Invalid notice of termination, solicitor

cherrypick

I had an adjudication on the RTB, they ruled in the tenant´s favour. But this caused lot of distress and economic damage as I was forced to act on the notice.

According to the Rent Act 2004

"It is an offence for a landlord/agent to knowingly take any action in reliance on an invalid notice of termination of tenancy that he/she knew or ought to have known was invalid."

I would like to take further action now and ask for compensations and/or a fine to the landlord.

Does anyone know a solicitor or a firm that can handle this case ? Someone else tried to do the same, what is the procedure?

Deub

What do you mean you were "forced" to act on the notice?

cherrypick

Deub wrote: »

What do you mean you were "forced" to act on the notice?

I had to look for another apartment, pay deposits, and the likes. And other things that I cannot publicly comment which I did on my best interest, but only because of the notice served as I did not know whether I would win or not.

But I will go forward just for the distress caused, it is no longer about money.

Graham

If the RTB already ruled in your favour did they not take into account your losses?

cherrypick

Graham wrote: »

If the RTB already ruled in your favour did they not take into account your losses?

Long story short, no.

There was no talk about loses on the hearing, only about the note being valid or not and the content of the letter being factual. How I am supposed to mention any detriment when I did not even know if they would rule in my favour ? Also, all that happened in the time while the adjudication process started and the hearing and I could not wait to the adjudication result. Sadly.

But this is not yet closed as the landlord might appeal as well (unlikely he will attempt). Regardless, what I am looking for is a solicitor as I do not think the RTB deals with this matter directly unless the claim is about damages or a landlord not providing basic services,etc.

To be clear, the reason I want to fill a lawsuit or equivalent is because it is an offence that has caused lot of distress and I was forced to look for other apartments derived from the notice, and the fact that the good terms with the landlord are done for. It affects the tenancy directly and indirectly. Among other things.

"74.—(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) a notice of termination that is invalid purports to be served by the person (or on his or her behalf) in respect of a tenancy, and

(b) the person does any act, in reliance on the notice, that affects adversely, or is calculated to affect adversely, any interest of the person on whom the notice is served.
...
"

Baby01032012

You have to go through the RTB. You have to let the adjudication - appeal - determination process run its course. They will take into account compensation if any is due. Of course you can take a civil matter through the circuit court. However even if you win solicitor and barrister fee will eat up whatever you win. Still not quiet sure what you feel you are due. You found alternate accommodation. Don’t think you’d get anything for emotional stress.

cherrypick

Baby01032012 wrote: »

You have to go through the RTB. You have to let the adjudication - appeal - determination process run its course. They will take into account compensation if any is due.

Do you have experience with it yourself ?

Also, unlike other type of claims I very much doubt the RTB will ask for compensations in this kind of adjudication for invalid notice of termination.

Baby01032012 wrote: »

Of course you can take a civil matter through the circuit court. However even if you win solicitor and barrister fee will eat up whatever you win. Still not quiet sure what you feel you are due. You found alternate accommodation. Don’t think you’d get anything for emotional stress.

Well, the fact I had to take another apartment at current market prices that is significantly more expensive counts then ? I´d say it does, deposit paid already.

Also, the relationship with the landlord is now broken and he ignores calls, etc. Plus you never know if he will try to evict you again with any excuse or send another notice again in the near future (but this time a bit more prepared and with less lies). The uncertainty is a detriment by itself.

Thus, he has forced me to act because of the invalid notice of termination, simply because it was a one-off opportunity that could not be delayed. And I did not want to risk that, without knowing the outcome of the adjudication.

Baby01032012

Yeah I know a little bit...I’ve a circuit court case starting at the moment against a letting agent.

What was the basis for finding the termination notice invalid...so I can give you a better idea where you stand.

At the end of the day you choose to move out. I know I know you had no choice but fact that you did will count against you.

I know it sticks in your throat but believe me solicitors and barristers will empty your pockets.

I’d wait out the RTB case. Don’t be contacting the landlord at this stage. That could be used against you.

cherrypick

Baby01032012 wrote: »

Yeah I know a little bit...I’ve a circuit court case starting at the moment against a letting agent.

Definitively not contacting the landlord, I have nothing to tell him anyway.

The basis for the notice of termination being invalid is that there was no willingness to carry the works that appeared on the letter (all made up), plus the letter was not sent how it should, knowingly. The purpose of the letter was to kick the current tenants to be able to increase the rent further as he is limited to a 4% or so every two years (pure greediness, I am paying a lot of money already).

And no, I did not chose to move out. I am still paying here.

My choice was to spend and risk money to protect me, as the outcome of not succeeding was more problematic and expensive. One can always give up a contract and lose deposit (and even a first month rent). Looking for apartments here is not easy now, takes time and effort. I would tell you more details so you could understand the situation better but this is a public forum.

Totally waiting for the RTB case to be finished, but then again, it is an offence to do what he did so I will proceed with further action based on that, as I said, I am not looking for money and I already wasted much. However, I need to know how.

Btw, may I hear a briefing of your story ? out of curiosity.

C3PO

I think you could probably take a civil case against the landlord but it would be difficult and probably costly too! I would suggest that it's time to just let it go and move on with your life!

CeilingFly

circuit court - probably two years of waiting. Risk of losing = costs of a few thousand. Mud slingling both sides.
Costs start from day one, so even if you didn't go ahead you'd be out of apkcet.

Is it worth it?

Would you win?

How were you "Forced", surely if it was with the RTB you could have held off all your actions until it was adjudicated upon.

I simply cannot see successful case

davo10

cherrypick wrote: »

And no, I did not chose to move out. I am still paying here.

My choice was to spend and risk money to protect me, as the outcome of not succeeding was more problematic and expensive. .

So you are still in the property?

ArthurG

Are you still there or have you moved out? You seem to be contradicting yourself.

cherrypick

ArthurG wrote: »

Are you still there or have you moved out? You seem to be contradicting yourself.

I do not think I am contradicting, but to make it clear: I am still on the same apartment, I have not moved out. And I am paying my rent like always.

cherrypick

davo10 wrote: »

So you are still in the property?

I am yes, hence the problem. Move out finally and pay much more at current market prices (although convenient) or give up on another apartment with the trouble it involves and stay where I am, which is way cheaper. This is legally possible despite losing some money.

The risk here is whether the lanlord will give up or not, I believe he has low chance to succeed in the future and might just give up and if he does not give up he will have to spend lot of money, I doubt he wants to do so and it would take time for him to recover the investment even after rising the rent to a new tenant.

tvjunki

But I will go forward just for the distress caused, it is no longer about money.[/QUOTE]

It is about money..
So to be straight your first landlords gave you an invalid notice.(which can happen) You took a case against him. You moved out in the mean time. You did not have to move out until the case was resolved. You are Now paying higher rent. You won the case against the last landlord.
Now you want compensation for pain and suffering.

Do you want to move back in to the property when relationship has now broken down? That can be one recourse but I would not want to be in that situation.

If you go to court to get compensation it will cost you more stress and legal fees. Your old landlord might not have the funds to compensate you and you could end up just getting a 5euro a week.
Some landlords are still in distress and banks are forcing them to improve rents. You have not said if you are in rent pressure zone and if you were paying well below the market rent?. All this is relevant.

cherrypick

CeilingFly wrote: »

circuit court - probably two years of waiting. Risk of losing = costs of a few thousand. Mud slingling both sides.
Costs start from day one, so even if you didn't go ahead you'd be out of apkcet.

Is it worth it?

Would you win?

How were you "Forced", surely if it was with the RTB you could have held off all your actions until it was adjudicated upon.

I simply cannot see successful case

If the landlord did not try to trigger an illegal eviction or if the landlord did not send a notice of termination unlawfully and knowingly then I would not even had to do anything. All this has been triggered by the notice of termination, I had better things to do that deal with my greedy landlord.

Also, to be precise, sending a notice of termination that is invalid knowing that it would end up in some sort of action by the tenants is an offence by itself:


"74.—(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) a notice of termination that is invalid purports to be served by the person (or on his or her behalf) in respect of a tenancy, and

(b) the person does any act, in reliance on the notice, that affects adversely, or is calculated to affect adversely, any interest of the person on whom the notice is served.
...
"

cherrypick

tvjunki wrote:

It is about money..

Not really no, it is about the fact the landlord did not want to be cool and forced the situation, which made me waste a lot of time and caused serious discomfort for weeks and I mean it. The whole idea of looking for a new apartment in this current market is already terrifying enough as you should know.

And no, I did not move out.

- Pressure zone regulations apply.
- I am paying a market rent, however, not if we consider the increase during 2018. The rent has almost doubled, all in all.

Because of what he did is an offence I want to act on that.

I would be ok if I knew for sure that he will not rinse and repeat the process and would start to be a more rational landlord again. But because I cannot know for sure and after the adjudication nothing is the same as before if something happened in the apartment I am forced to act, despite of the result of the adjudication. All that causes some distress too (for both parts).

Of course, if I can cover some money that will totally help me to make decisions. But If I cannot ask for compensations that would be ok, although unfair.

This landlord acted like a piece of **** doing this, for no reason really, and I do not want to give up just yet. I can´t explain details to you since this is a public forum but if I did you would then understand.

Deub

cherrypick wrote: »

- I am paying a market rent, however, not if we consider the increase during 2018. The rent has almost doubled, all in all.

Reading this, it looks like the market rent has doubled in 2018. The rent increased in 2018 but not that much.

Regarding the distress to look for another appartment: If the eviction had been valid, you would have had to move with all the extra cost and stress anyway. So it is not the invalid notice that stressed you but the situation to move out which is the risk when you rent.

I am a tenant and I have been in your situation. I know my new landlord can give me notice anytime but it is the game.

davo10

Op, you have not been evicted on foot of an invalid notice so your tenancy in your current rental property has not been adversely effected. It would seem that as you have not actually been served with a valid notice, nor evicted, it was your decision to pay a deposit on another property, you were entitled to stay until the end of a valid notice period.

It is not an offence to serve an invalid notice, it is an offence to evict on foot of one.

I'm not sure that you can sue for distress caused by an invalid notice, you brought your case to the RTB and they adjudicated in your favour, your tenancy continues as if notice had never been served.


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2004/act/27/section/74/enacted/en/html#sec74

cherrypick

Deub wrote: »

Reading this, it looks like the market rent has doubled in 2018. The rent increased in 2018 but not that much.

...
I am a tenant and I have been in your situation. I know my new landlord can give me notice anytime but it is the game.

To make it explicit: I am not looking to put a lawsuit requesting money to compensate for the distress, that has no price. Of course I would like it but it is not what I am looking for here.

And again no, your landlord cannot give you a notice anytime. He has to give you a notice lawfully. And depending on how many years, he has to give you several months, so he cannot simply kick you out. For the same reason that you have to give him a notice too and you pay monthly and very promptly.

While you are paying the rent you are the owner, people do not seem to understand that.

Have some reads, about "the game": https://slumleaks.wordpress.com

cherrypick

davo10 wrote: »

O

It is not an offence to serve an invalid notice, it is an offence to evict on foot of one.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2004/act/27/section/74/enacted/en/html#sec74

I mostly agree, but the law does not say "to evict on foot", to be precise it reads "Offence to do certain acts on foot of invalid termination."

"that affects adversely, or is calculated to affect adversely, any interest of the person on whom the notice is served."

However that is up to interpretation, etc. The Treshold website also says clearly that SERVING an invalid notice of termination is an offence based on the above link. You might not have compensation, but it is an offence... I am not totally sure what that means: a fine ? compensation ? or both ? it depends probably.

But my tenancy is not the same as before, I did take action based on the notice and also might take future action based on the notice regardless of the outcome of the adjudication because I do not have the same security as before. Thus, is calculated to affect adversely.

And that is the reason why I am looking for profesional advice on the matter.

davo10

I know you are upset about this, but I think you are misinterpreting the legislation.

For an eviction to be lawful in your case, it must be on foot of a valid notice of termination of the tenancy. But the serving of an invalid notice is not in itself an unlawful or criminal act. The unlawful act would be an evinction on foot of an invalid notice. You were sent an invalid notice, but you were not evicted.

At no time does a tenant own a rental property, you have a lease agreement but no right of ownership.

notharrypotter

cherrypick wrote: »

And that is the reason why I am looking for profesional advice on the matter.

If you want professional advice pay a solicitor.
Do not ask randomers on the internet.

cherrypick

davo10 wrote: »

I know you are upset about this, but I think you are misinterpreting the legislation.

You were sent an invalid notice, but you were not evicted.

You might well be right, however, I´d rather confirm this with a solicitor which is the reason of my post really, as well as to gather other people´s experiences on the matter.

My interpretation is different as I stated, and it also makes sense to me. Also note the word "eviction" is nowhere on the 74(1) article.

cherrypick

notharrypotter wrote: »

If you want professional advice pay a solicitor.
Do not ask randomers on the internet.

I was asking for good solicitors, preferably cheap if someone knows.

Also I would like to hear any experience about the process if someone had done it in the past or is planning to do so. Seems fair to me. But yes, I get your point.

Baby01032012

Good solicitor and cheap don’t go in the same sentence.

I will give you some non legal advice as other payers above have done which you have accepted.

You have no basis for a claim. Landlord issues notice of termination. You believe this is invalid and have taken case to Rtb which is still ongoing. Meanwhile you are still living there still paying rent having peaceful enjoyment etc. You have not been evicted or have had your rights breached.
The worst possible outcome is that Rtb finds that either notice invalid and you can continue to live there or valid and you will have to move out. In either case you have nothing to seek compensation for.

Substantial refurbishment is subjective is open to interpretation as legislation is new and only Rtb hearing can decide as there have not been any cases yet.

Such a long thread over nothing.

CeilingFly

cherrypick wrote: »

The Treshold website also says clearly that SERVING an invalid notice of termination is an offence based on the above link.

Threshold are very well known for bending the rules/interpreting laws to suit their own agenda and in an awful lot of cases they are very very wrong and this causes a huge amount of friction as tenants are reading what they are saying and thinking it is 100% correct.

RTB is really the only place to get correct legal information.

Serving an invalid notification simply cannot be an offence. Implementing an invalid notice is where the offence would lie.

tvjunki

cherrypick wrote: »

I would like to take further action now and ask for compensations and/or a fine to the landlord.

This is from your first post. It is about money. You are still in the property and you are paying current rent. Your situation has not changed apart from now not having a good relationship with your landlord. Your landlord can appeal the decision. Don't forget he would be just as stressed as you if not more going to a hearing.
Why did you not talk to your landlord about the notice and try to resolve this between you? Your relationship has now broken down.
Your landlord will make sure any new notice of rent increase or termination will be correct. You either accept or move to another property.
Not a nice situation to be in.

cherrypick

tvjunki wrote: »

Why did you not talk to your landlord about the notice and try to resolve this between you? Your relationship has now broken down.
Your landlord will make sure any new notice of rent increase or termination will be correct. You either accept or move to another property.
Not a nice situation to be in.

First thing I did is to call him and offered to pay more, and call it a day. He refused.

Now, on the matter, please take a look into this case
https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/downloads/tribunal-report/TR1217-002734-DR0517-34310_Tribunal_Report.pdf

This is quite similar to my case and the landlord had to compensate for terminating the tenancy unlawfully (the tenant moved out on its own and the landlord wanted her to stay after all).

tvjunki wrote: »

Your landlord will make sure any new notice of rent increase or termination will be correct.

Good luck with that, he will have to spend a lot of money to make sure it is valid as it has to change the nature of the property and it is not possible to do so in this apartment. So as soon as he does the maths he will realise how stupid the whole thing was, it would take years to recover the expense. I get your point, though.

Also for those reading this that do not know, the landlord has to offer the tenancy back regardless. We are assuming here he would not do that, but if he does, he cannot simply increase your rent.

However, he will definitively keep increasing the rent not like he was not doing that.

cherrypick

CeilingFly wrote: »

Threshold are very well known for bending the rules/interpreting laws to suit their own agenda and in an awful lot of cases they are very very wrong ...

I can confirm you that as it was my experience, however, I did my own research. In fairness, they offered both good and bad advice.

CeilingFly wrote: »

Serving an invalid notification simply cannot be an offence. Implementing an invalid notice is where the offence would lie.

The law is very clear on the matter, I have posted the excerpt few times here already. It clearly says it is.

So you are wrong there, but do not trust me and look into this actual tribunal report, here you are:
https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/downloads/tribunal-report/TR1217-002734-DR0517-34310_Tribunal_Report.pdf

davo10

cherrypick wrote: »

I can confirm you that as it was my experience, however, I did my own research. In fairness, they offered both good and bad advice.



The law is very clear on the matter, I have posted the excerpt few times here already. It clearly says it is.

So you are wrong there, but do not trust me and look into this actual tribunal report, here you are:
https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/downloads/tribunal-report/TR1217-002734-DR0517-34310_Tribunal_Report.pdf

You understand that in the case you linked, the tenant was unlawfully evicted? You have not been evicted, you were served an invalid notice of termination, which the relevant adjudicator (RTB) has ruled in your favour. Your tenancy therefore continues and has not been adversely affected by the notice i.e. your tenancy has not been terminated.

If you read down to "Findings" you will see that the RTB found that the tenancy was invalidly terminated. You are still in the property, that is the key difference, the LL in this case acted unlawfully, in your case the LL would have broken the law if you had been evicted ( adversely affect by termination) You disputed the notice and won, no eviction, no law broken.

CeilingFly

cherrypick wrote: »

Also, to be precise, sending a notice of termination that is invalid knowing that it would end up in some sort of action by the tenants is an offence by itself:


"74.—(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) a notice of termination that is invalid purports to be served by the person (or on his or her behalf) in respect of a tenancy, and

(b) the person does any act, in reliance on the notice, that affects adversely, or is calculated to affect adversely, any interest of the person on whom the notice is served.
...
"

note the word "and"

Little words are extremely important in legal disputes. The notice on its own is not an offence. The notice and then acting on the notice is the offence.

C3PO

OP my guess is that English is not your first language? Consequently it makes your posts very difficult to follow and I also think it makes it hard for you to interpret the legal terminology correctly. I would suggest that you need to go and talk to a solicitor who specialises in this area and follow his advice but as stated before I think you are "on a hiding to nothing"!

tvjunki

cherrypick wrote: »

First thing I did is to call him and offered to pay more, and call it a day. He refused.

Now, on the matter, please take a look into this case
https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/downloads/tribunal-report/TR1217-002734-DR0517-34310_Tribunal_Report.pdf

This is quite similar to my case and the landlord had to compensate for terminating the tenancy unlawfully (the tenant moved out on its own and the landlord wanted her to stay after all).


Good luck with that, he will have to spend a lot of money to make sure it is valid as it has to change the nature of the property and it is not possible to do so in this apartment. So as soon as he does the maths he will realise how stupid the whole thing was, it would take years to recover the expense. I get your point, though.

Also for those reading this that do not know, the landlord has to offer the tenancy back regardless. We are assuming here he would not do that, but if he does, he cannot simply increase your rent.

However, he will definitively keep increasing the rent not like he was not doing that.

This case is not relevant as the landlord did not give notice in writing, he wanted the house for himself and do short term lettings which he can do. He did offer it back to the x tenant but she did not move back in.

Substantial change. You have missed something there as well. Your landlord has to improve the property(that could be a new boiler or insulation etc) but only has to offer you back the property if completed in 6months but can charge you the market rent. He can offset the cost against the 52% tax he pays if he is on the higher tax bracket.

He can also give you notice that he will not be renewing your lease to a further part 4.(you have not said how long you have lived in the property)Section 34b and he does not have to give reason apart from not renewing a further part 4. You may be looking for another place anyway.

cherrypick

C3PO wrote: »

OP my guess is that English is not your first language? Consequently it makes your posts very difficult to follow and I also think it makes it hard for you to interpret the legal terminology correctly. I would suggest that you need to go and talk to a solicitor who specialises in this area and follow his advice but as stated before I think you are "on a hiding to nothing"!

Going too fast there while doing things in parallel... but you are right. Apologies for not writing more carefully.

Please let me know what sentences in particular sound bad to you other than typos and grammar mistakes ? so I can correct those. I know you refer more or less like "in general" but I will appreciate guidance. Feel free to PM me.

cherrypick

tvjunki wrote: »

he wanted the house for himself and do short term lettings which he can do.

No he can´t. He cannot say he wanted it back for a family or himself and also do short term letting. That makes no freaking sense, I do not know in what world people live.

And that is why she won the case. Because her tenancy was unlawfully terminated despite she moved voluntarily to a new apartment does not even matter how she was notified which I thought it was by letter but I must have misunderstood (note that was an appeal so the original claim would have more details).

Or that is what I understood in the summary. I believe it is very explicit.

cherrypick

CeilingFly wrote: »

note the word "and"

Little words are extremely important in legal disputes. The notice on its own is not an offence. The notice and then acting on the notice is the offence.

True, true. However he is acting on the notice, I cannot provide details but so you have an idea, he no longer replies to anything related to the apartment nor he provides basic information he should provide. There are other people involved on this other than my greedy landlord.

Also he did this calculating an outcome that no matter how would cause me detriment (have an effect), the mere fact I had to fill a claim to the RTB is proof of it. Now he could even serve a better letter in the future, thanks to this attempt. Well, as I said, he will have to really spend money if he does not want to give up but...

Baby01032012

After last post I think personal issues forum might be more appropriate

davo10

cherrypick wrote: »

True, true. However he is acting on the notice, I cannot provide details but so you have an idea, he no longer replies to anything related to the apartment nor he provides basic information he should provide. There are other people involved on this other than my greedy landlord.

Also he did this calculating an outcome that no matter how would cause me detriment (have an effect), the mere fact I had to fill a claim to the RTB is proof of it. Now he could even serve a better letter in the future, thanks to this attempt. Well, as I said, he will have to really spend money if he does not want to give up but...

Yes you will be spending money, you want to take a civil case against the LL, that is going to cost you. The intended outcome of the notice was to adversely affect your tenancy by terminating it. This did not happen because the RTB ruled in your favour, it's a mystery why you think you are due money when you were not evicted on foot of an invalid notice. I think that you feel that the LL should reimburse you for what you paid for the other property, but you voluntarily jumped the gun and paid this before the RTB made its findings.

I don't think you will be happy until you have paid a solicitor to tell you that as the LL didn't act on the notice, you have no case for compensation.

Incidentally, there is nothing to stop the LL serving you with a new, valid notice.

cherrypick

davo10 wrote: »

I don't think you will be happy until you have paid a solicitor to tell you that as the LL didn't act on the notice, you have no case for compensation.

Incidentally, there is nothing to stop the LL serving you with a new, valid notice.

That could be the case, easily. However there are other similar cases published were the landlord had to actually pay, as I said, either a fine or compensation is what I am looking for.

https://www.threshold.ie/advice/ending-a-tenancy/how-your-landlord-may-end-your-tenancy/ see the paragraph that explains that what he did is an offence regardless of what I did or not on my side in the meanwhile. Also, there is something that can easily be considered as "taken action" but I cannot explain that detail because this is a public forum.

But I do agree, If I am mistaken, then I will reconsider the situation and reevaluate the options.

In any event this adjudication is something that had to be done, I might or might not benefit from it but if the increases the rent further to a new tenant I can always put another claim.

Or I can just not leave and keep paying the rent, and wait until there is new legislation in place were this is a criminal offence which is meant to happen "soon".

davo10

At the risk of repeating the same point over and over, that link relates to ending a tenancy.

I assume the paragraph you are referring to is this:

"It is an offence for a landlord/agent to knowingly take any action in reliance on an invalid notice of termination of tenancy that he/she knew or ought to have known was invalid."

The "action" is terminating the tenancy, that would be an offence if he acted on an invalid notice to evict you. But he didn't, you have not been evicted, you are still there, the tenancy is still in place, the RTB ruled in your favour, it is not a criminal offence, the LL has broken no law.

Can you please provide a link to the other cases where LLs were punished for giving invalid notice but not acting on it to evict the tenant. The relevant law is clear, another poster has linked to it, for it to be an offence the LL must give invalid notice AND act on it by terminating tenancy/evicting you.

If you leave or your tenancy is ended with valid notice, and a new tenant is charged more, it is the new tenant who claims, not you.

"Soon" in Irish legislation process means a very, very long time.

Deub

Soon may come at best in a few months but it doesn't mean it will be retroactive.

cherrypick

Deub wrote: »

Soon may come at best in a few months but it doesn't mean it will be retroactive.

Correct, so if I do not stop paying my rent and I do not surrender the contract then it will apply going forward. Which is the whole point.

cherrypick

davo10 wrote: »

At the risk of repeating the same point over and over, that link relates to ending a tenancy.

I assume the paragraph you are referring to is this:

"It is an offence for a landlord/agent to knowingly take any action in reliance on an invalid notice of termination of tenancy that he/she knew or ought to have known was invalid."

The "action" is terminating the tenancy, that would be an offence if he acted on an invalid notice to evict you. But he didn't, you have not been evicted, you are still there, the tenancy is still in place, the RTB ruled in your favour, it is not a criminal offence, the LL has broken no law.

Can you please provide a link to the other cases where LLs were punished for giving invalid notice but not acting on it to evict the tenant. The relevant law is clear, another poster has linked to it, for it to be an offence the LL must give invalid notice AND act on it by terminating tenancy/evicting you.

If you leave or your tenancy is ended with valid notice, and a new tenant is charged more, it is the new tenant who claims, not you.

"Soon" in Irish legislation process means a very, very long time.

Hi Davo,

First of all, sure it is not a criminal offence (yet), please I am not stupid. But a civil one.

Find some in the link below (filter by "invalid notice of termination" or "unlawful") read the tribunal appeals, else, I put one in some post before where a woman left to go to another apartment and later on she acted on base of an unlawful termination, and she was not evicted or anything and in fact the landlord wanted her back.. The RTB ruled in her favour.

https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/search-results/listing/

My understanding is that the "action" can mean many things, for example: do not fix anything in the apt., do not reply your calls to repair things, do not provide his address or a rent book, do not fix things broken due to usual wear among other things. Also the action can be to force you to look for other apartments in the meanwhile or even negotiate a higher rent on the hearing.

The action is not meant to be terminating the tenancy when it is INVALID - but the attempt to do so - because if it is invalid the tenancy cannot terminate indeed. Unless:

- You were evicted illegally.
- You voluntarily left, because you felt like doing so AFTER you got such letter of termination.

I do not think it is that difficult to get the backgrounds of that article, whether you will win or not in a circuit court... or if that is worth it... that I do not know.

Also this could be easily a movie script but I would not be surprised if we know some years from now that all agencies and asset managers were doing shady activities and cooperating to artificially inflate prices (even evicting people whenever that would help them to achieve their goals). So considering this a criminal offence is probably something that has to be done, too much greediness.

Askthe EA

Lock. It. Up!

Fol20

cherrypick wrote: »

That could be the case, easily. However there are other similar cases published were the landlord had to actually pay, as I said, either a fine or compensation is what I am looking for.

https://www.threshold.ie/advice/ending-a-tenancy/how-your-landlord-may-end-your-tenancy/ see the paragraph that explains that what he did is an offence regardless of what I did or not on my side in the meanwhile. Also, there is something that can easily be considered as "taken action" but I cannot explain that detail because this is a public forum.

But I do agree, If I am mistaken, then I will reconsider the situation and reevaluate the options.

In any event this adjudication is something that had to be done, I might or might not benefit from it but if the increases the rent further to a new tenant I can always put another claim.

Or I can just not leave and keep paying the rent, and wait until there is new legislation in place were this is a criminal offence which is meant to happen "soon".

Just out of interest is compensation or a fine expendable from a tax point of view?