Long Term Leasing to Council

randomname2005

Apologies if this zombie thread should be left in the past.
Has anyone recently taken up this option (with any local council)? It is something being considered but would like to see what the current realities are.

Best wishes,
RN

Samuel T. Cogley

randomname2005 wrote: »

Apologies if this zombie thread should be left in the past.
Has anyone recently taken up this option (with any local council)? It is something being considered but would like to see what the current realities are.

Best wishes,
RN

We've a couple of these in our complex. It seems to me it's where they dump the problem cases.

mel123

randomname2005 wrote: »

Apologies if this zombie thread should be left in the past.
Has anyone recently taken up this option (with any local council)? It is something being considered but would like to see what the current realities are.

Best wishes,
RN

I have not taken up the option but i do know the ins and outs of it well. To me its a great idea in theory. Once you hand over the property to the council, they become the landlord so you have nothing to do with the property for the lease term. There are different lease terms you can choose. But a worry would be if i lease my property out for 10 years, after the ten years, is the tenant going to move if i want the property back? The council seem to have a bad rap for helping with the eviction process and even advising tenants to over hold.

The technical end of it, your property gets inspected to make sure it meets regulations. If it doesnt you can do the works and they will come back. If it gets accepted then you need to have the contents they tell you plus it has to be all new white goods, or they must have a minimum warranty left on them (cant remember off the top of my head).
As others have said, you get no say in who they put in there, you could get someone from hell to terrorise your neighbours, or you could get the best tenant going, pure luck of the draw.

JimmyVik

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

We've a couple of these in our complex. It seems to me it's where they dump the problem cases.

My friend is literally in tears every night now after leasing to the council 2 years ago on a 10 year lease.
It was fine for the first 1.5 years.
Then they started getting knocks on their door in a different town from irate neighbours of the tenants the council put in their apartment.

Now they are daily getting threats and solicitors letters as well as letters from the management company telling them to do something about the anti social tenants.

They have contacted the council numerous times and asked them to sort out the anti social behavior. Council just say, we have spoken to them, and thats it.

My friend can do nothing whatsoever about the situation, yet they are the ones the neighbours and management company are focusing on. They are really in a bad place.

Council dumped some scumbag in there and they have proceeded to make life a living hell for all the people living around them. #And the council will do nothing at all to sort out the situation and basically told my friend its none of their business to get lost.

The funny thing is that it was Aribnbd for the summer before they leased it to the council. They got lots of complaints about luggage wheel noise, so they just decided to lease it to the council when airbnb became illegal.
I bet all those people would love it to be airbnbd now.

cruizer101

Feel sorry for your friend, I had always thought the great advantage of it was the detachment as you are not really the landlord the council is.

Have they tried to get in contact with local councillors they may be able to push it more with the council.
Also maybe talk to a solicitor as that sounds like harassment, it is not their responsibility, how did they get their address.

JimmyVik

cruizer101 wrote: »

Feel sorry for your friend, I had always thought the great advantage of it was the detachment as you are not really the landlord the council is.

Have they tried to get in contact with local councillors they may be able to push it more with the council.
Also maybe talk to a solicitor as that sounds like harassment, it is not their responsibility, how did they get their address.

Im sure it is harassment, but at the same time they dont want the people to be going through this.
They have been on to local councilors but just got the usual, thankyou for your email, i will look into it stuff.



They are thinking about going to a solicitor but they would probably have to have a separate case against all the people who are harassing them. Must be about 5 at this point.



Looking from the other peoples points of view, they are just looking for someone, anyone to do something about this tenant.


Really all thats needed is for the council to put manners on their tenant which they are not doing.

LizardKing

They should talk to the solicitor whom they used to setup the original 10 year lease with the council.

Get them to write a letter to the council to outline the issues and the complaints

The council 100% have to manage the tenants they put into the units and if they are not abiding by the house rules as outlined in the lease they should be warned and then if they continue they should be moved out.

(Problem is the pandemic and evictions are outlawed mostly)

LizardKing

mel123 wrote: »

I have not taken up the option but i do know the ins and outs of it well. To me its a great idea in theory. Once you hand over the property to the council, they become the landlord so you have nothing to do with the property for the lease term. There are different lease terms you can choose. But a worry would be if i lease my property out for 10 years, after the ten years, is the tenant going to move if i want the property back? The council seem to have a bad rap for helping with the eviction process and even advising tenants to over hold.

The technical end of it, your property gets inspected to make sure it meets regulations. If it doesnt you can do the works and they will come back. If it gets accepted then you need to have the contents they tell you plus it has to be all new white goods, or they must have a minimum warranty left on them (cant remember off the top of my head).
As others have said, you get no say in who they put in there, you could get someone from hell to terrorise your neighbours, or you could get the best tenant going, pure luck of the draw.

I have not heard of any Long-Term Leases being turned back to owners with tenants in place. The contract states the term of the lease and they are required to hand back the property in the same state they were given bar the fixtures and fittings , furniture etc..It would be crazy if they tried to hand back the unit with tenants still in place.



There are shorter term RAS leases perhaps that this could happen on where the owner remains the landlord and deals direct with the tenants and is paid by the council.

JimmyVik

LizardKing wrote: »

They should talk to the solicitor whom they used to setup the original 10 year lease with the council.

Get them to write a letter to the council to outline the issues and the complaints

The council 100% have to manage the tenants they put into the units and if they are not abiding by the house rules as outlined in the lease they should be warned and then if they continue they should be moved out.

(Problem is the pandemic and evictions are outlawed mostly)

Ive had dealings with councils myself in the past. Co-operative is not a word i would use to describe them. The opposite in fact.

randomname2005

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

We've a couple of these in our complex. It seems to me it's where they dump the problem cases.

Thanks for the info.

mel123

LizardKing wrote: »

I have not heard of any Long-Term Leases being turned back to owners with tenants in place. The contract states the term of the lease and they are required to hand back the property in the same state they were given bar the fixtures and fittings , furniture etc..It would be crazy if they tried to hand back the unit with tenants still in place.



There are shorter term RAS leases perhaps that this could happen on where the owner remains the landlord and deals direct with the tenants and is paid by the council.

Yes correct, perhaps i worded it wrong. You certainly are meant to get it back unoccupied after the lease expires, what i mean is, if the tenant doesnt move willingly at expiry, how much does the council push them out?! Hence loads of stories on here of local councils telling tenants to overhold. The council is back to the same situation with the tenant, they have to find them a new property.

Listen its prob much of a muchness in a way, you get a bad tenant weather its through this scheme or one you found yourself, then your up the creek either way. For me, the issue is if my life circumstances change and i need that house back then ive an even slimmer chance of getting it back from the council because i have signed a contract for a certain period of time.

mgn

LizardKing wrote: »

I have not heard of any Long-Term Leases being turned back to owners with tenants in place. The contract states the term of the lease and they are required to hand back the property in the same state they were given bar the fixtures and fittings , furniture etc..It would be crazy if they tried to hand back the unit with tenants still in place.



There are shorter term RAS leases perhaps that this could happen on where the owner remains the landlord and deals direct with the tenants and is paid by the council.

I thought the RAS scheme was replaced by the HAP scheme,

At least with RAS you were paid every month regardless of what happened, with the HAP scheme, if the tenant stops paying their share of the rent to the council the council stops paying the landlord.

LizardKing

I dunno about RAS / HAP I was just pointing out there is other types of lease and perhaps it was more them than the long term which I have.

The lease states being returned in vacant possession , which means empty

Lease also has clauses if you wish to sell early and you can give council first offer to buy

The_Conductor

mel123 wrote: »

Listen its prob much of a muchness in a way, you get a bad tenant weather its through this scheme or one you found yourself, then your up the creek either way. For me, the issue is if my life circumstances change and i need that house back then ive an even slimmer chance of getting it back from the council because i have signed a contract for a certain period of time.

Its not much of a muchness though- if the local authority/council, have an active policy of housing their 'most demanding' tenants in these units.
Aka- the council puts the tenant in. They know they're the dregs of society. You are known to your neighbours who make your life hell, when in actual fact there is nothing whatsoever you can do. When/if a neighbour takes a third party case to the RTB for antisocial behaviour- both you and the council are found guilty- however, they only chase you........

If it was a random tenant being homed in the property, law of odds would suggest you'd probably end up with a tenant who is perfectly fine- however, the odds are stacked against you from the get go on this.

Samuel T. Cogley

Just to add to the above, the owner is trying her best with one of the units, but not getting a lot of support from the council (Dublin City) as far as I can tell. It's her we've gone after and potentially (although extremely unlikely) I imagine this sort of thing could go to forfeiture.

mrslancaster

A friend of mine started to do a 10 year lease with DCC last year. He got a list of stuff over and above the rented house requirements. House had to have new white goods if over 6 months old, new boiler if over 1 year old, fully furnished with curtains & blinds in all rooms, extra smoke & CM alarms, extractors in bathroom, non slip flooring, freshly painted in & out, attic insulation had to be replaced. He had to send a load of paperwork eg proof of ownership, property tax receipts, insurance, tax clearance and certs for elec/gas. The council sent an inspector to see if everything was ok. He got a report & afair they wanted new locks on hall door, different coffee table & the staircase replaced. They were paying 80% with 3 year reviews based on some EU table and it could go up or down. He didnt go ahead in the end.
Edit: Also, the lease had to be done by a solicitor afair.

The_Conductor

That does sound extreme.
New white goods if over 6 months old?
Love to see someone try to explain to Revenue how/why all the white goods have to be replaced on that schedule.
That little shopping list of work- sounds like someone's dream list- new boiler if over a year old- someone is seriously extracting the urine...........

Just out of interest- which local authority was this?

Mad_maxx

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its not much of a muchness though- if the local authority/council, have an active policy of housing their 'most demanding' tenants in these units.
Aka- the council puts the tenant in. They know they're the dregs of society. You are known to your neighbours who make your life hell, when in actual fact there is nothing whatsoever you can do. When/if a neighbour takes a third party case to the RTB for antisocial behaviour- both you and the council are found guilty- however, they only chase you........

If it was a random tenant being homed in the property, law of odds would suggest you'd probably end up with a tenant who is perfectly fine- however, the odds are stacked against you from the get go on this.

you cant take a third party case to the RTB where the tenancy involves the local authority , the RTB has no jurisdiction to resolve those matters

mrslancaster

The_Conductor wrote: »

That does sound extreme.
New white goods if over 6 months old?
Love to see someone try to explain to Revenue how/why all the white goods have to be replaced on that schedule.
That little shopping list of work- sounds like someone's dream list- new boiler if over a year old- someone is seriously extracting the urine...........

Just out of interest- which local authority was this?

It was DCC and I saw the list allright and it seemed ott. The white goods were about 2/3 years old and he had to get all new plus a new gas boiler. He had to install extra mains smoke & CM alarms in living room and landing. They wanted drapes on all windows as well as blinds and he had to get an electric extractor in the bathroom even though theres a big window. The locks on the front door were new and they had to be changed- small job for a locksmith but everything took months to get done with tradesmen in short supply and lockdowns.

Mad_maxx

mrslancaster wrote: »

A friend of mine started to do a 10 year lease with DCC last year. He got a list of stuff over and above the rented house requirements. House had to have new white goods if over 6 months old, new boiler if over 1 year old, fully furnished with curtains & blinds in all rooms, extra smoke & CM alarms, extractors in bathroom, non slip flooring, freshly painted in & out, attic insulation had to be replaced. He had to send a load of paperwork eg proof of ownership, property tax receipts, insurance, tax clearance and certs for elec/gas. The council sent an inspector to see if everything was ok. He got a report & afair they wanted new locks on hall door, different coffee table & the staircase replaced. They were paying 80% with 3 year reviews based on some EU table and it could go up or down. He didnt go ahead in the end.
Edit: Also, the lease had to be done by a solicitor afair.

everything about that is correct bar the having to get a solicitor to draw up the lease , the council present the property owner with a standard lease and the property owner accepts it or lumps it

i have a ten year lease with Limerick CC , none of the above demands would i view as a big deal bar replacing the staircase but perhaps it was in poor order , engineer who inspected my place was pretty reasonable i have to say

i have a rent review in July of this year as three years will have passed , its worked well for me so far but my property was a very small capital investment

harr

Friends of mine started this process with Co co and it was nearly costing them 40 grand to bring the house up to the conditions the council wanted.
All the floors replaced ( anti slip ) heating upgrades, whites goods , stair case , front door , attic door and a heap of insulation. Even the decking out the back was not in order.
The house was only 7 years old and was his wife’s before they married.
They didn’t want to be landlords so taught this route was the perfect solution and could keep the house as a nest egg .. they ended up selling it in the end.

Mad_maxx

harr wrote: »

Friends of mine started this process with Co co and it was nearly costing them 40 grand to bring the house up to the conditions the council wanted.
All the floors replaced ( anti slip ) heating upgrades, whites goods , stair case , front door , attic door and a heap of insulation. Even the decking out the back was not in order.
The house was only 7 years old and was his wife’s before they married.
They didn’t want to be landlords so taught this route was the perfect solution and could keep the house as a nest egg .. they ended up selling it in the end.

find that incredibly hard to believe , no way should a seven year old house require that kind of repairs to meet rental standards

The_Conductor

Mad_maxx wrote: »

find that incredibly hard to believe , no way should a seven year old house require that kind of repairs to meet rental standards

Its not rental standards- its a local authority applying current building standards on a 7-10 (or older) property- when it doesn't have to comply with current building standards for any other purpose (including rental standards). They are well known for doing just this.

JimmyVik

Mad_maxx wrote: »

you cant take a third party case to the RTB where the tenancy involves the local authority , the RTB has no jurisdiction to resolve those matters

I believe that is true.
The owner of the property can do nothing.
Cases have to be taken against the council. And through the courts, not the RTB.
It still doesnt top the neighbours finding the owner and harassing them though as the focus of their frustration.

JimmyVik

Mad_maxx wrote: »

everything about that is correct bar the having to get a solicitor to draw up the lease , the council present the property owner with a standard lease and the property owner accepts it or lumps it

i have a ten year lease with Limerick CC , none of the above demands would i view as a big deal bar replacing the staircase but perhaps it was in poor order , engineer who inspected my place was pretty reasonable i have to say

i have a rent review in July of this year as three years will have passed , its worked well for me so far but my property was a very small capital investment

Who gets to decide how much the rent will be after the 3 years review.
Or is there some published figure that is used?

Mad_maxx

JimmyVik wrote: »

Who gets to decide how much the rent will be after the 3 years review.
Or is there some published figure that is used?

i dont know but il tell you in three months

if my rent stays the same , il be content enough , i argued for a very high benchmark before the 20% below market deduction so im very happy with what im being paid

Mad_maxx

JimmyVik wrote: »

I believe that is true.
The owner of the property can do nothing.
Cases have to be taken against the council. And through the courts, not the RTB.
It still doesnt top the neighbours finding the owner and harassing them though as the focus of their frustration.

still doesnt matter , the property owner cant do anything , even the property owner sold the house or apartment , the local authority still have a lease and a right to the use of it

i used to think you could take a third party case to the RTB but i looked into it , you cant

JimmyVik

Mad_maxx wrote: »

still doesnt matter , the property owner cant do anything , even the property owner sold the house or apartment , the local authority still have a lease and a right to the use of it

i used to think you could take a third party case to the RTB but i looked into it , you cant

You would think that the property owner should be immune to any kind of action from anyone in a case like this. All they can do is pass on the irate messages to the council and nothing else.

The_Conductor

JimmyVik wrote: »

You would think that the property owner should be immune to any kind of action from anyone in a case like this. All they can do is pass on the irate messages to the council and nothing else.

I'm a director in a management company who are pursuing an owner in this precise situation. The owner can do whatsoever they wish with the local authority- we have a relationship with the owner, not with the local authority. If the owner does not remedy the antisocial behaviour (which in our case has necessitated a complete evacuation of a block overnight when the tenants tried to bypass the gas meter)- we can and will put a lien on their property, sufficient to cover the damage to other properties (which includes overnight accommodation costs when Bord Gais removed everyone from the block). The owner can chase the local authority for this- thats between them- its not our problem.

Mad_maxx

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'm a director in a management company who are pursuing an owner in this precise situation. The owner can do whatsoever they wish with the local authority- we have a relationship with the owner, not with the local authority. If the owner does not remedy the antisocial behaviour (which in our case has necessitated a complete evacuation of a block overnight when the tenants tried to bypass the gas meter)- we can and will put a lien on their property, sufficient to cover the damage to other properties (which includes overnight accommodation costs when Bord Gais removed everyone from the block). The owner can chase the local authority for this- thats between them- its not our problem.

What if it's a free hold house which the council have leased to the council?