Landlord refusing to rent to couples

earwax_man

I'm moving out due to a change in job and I agreed with my landlord to find a replacement for the studio I'm renting. A couple was interested in the flat, and I forwarded them on to my landlord to sign a new lease.

The couple emailed me a bit afterwards that he was going to rise the rent for the two in the same space, and they pulled out because it was now too expensive. Since then I've asked him what he was charging them, and he replied saying that couples are not allowed to rent the apartment. He blamed me and said he's keeping my deposit unless I find someone. It's expensive to live here, so finding single people is more difficult.

I'm thinking of giving Threshold a ring to talk about it, any thoughts on what to do about this whole situation?

Fol20

earwax_man wrote: »

I'm moving out due to a change in job and I agreed with my landlord to find a replacement for the studio I'm renting. A couple was interested in the flat, and I forwarded them on to my landlord to sign a new lease.

The couple emailed me a bit afterwards that he was going to rise the rent for the two in the same space, and they pulled out because it was now too expensive. Since then I've asked him what he was charging them, and he replied saying that couples are not allowed to rent the apartment. He blamed me and said he's keeping my deposit unless I find someone. It's expensive to live here, so finding single people is more difficult.

I'm thinking of giving Threshold a ring to talk about it, any thoughts on what to do about this whole situation?

Speaking as a landlord, If you have all that in writing he may have just shot himself in the foot. If your trying to re-assign your lease and if he declines the new tenant then you have full rights to leave with a refund of your deposit

If you are outside your lease and you give adequate notice, then you dont have to find any tenant and are entitled to a refund of your deposit.

Lastly, before you leave, i would make sure you clean the place top to bottom, incl fridge and oven etc. I would take pictures of everything. It sounds like your landlord might try and pull a fast one and you should take them to protect yourself. Make sure the pics are date stamped as well.

earwax_man

I have it via email from the couple and via SMS for him saying he's refusing couples. Even though I gave double the required notice of my departure due to changing jobs & city, I'm still only 7 months into my year lease, and so I followed his wish to find another tenant to replace me.

Also, it's not a house share, it's a studio apartment with nothing in the lease about amount of people.

Good idea, I'll get the place shining in case of anything. It's already clean but I don't want to chance it at all.

theballz

Most do refuse couples. I sublet out a room and would never allow a couple in

It’s fairly common

earwax_man

theballz wrote: »

Most do refuse couples. I sublet out a room and would never allow a couple in

It’s fairly common

AFAIK in a house share you can be picky with gender, age, race, etc; but I thought renting and not sharing a space with anyone else would have to abide by discrimination laws?

TomOnBoard

Landlord is entitled to rent or not to whomever s/he wishes, subject to the law. He rented to you, an individual. You agreed to find "a replacement", not multiple replacements. The landlord can choose to allow a couple to take over your lease, or not. If you found one person and he refused that tenancy, it would be a more difficult case for him to defend.

Mrs OBumble

It's a studio. Likely only has planning for one person to live there.

TheChizler

He was happy enough to accept the couple if they paid more rent.

TomOnBoard

TheChizler wrote: »

He was happy enough to accept the couple if they paid more rent.

There's your answer. Tell LL you want your deposit back and leave him to proceed as he wishes.

TomOnBoard

Also check RTB if he's registered your tenancy with them.

TomOnBoard

davo10 wrote: »

Your lease agreement is for one person, you, you can assign your lease but the LL does not have to accept assignment to two people, why would you think this would be the same lease agreement?, that is fundamentally changing the terms of your lease. It is up to you to find someone to assign the lease to, one person. If you are 7 months into a one year fixed term then if you don't assign your lease, the LL has to advertise and mitigate your loss by refunding you your deposit less any expense in getting a new tenant, if that takes a couple of weeks, then that's pretty much your deposit gone.

If the LL refuses to assign, you walk with your deposit, but you have got to assign on the same terms as you agreed to in your lease, one person. You can't argue that the LL refused, when the assignment is to double the number agreed in your lease.

Can't see how discrimination laws come into this, you want to double the occupancy even though you have an agreement for one person. That isn't discrimination.

Tomonboard, what has RTB registration got to do with this? Even if the LL didn't register, he can do so at anytime by paying the late reg fee, it thinks it's about €180.

OP's post is inconsistent in relation to whether or not LL refused the couple. In one place, he says LL agreed but wanted more money from them; in another, he say LL said couples were not allowed. If it goes bad later, the fact that LL asked for more rent but was willing to accept the couple if they paid, might act against him in hands of a good solicitor. It shows he was willing to enter into a new lease if he got more money. Crucially within consideration of that will be the personal circumstances of the OP. For example, if he had decided to invite someone else to live with him, sharing the apartment, would the LL evict him? Messy territory.

I agree fully with you that discrimination is not an issue here. I also agree that the current tenant cannot expect the LL to simply accept increased occupancy as a lease assignment. However, my point above abt. the LL being willing to accept them at a higher rent applies.

RTB comes into it as OP may need to make a complaint to RTB in due course.

Edit: I just noticed OP said that there's nothing in the lease about the number of ppl.

davo10

earwax_man wrote: »

I have it via email from the couple and via SMS for him saying he's refusing couples. Even though I gave double the required notice of my departure due to changing jobs & city, I'm still only 7 months into my year lease, and so I followed his wish to find another tenant to replace me.

Also, it's not a house share, it's a studio apartment with nothing in the lease about amount of people.

Good idea, I'll get the place shining in case of anything. It's already clean but I don't want to chance it at all.

I'm struggling to see why you feel hard done by here, you are legally allowed to assign the lease with the LLs permission, and if that is refused then you can terminate lease and get your deposit back.

But the lease you are assigning is for occupancy by only one person, not two, that isn't assignment when you are doubling the occupancy, it is fundamentally changing your lease agreement.

If you can't assign lease to one person, then you are responsible for the last 5 months of your lease but the LL must mitigate this by finding a new tenant as soon as possible, if that takes a couple of weeks, then your deposit will be eaten up.

Hard you see how this is discrimination, your lease agreement is for one person, you tried to assign to double that number, that's not discrimination by the LL. if he wants to let his property to one tenant only, so be it, that is not discrimination based on marital status, sex, age, HAP etc.

The_Conductor

If the property is currently let to one person- assign the lease- to another person.
It is possible that, as Mrs. O Bumble has alluded to, it may only have planning for a single occupant- its actually not that unusual anymore.
Just get someone and assign the lease to them- in the current market- you shouldn't have any great difficulty doing this?

ted1

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

It's a studio. Likely only has planning for one person to live there.

Ive never saw planning permission that limits to 1 occupant

ted1

TheChizler wrote: »

He was happy enough to accept the couple if they paid more rent.

There’s more wear and tear with two people. Makes sense to charge more

ted1

TheChizler wrote: »

He was happy enough to accept the couple if they paid more rent.

There’s more wear and tear with two people. Makes sense to charge more

listermint

Id defend the landlord here if he had not of said that he would take the couple but would take an increase in the rent.

All this guff about planning as an excuse that has come out from fellow landlords is just that guff.

Please stick to the facts.

The man asked to have the lease reassigned, Landlord had no problem doing that but said no couples. then said actually yeah il take couples but il increase the rent.

The tenant in this case has done what was asked. No excuses this fella just wants more rent for same Studio.

listermint

ted1 wrote: »

There’s more wear and tear with two people. Makes sense to charge more

Thats fine but the landlord is changing his mind as the wind blows at this point is it the tenants fault to find new tenants ? When his 'rules' are meaningless.

antodeco

I raised the price of mine by €100 for a couple (overall, price is still less than €1000). This is for a self contained 4 room apartment. The reason I put the price is up was:

All bills are included in the rent (more people = more usage).
More wear and tear and the furniture.

I dont think its wrong of the landlord to refuse couples, however, they really should have advised you of this when you said you were going to source someone.

davo10

listermint wrote: »

Thats fine but the landlord is changing his mind as the wind blows at this point is it the tenants fault to find new tenants ? When his 'rules' are meaningless.

It is obvious to all that the op is is not assigning his lease. If the LL wants to charge more for 2 people or doesn't want to rent to two people, that's his choice, the op has a lease agreement for one person only.

tuskacz

Couples are more noisy, in bed also. Fully understand the landlord.

KathleenGrant

tuskacz wrote: »

Couples are more noisy, in bed also. Fully understand the landlord.

Couples are also more noisy out of bed. Our neighbours argue/slam doors on a regular basis

Doop

tuskacz wrote: »

Couples are more noisy, in bed also. Fully understand the landlord.

Why would the landlord be listening to his tenants in a separate studio apartment?

listermint

davo10 wrote: »

It is obvious to all that the op is is not assigning his lease. If the LL wants to charge more for 2 people or doesn't want to rent to two people, that's his choice, the op has a lease agreement for one person only.

The landlord wants to do both, at the same time. So surely you can understand why the OP is confused.


Mixed signals, thats the best way to get results! .....

Fian

2 people = more wear and tear, more noise, more potential for hassle, risk that a break-up will lead to non-payment of rent etc.

From a landlord's point of view it makes no sense to choose a couple over a single person unless necessary in order to get a higher rent.

Its not unlawful discrimination, unless potentially if it were a gay couple and the "no couples" was code for "no gays".

The landlord can decide whether he wants to rent to a couple or not.

Claw Hammer

ted1 wrote: »

Ive never saw planning permission that limits to 1 occupant

There is likely no plannig perission at all. It is likely a pre-63.
The landlord is entitled to refuse an upy proposed assignment, for good reasons as well as bad. It is not clear whether the o/p attempted to assign the lease first and then gave notice, gave notice and then tried to assign the lease. As is proposed assignment has now been refused, the OP is entitled to determine the tenancy, fixed term are not.

TheChizler

ted1 wrote: »

There’s more wear and tear with two people. Makes sense to charge more

Fair enough but the point is that not accepting couples wasn't a condition when the OP was sent off to find a replacement, as evidenced by the landlord accepting them provided they pay more.

Fol20

Just out of interest, if a tenant finds any random person where the ll might be feel the new tenant isnt of a good calibre are you able to retain his deposit until he finds someone decent? Or for example if you employed an agent to find the tenant, can you use the agency again to go over the reference check again and the cost would come out of the tenants deposit?

Claw Hammer

Fol20 wrote: »

Just out of interest, if a tenant finds any random person where the ll might be feel the new tenant isnt of a good calibre are you able to retain his deposit until he finds someone decent? Or for example if you employed an agent to find the tenant, can you use the agency again to go over the reference check again and the cost would come out of the tenants deposit?

The landlord either accepts the person or not. Once e refuses, for good reason or bad, the tenant can end the tenancy. The landlord can only retain the deposit for damage done and rent owing. Agency fees do not fall into either category.

Grolschevik

So any random person(s) would do? Someone requiring HAP, for example, or your friendly neighborhood dealer, or a group of four in a one-bed?

Claw Hammer

Grolschevik wrote: »

So any random person(s) would do? Someone requiring HAP, for example, or your friendly neighborhood dealer, or a group of four in a one-bed?

Anyone at all, even a tinker.

Grolschevik

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Anyone at all, even a tinker.

I'd say many people aren't aware of that!

Claw Hammer

Grolschevik wrote: »

I'd say many people aren't aware of that!

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
ignorantia legis neminem excusat.

Grolschevik

Presume it's s186 of the 2004 act?

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2004/act/27/section/186/enacted/en/html

Edited before I saw the below post.

Claw Hammer

Grolschevik wrote: »

Can you dig out the section, for general reference in the thread?

RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT 2004
Tenant may terminate where consent to assignment or sub-letting withheld.

186.—(1) This section has effect—

(a) despite the fact that the tenancy concerned is one for a fixed period, and

(b) despite anything to the contrary in the lease or tenancy agreement concerned.

(2) If a landlord of a dwelling refuses his or her consent to an assignment or sub-letting of the tenancy concerned by the tenant, the tenant may serve a notice of termination in respect of the tenancy and terminate it accordingly.

(3) The period of notice to be given by that notice of termination is—

(a) that specified in section 66, or

(b) such lesser period of notice as may be agreed between the landlord and the tenant in accordance with section 69,

even if the lease or tenancy agreement provides for a greater period of notice to be given.