Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Tenants made multiple changes to the property

Options
12345679»

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    pasquale83 wrote: »
    no, he didn't

    I am not surprised. Starting a row with the tenants who find that they spend money on "improving" the place only then to find they are asked to increase their deposit is the wrong thing to do if the tenants are going to be let stay. Either you get rid of them now or put up and shut up.


  • Options
    #243
    pasquale83
    Registered Users Posts: 477 ✭✭pasquale83


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    I am not surprised. Starting a row with the tenants who find that they spend money on "improving" the place only then to find they are asked to increase their deposit is the wrong thing to do if the tenants are going to be let stay. Either you get rid of them now or put up and shut up.

    would it be so difficult to sell the property? I really don't need it at this stage. I don't want to be into the landlord business.

    I understood that is one of the reason I can terminate a tenancy when part-4 kicks in. would it be so difficult to evict them and sell the property later?

    also, what makes you think they will vacate the property also within the first 6 months? if they ignored the lease at all do you think my eviction letter will scare them?

    mine are genuine questions just to understand if I don't know something I should know.


  • Options
    #244
    davindub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    pasquale83 wrote: »
    davindub wrote: »
    The above makes sense op, i see no benefit to evicting them when that action will at least cost you reletting expenses.

    Did your solicitor mention renegotiating the deposit to cover the restoration costs if needed?

    no, he didn't

    I would consider it. No need for a row, just explain if the worst happens you need a little more coverage than whats in place.


  • Options
    #245
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    pasquale83 wrote: »
    would it be so difficult to sell the property? I really don't need it at this stage. I don't want to be into the landlord business.

    I understood that is one of the reason I can terminate a tenancy when part-4 kicks in. would it be so difficult to evict them and sell the property later?

    also, what makes you think they will vacate the property also within the first 6 months? if they ignored the lease at all do you think my eviction letter will scare them?

    You don't want to scare them, you want rid of them. If you can't get them out at an early stage when will you get them out?
    You have asked the other questions before.


  • Options
    #246
    pasquale83
    Registered Users Posts: 477 ✭✭pasquale83


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    You don't want to scare them, you want rid of them. If you can't get them out at an early stage when will you get them out?
    You have asked the other questions before.

    OK, but my concern is: how do they will return the house in the original state in 28 days? I think it is impossible and the risk is that they will leave the house in a state I need to fix it before selling.

    That is the problem with this people. they've made changes that are not easy to revert


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    Exodus 1811
    Registered Users Posts: 164 ✭✭Exodus 1811


    OP, I have read through the replies, and couldn’t find if you’d actually spoken to the tenants yet?


  • Options
    #248
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    davindub wrote: »
    I would consider it. No need for a row, just explain if the worst happens you need a little more coverage than whats in place.

    What good is a bit of extra deposit the next time they break the lease and the time after that and after that....

    Get rid asap.


  • Options
    #249
    davindub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Adam Square Sliver wrote: »
    What good is a bit of extra deposit the next time they break the lease and the time after that and after that....

    Get rid asap.

    Well you can use the additional deposit to restore the property so there is that....would you not see that as useful?

    The OP can still terminate later even with part 4 in place if the tenants are making alterations to the property.

    On the other hand evicting now will involve getting in someone to restore the property (hard to get someone quickly too) and leaving the unit empty whilst doing so, then reletting and maybe getting in tenants who run down the property, the OP is abroad so probably will need a letting agent (1 months fees). What would be the cost of that now? Then add in the risk of overholding etc.


    Real world issues of a landlord....


  • Options
    #250
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Exodus 1811 wrote: »
    OP, I have read through the replies, and couldn’t find if you’d actually spoken to the tenants yet?
    Look harder.
    pasquale83 wrote: »
    as I said in this thread multiple times that is the reason why I am so fed up with this situation.

    Their reply has been always "yes, no problem" and they did whatever they wanted. They don't care at all to my request.

    =-=

    OP; either evict now, or if you ever decide to sell, I assume they'll remove anything they want before moving on.

    Have you searched for their surname in PTRB?


  • Options
    #251
    pasquale83
    Registered Users Posts: 477 ✭✭pasquale83


    davindub wrote: »
    Well you can use the additional deposit to restore the property so there is that....would you not see that as useful?

    The OP can still terminate later even with part 4 in place if the tenants are making alterations to the property.

    On the other hand evicting now will involve getting in someone to restore the property (hard to get someone quickly too) and leaving the unit empty whilst doing so, then reletting and maybe getting in tenants who run down the property, the OP is abroad so probably will need a letting agent (1 months fees). What would be the cost of that now? Then add in the risk of overholding etc.


    Real world issues of a landlord....

    You got my point. I just want to add that I will sell the property if I will be easily able to evict the tenant as I cannot easily manage the rental of an additional tenant from abroad.

    If the people will stay long term as looks like they want to, then the fact that they changed some appliances with their own wouldn't matter to me. If they will leave in 6 years for example I will need new appliances anyway.

    The only thing that really pissed me off is the change of the lock.

    I was reading that from 2016 to 2017 in IRL the overholding practice increased by 25%. There are no houses around. I think that the risk is concrete and high.

    It's easy to say: 'evict them' on the paper but in practice will involve big trouble also at this stage. This is were I am stuck at.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    pasquale83
    Registered Users Posts: 477 ✭✭pasquale83


    the_syco wrote: »
    Look harder.


    =-=

    OP; either evict now, or if you ever decide to sell, I assume they'll remove anything they want before moving on.

    Have you searched for their surname in PTRB?

    I did but couldn't find it. But the RTB website is not reliable it doesn't even find my registered property even if I have an email confirmation of it I recently requested to the RTB customer service.


  • Options
    #253
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    OP in my opinion you haven't got the stamina required to be a landlord. I was thinking like you when I started: trying to avoid confrontation and risk. Well a few tenants were taking the .... and almost took the business to the ground. I do not have anymore a single tenant I had in 2013 (most were inherited from previous landlords). To be a successful landlord you have to choose well the prospective tenants and be ready to evict at first sign that informal warnings are not listened to by tenants (on my average 10-15% of tenants I choose will seriously and repeatedly break lease/statutory obligations within the first few months, with my inherited tenants it was almost 70% due to my weak initial attitude). It looks like you have just one tenancy which is a very risky business proposition, on the other side if you don't stop the behaviour now it will get worse (believe me I have been through that) and MUCH harder to evict when they get part 4 free for all rights, where you will have to prove the breaks of lease with solid evidence backed by witness. Ask yourself: can I stay without rent for a few months now or many more months and more damage in a few years time? In any case if your tenants are not on benefits it is very unlikely they will stop paying rent even if you are evicting since they have a very visible income source that can be attacked later on (just like the landlord property).


  • Options
    #254
    pasquale83
    Registered Users Posts: 477 ✭✭pasquale83


    GGTrek wrote: »
    OP in my opinion you haven't got the stamina required to be a landlord. I was thinking like you when I started: trying to avoid confrontation and risk. Well a few tenants were taking the .... and almost took the business to the ground. I do not have anymore a single tenant I had in 2013 (most were inherited from previous landlords). To be a successful landlord you have to choose well the prospective tenants and be ready to evict at first sign that informal warnings are not listened to by tenants (on my average 10-15% of tenants I choose will seriously and repeatedly break lease/statutory obligations within the first few months, with my inherited tenants it was almost 70% due to my weak initial attitude). It looks like you have just one tenancy which is a very risky business proposition, on the other side if you don't stop the behaviour now it will get worse (believe me I have been through that) and MUCH harder to evict when they get part 4 free for all rights, where you will have to prove the breaks of lease with solid evidence backed by witness. Ask yourself: can I stay without rent for a few months now or many more months and more damage in a few years time? In any case if your tenants are not on benefits it is very unlikely they will stop paying rent even if you are evicting since they have a very visible income source that can be attacked later on (just like the landlord property).

    thanks again for you feedback GGTrek. Can you please provide examples of how they can turn the business down? am I at risk of loosing the house?

    Also, when part-4 kicks in and I want to sell the house sometimes in the future, would that been enough and good reason to evict them? In that case I will not have the problem in showing that they broke the lease as I will not use that reason as justification for the eviction.

    thanks


  • Options
    #255
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,163 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Are these the same tenants who sublet part of the property without your permission?


  • Options
    #256
    pasquale83
    Registered Users Posts: 477 ✭✭pasquale83


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    Are these the same tenants who sublet part of the property without your permission?

    I thought they did based on some daft.ie ads but when I visited the house I did not see any evidence of the sublet (well, it would actually fall under the rent a room scheme). but yes, they are the same...


  • Options
    #257
    stinkbomb
    Registered Users Posts: 263 ✭✭stinkbomb


    davindub wrote: »

    The OP can still terminate later even with part 4 in place if the tenants are making alterations to the property.

    Not necessarily. Only if they are threatening the fabric of the property or similar.


  • Options
    #258
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    stinkbomb wrote: »
    Not necessarily. Only if they are threatening the fabric of the property or similar.

    He can terminate for breach of condition. He can demand that the changes be reversed and if not done within a reasonable time, he can terminate. The o/p in this case seems to want someone to give him the advice he wants to hear.


Advertisement