispute with the RTB.

sandy2000

And another example of how Airbnb contributes to high rents and a housing shortage. Somewhere that was residential now off the market and the evicted tenants added to those chasing the decreasing supply. Artificially decreased by the numbers removed for Airbnb lettings.

If you're going to report it to the RTB, you can also report it to the enforcement section of your local planning department. Dublin City Council at least are increasing enforcement when they get complaints or reports. Most local authority websites have a section on their website with an email address and contact details.

amcalester

Lodge a dispute but I bet that when it’s gets to the hearing you’ll find that the son still “lives”there and only moves out when it is booked on AirBnB.

manualskeleton

davo10 wrote: »

Life's to short. Airbnb isn't a tenancy, they are guests in your house.

Do you like getting pushed around? If there's a process in place with RTB, I don't see why I wouldn't report it.

manualskeleton

Graham wrote: »

Gather as much evidence as you can that it's the entire property being offered for short-term lettings and register a dispute with the RTB.

There's tonnes of evidence. It's on a few sites and a clear listing date of second week of April. 2 nights for the whole house costs more than I paid per month That's the reason they've done it.

manualskeleton

davo10 wrote: »

Life's to short. Airbnb isn't a tenancy, they are guests in your house.

How about booking.com and others?

Franz Von Peppercorn

davo10 wrote: »

Life's to short. Airbnb isn't a tenancy, they are guests in your house.

Life is never too short to screw people screwing you.

manualskeleton

Hard to describe how strange it is seeing your old bedroom on an accommodation site

davo10

manualskeleton wrote: »

How about booking.com and others?

There is a difference between a tenant and a guest. The RTB applies to tenancies, but wouldn't apply to a guest in a B&B/hotel (you don't have to register a tenancy every time an Airbnb guest stays) so the site doesn't matter, the owner/son is not letting to another tenant. The son's answer to this, I'm certain, will be that he lives there and moves out when guests stay.

I'm not downplaying it, I said there is nothing to stop you opening a dispute with RTB, and I'd say your suspicions are correct, but they will claim son still lives there and the property is not being re-let within the 6 month period.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

Hi folks, we were evicted for the landlord's son on Jan 31st (all done by the book). The house needed vital repairs such as heaters broken, mould problems, cooker and we think we were really evicted so that they didn't have to fix anything.

I've kept an eye on the address with a Google alert because it was so suspicious to me and I've just seen it go up on a few accommodation websites.

What is the legal situation here? I'll have to find the letter we got, but I'm pretty sure only the person named on the court order we received was allow to live there for the first six months.

Its in the RTB rules that a ex tenant must submit there new address in writing within 28 days off Termination to enable the Landlord to contact them if the property comes back on the open market as a Full Tenancy (email ,text does not suffice.

Considering the Landlord doesn't have this on the open market and name on the Order is renting and using Airbnb ,this is of no concern to you.

Also you mentioned Court Order, you only get a court order if you refused
Notice of Termination and Landlord needed to go through the RTB Ruling to get get a Court Order as you were Overholding and Illegally staying in the property.

You have been a burden long enough on the Landlords back, move on and thank your lucky stars you had more than enough time to vacate property.

manualskeleton

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

Its in the RTB rules that a ex tenant must submit there new address in writing within 28 days off Termination to enable the Landlord to contact them if the property comes back on the open market as a Full Tenancy (email ,text does not suffice.

Considering the Landlord doesn't have this on the open market and name on the Order is renting and using Airbnb ,this is of no concern to you.

Also you mentioned Court Order, you only get a court order if you refused
Notice of Termination and Landlord needed to go through the RTB Ruling to get get a Court Order as you were Overholding and Illegally staying in the property.

You have been a burden long enough on the Landlords back, move on and thank your lucky stars you had more than enough time to vacate property.

A burden! The state of you without knowing the details of our case.

I mentioned the wrong term then, we vacated their property which was breaking the law for a number of reasons on the date we were meant to, so notice of termination then.

EdgeCase

The whole temporary let AirBnB thing is getting out of hand. I know a few people in Ireland and elsewhere who are now living next to what amounts to an "aparthotel" with new guests every few days in multiple apartments / former family homes.

It's not being regulated properly almost anywhere. I mean if you wanted to open a B&B or self catering you'd need to get planning permission. I don't see why this setup is being treated as different because it's online.

Just had a quick look on Airbnb and there are over 300 whole houses/apartments available and the same again of bedrooms only in Dublin alone . Imagine if they were available on the rental market!

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

A burden! The state of you without knowing the details of our case.

If have submitted enough information in your OP to formulate a Case and you can
submit more if you are unhappy with the reply as I have given you the correct information with regards to the Legal system.

It is your duty and responsiblity to check all heaters and appliances in the property before signing contracts, no point in making assumptions that the
Landlord is throwing you out because of complaints.

The Mould problem may or may not be present because of poor ventilation
ie. leaving clothes dry indoors without opening windows as I'm sure mould wasn't present when you viewed and accepted property.

manualskeleton

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

If have submitted enough information in your OP to formulate a Case and you can
submit more if you are unhappy with the reply as I have given you the correct information with regards to the Legal system.

It is your duty and responsiblity to check all heaters and appliances in the property before signing contracts, no point in making assumptions that the
Landlord is throwing you out because of complaints.

The Mould problem may or may not be present because of poor ventilation
ie. leaving clothes dry indoors without opening windows as I'm sure mould wasn't present when you viewed and accepted property.

And if they broke during the tenancy? You've obviously got a massive chip on your shoulder here and are applying it to my case with minimal info.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

And if they broke during the tenancy? You've obviously got a massive chip on your shoulder here and are applying it to my case with minimal info.

If the Landlord broke the rules during your tenancy you were 100% correct to take a case to the RTB board as you should have received a copy of and read
explaining the procedure.

No point in crying over spilled milk if the property is not for you move on
or in your case you were evicted. I assume you have found new accomodation and if you haven't you have learned something new.

Your making a case known on this forum if the adequate details are not sufficient
that's your chip on your shoulder to burden.

As a Landlord if I was met with tenants with this aggressiveness you would be evicted before the 6months Part IV came into operation.

Graces7

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

If the Landlord broke the rules during your tenancy you were 100% correct to take a case to the RTB board as you should have received a copy of and read
explaining the procedure.

No point in crying over spilled milk if the property is not for you move on
or in your case you were evicted. I assume you have found new accomodation and if you haven't you have learned something new.

Your making a case known on this forum if the adequate details are not sufficient
that's your chip on your shoulder to burden.

As a Landlord if I was met with tenants with this aggressiveness you would be evicted before the 6months Part IV came into operation.

:eek:

manualskeleton

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

If the Landlord broke the rules during your tenancy you were 100% correct to take a case to the RTB board as you should have received a copy of and read
explaining the procedure.

No point in crying over spilled milk if the property is not for you move on
or in your case you were evicted. I assume you have found new accomodation and if you haven't you have learned something new.

Your making a case known on this forum if the adequate details are not sufficient
that's your chip on your shoulder to burden.

As a Landlord if I was met with tenants with this aggressiveness you would be evicted before the 6months Part IV came into operation.

Aggressiveness

Fecking hell.

I'm asking for what advice about avenues open to me in a case where I was moved on for a false reason. If you can't help me with that, I don't know what you're doing posting.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

Aggressiveness

Fecking hell.

I'm asking for what advice about avenues open to me in a case where I was moved on for a false reason. If you can't help me with that, I don't know what you're doing posting.

Your assuming you were evicted on a a false reason stating complaining
about broke aplliances and mould was one reason and the Eviction Order that
a family member moved and suspected airbnb in was partially incorrect is of weak foundation.

If the truth is not what you are after then refuse to read my posts as you have put your case on a public forum.If you submit your case to the RTB the answers will be the same or worse so a good lesson in your case.

Reference to my posts as in your words "the state of you " and you have a chip on your shoulder would be in most people eyes aggressive behaviour, which probably got you evicted in the 1st place. You wanted an answer you got one.

davo10

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

Your assuming you were evicted on a a false reason stating complaining
about broke aplliances and mould was one reason and the Eviction Order that
a family member moved and suspected airbnb in was partially incorrect is of weak foundation.

If the truth is not what you are after then refuse to read my posts as you have put your case on a public forum.If you submit your case to the RTB the answers will be the same or worse so a good lesson in your case.

Reference to my posts as in your words "the state of you " and you have a chip on your shoulder would be in most people eyes aggressive behaviour, which probably got you evicted in the 1st place. You wanted an answer you got one.

Hard night out last night?

Franz Von Peppercorn

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

Your assuming you were evicted on a a false reason stating complaining
about broke aplliances and mould was one reason and the Eviction Order that
a family member moved and suspected airbnb in was partially incorrect is of weak foundation.

He is wondering if he was evicted because of the place being listed on an Airbnb site.

If the truth is not what you are after then refuse to read my posts as you have put your case on a public forum.If you submit your case to the RTB the answers will be the same or worse so a good lesson in your case.

I haven’t seen any legal answers from you. You just hurl insults.

Reference to my posts as in your words "the state of you " and you have a chip on your shoulder would be in most people eyes aggressive behaviour, which probably got you evicted in the 1st place. You wanted an answer you got one.

You accused him of being a burden in your first post. That was aggressive.

Now you are claiming that the chip on his shoulder got him evicted. Also a personal attack.

What does that mean? He’s angry because he was evicted so the landlord can’t have seen this chip on the shoulder before that. And evicting people because you don’t like them isn’t legal.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

davo10 wrote: »

Hard night out last night?

No!! I just believe tenants and ex-tenants just need a bit of "ToughLove" as the pun goes and need to jump on the governments back and not the Landlords as they are the orchestrators of the criplpled housing market, and people need to be brought up to speed as the situation is going to accelerate in the coming months.

manualskeleton

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

Your assuming you were evicted on a a false reason stating complaining
about broke aplliances and mould was one reason and the Eviction Order that
a family member moved and suspected airbnb in was partially incorrect is of weak foundation.

If the truth is not what you are after then refuse to read my posts as you have put your case on a public forum.If you submit your case to the RTB the answers will be the same or worse so a good lesson in your case.

Reference to my posts as in your words "the state of you " and you have a chip on your shoulder would be in most people eyes aggressive behaviour, which probably got you evicted in the 1st place. You wanted an answer you got one.

Thanks for your poorly-informed non-contribution. I won't be responding to you again.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

He is wondering if he was evicted because of the place being listed on an Airbnb site.



I haven’t seen any legal answers from you. You just hurl insults.



You accused him of being a burden in your first post. That was aggressive.

Now you are claiming that the chip on his shoulder got him evicted. Also a personal attack.

What does that mean? He’s angry because he was evicted so the landlord can’t have seen this chip on the shoulder before that. And evicting people because you don’t like them isn’t legal.

1) No he wasn't wondering he assumed his termination was illegal due to 2 reasons he stated.

2) I implied that if his aggressive behaviour he displayed to me was a mirror image to the Landlord his assumption of complaining behaviour more than likely attributed to the eviction order but was not stated in letter and for good reason by the Landlord.

3) I haven't attacked the poster in any shape or form and go read my OP for you answers on Procedures.

4) This is starting to show a reflection of other tenants to Landlords so good postings.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

Thanks for your poorly-informed non-contribution. I won't be responding to you again.

No Problem! I will the accept the graititude even if done half -heartly,

I've given you good advice and is something you need to absorb and digest
even if its not palatable at the moment.

manualskeleton

I'll leave that aspect of the topic by stating that we were model tenants who took great care of a substandard agency property which at times had faults which put health at risk that were not fixed for months. Go cast your aspersions elsewhere.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

I'll leave that aspect of the topic by stating that we were model tenants who took great care of a substandard agency property which at times had faults which put health at risk that were not fixed for months. Go cast your aspersions elsewhere.

It would have been helpful if you stated this in you original post ! This is helpful
to yourself in the future to not accept subdstandard in the future and to maybe up your price to acceptable high standards in your next search. and conduct a thorough investigation of inventory before signing.

YOu weren't happy in your accomodation in fact you come accross as hating and begrudging the Landlord.....your out now and don't want to go back so Job done!
Deposit which wasn't mentioned needs to negotiated by both and if still not happy lodge a complaint to the RTB in relation to above.

Graham

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

No!! I just believe tenants and ex-tenants just need a bit of "ToughLove" as the pun goes and need to jump on the governments back and not the Landlords as they are the orchestrators of the criplpled housing market, and people need to be brought up to speed as the situation is going to accelerate in the coming months.

Mod Note

Tone down the aggression in your posts please Kaelyn Ripe Minor, it's not necessary.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

1) No he wasn't wondering he assumed his termination was illegal due to 2 reasons he stated.

Which was perfectly legit of him.

2) I implied that if his aggressive behaviour he displayed to me was a mirror image to the Landlord his assumption of complaining behaviour more than likely attributed to the eviction order but was not stated in letter and for good reason by the Landlord.

You are far more aggressive than he is and those reasons would be illegal anyway contradicting your first post.

3) I haven't attacked the poster in any shape or form and go read my OP for you answers on Procedures.

You literally attacked him in your first post. Calling a renter who pays on time a burden is an attack.

4) This is starting to show a reflection of other tenants to Landlords so good postings.

I’m not a tenant. What’s being shown up here is landlord attitudes to tenants not vice versa.

Spook_ie

manualskeleton wrote: »

There's tonnes of evidence. It's on a few sites and a clear listing date of second week of April. 2 nights for the whole house costs more than I paid per month That's the reason they've done it.

But is it available for 1st week, 3rd week, 4th week etc. or just the second week?

l5auim2pjnt8qx

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Which was perfectly legit of him.



You are far more aggressive than he is and those reasons would be illegal anyway contradicting your first post.



You literally attacked him in your first post. Calling a renter who pays on time a burden is an attack.



I’m not a tenant. What’s being shown up here is landlord attitudes to tenants not vice versa.

The Op stated He received a Court Order to be evicted" no mention of a renter paying on time and he later corrected himself as " a Notice of Termination" and not a "Court Order Eviction". Please read postings carefully as misinterpretations confusing the original post are redirected incorrectly.

manualskeleton

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

It would have been helpful if you stated this in you original post ! This is helpful
to yourself in the future to not accept subdstandard in the future and to maybe up your price to acceptable high standards in your next search. and conduct a thorough investigation of inventory before signing.

YOu weren't happy in your accomodation in fact you come accross as hating and begrudging the Landlord.....your out now and don't want to go back so Job done!
Deposit which wasn't mentioned needs to negotiated by both and if still not happy lodge a complaint to the RTB in relation to above.

Of course I didn't accept substandard accommodation. In fact, me not accepting it and lodging complaints as per my tenancy agreement in the way I was meant to is what I think got us asked to leave

manualskeleton

Spook_ie wrote: »

But is it available for 1st week, 3rd week, 4th week etc. or just the second week?

Loads of availability. It looks full time up as a holiday home.

EdgeCase

EdgeCase wrote: »

It's not being regulated properly almost anywhere. I mean if you wanted to open a B&B or self catering you'd need to get planning permission. I don't see why this setup is being treated as different because it's online.

Not necessarily, a b&b doesn't need planning if it has 4 bedrooms or less available for guests which would cover a lot of b&bs.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

manualskeleton wrote: »

Of course I didn't accept substandard accommodation. In fact, me not accepting it and lodging complaints as per my tenancy agreement in the way I was meant to is what I think got us asked to leave

By signing a contract is "A legal agreement by Yourself and the landlord "
that you have accepted what's on offer "rightly or wrongly" .

If you had a problem with inventory you should have lodged a complaint with the
RTB during Tenancy agreement now you can't lodge the complaint as the tenacy
agreement has ended...The Legal Agreement has ended .Its all pie in the sky.

Anyway ! You'll be glad to hear "I have said all there is to say on this matter.

Graham

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

By signing a contract is "A legal agreement by Yourself and the landlord "
that you have accepted what's on offer "rightly or wrongly" .

That's an incredibly inaccurate oversimplification.

Issues arise when what you receive is not what was offered/contracted or when what you receive is not inline with legislations (minimum standards etc).

Heating is a great example. The fact the heating wasn't working when a tenant signed the contract for example doesn't absolve the landlord of their responsibility to provide functioning heating.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

Graham wrote: »

That's an incredibly inaccurate oversimplification.

Issues arise when what you receive is not what was offered/contracted or when what you receive is not inline with legislations (minimum standards etc).

Heating is a great example. The fact the heating wasn't working when a tenant signed the contract for example doesn't absolve the landlord of their responsibility to provide functioning heating.

If its incredibly oversimplification - then the message is quite clear.

It wasn't stated in any of his posts if heating was broken before contract was signed or afterwards ,this would be incredibly hard to prove in court or at a tribunal as its his word and against the landlords ....it would fall on the tenant having to check to the property heating etc out beforehand.(signed contract)

And yes Minimum standards have to aspired to by the Landlord during tenancy
and falls on Landlord to fix them hence why I told him he should off related the
case to the RTB.....no mention of poster of any findings of a case.


Anyway : defo outta here.

Graham

Kaelyn Ripe Minor wrote: »

If its incredibly oversimplification - then the message is quite clear.

It wasn't stated in any of his posts if heating was broken before contract was signed or afterwards ,this would be incredibly hard to prove in court or at a tribunal as its his word and against the landlords

For the benefit of any tenant who finds themselves without functioning heating:

It doesn't matter when the heating was broken.

The landlord is obligated to provide functioning heating. It is part of the minimum standards for rented accommodation that apply to all tenancies and cannot be opted/contracted out of by either party.