Landlord being difficult- considering rtb adjudication

Brbiyer

Hi,
This is a a bit of rant and also seeking a bit of advice from anyone who has been through the process. I have scoured the threads here and it looks like a lot of people were landlords who had to face difficult tenants and rtb.

We have been renting this particular property for close to a year now. We have our own in another area- but I wanted to cut down my commute to work-so I moved the kids and we moved to this rental in the country. AT the time of renting, the landlord seemed to be looking for long term renter sand that suited us fine.
Now, about 3 weeks ago she told us that she wont be renewing our lease because she needs the property for her son who is renovating his house and after that she doesn't really know what she is going to do with the property- she may sell it. I don't buy this story a all. Mostly because this is not her only rental property and the fact that we had a difficult relationship with her for the past few months.
The difficulty has been that whenever anything like toilets, showers, plumbing, etc needed to be fixed- she would never reply to my text for ages or the job wouldn't get done in a reasonable time frame. I had to be constantly text her to get around to jobs- and then she would make it feel like it was somehow our fault. For example- the septic tank had a little overflow and the and she said that that hadn't happened before (!like it was just us!) and that she thought it was only because of the rain-now we had only been there for 2 months and it certainly wasn't us that made it so. Apparently they found baby wipes when emptying it and her son tried to tell us off! Now my kids are over 8years and we don't use baby wipes at all- also did i tell you we had been there only 2 months at that stage?
Another time, both the showers stopped working- again she said that it was strange that had happened- I don't know what she thinks a family of 2 adults and 2 children do with the showers!- Never mind the fact that the water is really hard and they have no water softer here to protect their appliances.
Now, I did insist that she organise to have external lights put in as we live in the country side and its pitch dark- I think that's basic and safety and that she is required to do that really- she was very cross with me that stage. We did have a good few months during the summer when thankfully all was working fine and I didn't need to contact her.
Also, there was a tendency for workmen (usually her son and his crew) turn up suddenly without so much as a text. She lives next door, so she can see clearly if we are in or not...but its really no excuse
Now she has slapped me with a notice- it is not a valid notice as it's not a statutory declaration. I am going to dispute that. I was wondering do I have a leg to stand on ass she only wants the property or her son fora few weeks, while I have to move my whole family and the children are in in school in the area.
Also, she is not giving us a proper reference. I had a friend ring her to test the waters- she said that we paid the rent promptly but thats all she is prepared to say- what landlord is going to rent us another property with a reference like that.
we are quiet and we are clean and always pay rent on time.
She also owns the property next door to us and she has renewed their lease no problem. They have also asked to fix stuff which she hasn't done-but they haven't really followed up as they are building their own house and moving soon.
Any advice is appreciated.

Browney7

Have all the notices been given in writing?

myshirt

It sounds like it may be a mechanism to get you out, and not bona fides, agreed. But it also sounds like you are a right pain in the arse. If the relationship has went sour, just move on.

RossieMan

I don't know why people insist on having their contracts extended when they don't have a good relationship with the landlord. Move on, lives too short for both sides to out up with arseholes.
Some people just don't mix.

Brbiyer

All very good advice-thanks so much ,NOT!
Have you considered the fact that maybe we haven't been able to find anything else suitable and would like some time?

antoinolachtnai

Brbiyer wrote: »

All very good advice-thanks so much ,NOT!
Have you considered the fact that maybe we haven't been able to find anything else suitable and would like some time?

If this is important to you and you are prepared to have a long fight then you will be able to stay for some time. It is your family’s home so best thing might be to appoint a solicitor.

DubCount

Brbiyer wrote: »

All very good advice-thanks so much ,NOT!

How to win friends and influence people ?

Mrs OBumble

You know ahe has a son. You don't know if he needs to move in or not - but you cannot prove that he doesn't.

She is not required to give you a reference - but you might point out to her that unless she gives you a good one you're not going to find somewhere else to move to.

You certainly have the grounds for a legal fight, which will buy you time at least.

In the meantime, try not to break anything else. Or if you do, just fix it yourself.

meijin

you have 28 days to file the dispute with RTB, wait until day 25 and do it online

if there is no statutory declaration, few months wait until you get the hearing date, and easy win for you

more in PM ;-)

Fol20

Honestly your attitude here stinks so you need to up that. People here are just giving you advice so no need to bite down their neck. As others have pointed out, potentially you might be a pain to deal with if your constantly texting, i know for my own situation, i normally never increase rent for sitting tenants but for this one guy, due to the way he interacts with me there is no love loss between us and rent will be increased to the max the moment i get the chance. and even doing jobs for him now, i have either ignored them if they are not critical or dug my feet in to slow them down. Once is current Part 4 expires, he will be getting the boot.

What comes around goes around so you need to maintain a friendly relationship or its time to move on. If you dig your heels in here, you can forget about receiving any reference which will make it more difficult for you to move out. They are not obliged to give a reference and if i have something bad to say, its better to say nothing at all. LL are not your friend and dont have to bs their way so you can get a place.If you submit an RTB dispute, it is all public and can be viewed by anyone, any time i vet tenants, i check this out and if i see the dispute you might lodge, i would run a mile.

To your benefit,I would request an affidavit before you move out and you should move out. If the ll wants the place back ,they will get it back, it will just take more time and you will shoot yourself in the foot for other applications. You have no proof it is or is not legit. If they re-let the place within 6months of you leaving, they are obliged to give you first right to decline. If they dont, you then have a valid claim but its only after confirming this.

Browney7

Fol20 wrote: »

Honestly your attitude here stinks so you need to up that. People here are just giving you advice so no need to bite down their neck. As others have pointed out, potentially you might be a pain to deal with if your constantly texting, i know for my own situation, i normally never increase rent for sitting tenants but for this one guy, due to the way he interacts with me there is no love loss between us and rent will be increased to the max the moment i get the chance. and even doing jobs for him now, i have either ignored them if they are not critical or dug my feet in to slow them down. Once is current Part 4 expires, he will be getting the boot.

What comes around goes around so you need to maintain a friendly relationship or its time to move on. If you dig your heels in here, you can forget about receiving any reference which will make it more difficult for you to move out. They are not obliged to give a reference and if i have something bad to say, its better to say nothing at all. LL are not your friend and dont have to bs their way so you can get a place.If you submit an RTB dispute, it is all public and can be viewed by anyone, any time i vet tenants, i check this out and if i see the dispute you might lodge, i would run a mile.

To your benefit,I would request an affidavit before you move out and you should move out. If the ll wants the place back ,they will get it back, it will just take more time and you will shoot yourself in the foot for other applications. You have no proof it is or is not legit. If they re-let the place within 6months of you leaving, they are obliged to give you first right to decline. If they dont, you then have a valid claim but its only after confirming this.

In fairness, the second reply the OP got was being labelled a pain in the arse and two out of the three issues cited by the OP seemed very reasonable to me to have remedied as quick as possible - raw sewage entering the garden and no working showers. Any decent LL shouldn't drag their feet on such issues and should remedy as quick as possible and shouldn't require the tenant to chase up regularly to get an update. If a tenant feels you are fobbing them off, of course they'll keep onto you. It's not like they asked for new lightbulbs to be fair.

Clearly, the rental market isn't the scary place it's made out to be by LL's on this forum where tenants will stay rent free for two years and kill your first born if LLs can drag their feet for essential repairs and then if the tenant "pisses them off" turf them out.

Fol20

Browney7 wrote: »

In fairness, the second reply the OP got was being labelled a pain in the arse and two out of the three issues cited by the OP seemed very reasonable to me to have remedied as quick as possible - raw sewage entering the garden and no working showers. Any decent LL shouldn't drag their feet on such issues and should remedy as quick as possible and shouldn't require the tenant to chase up regularly to get an update. If a tenant feels you are fobbing them off, of course they'll keep onto you. It's not like they asked for new lightbulbs to be fair.

Clearly, the rental market isn't the scary place it's made out to be by LL's on this forum where tenants will stay rent free for two years and kill your first born if LLs can drag their feet for essential repairs and then if the tenant "pisses them off" turf them out.

Well we are getting his opinion here also. In my case, its all based on the relationship with the tenant, with some i have had very good ones where i will fix whatever they want and get people out asap. Others based on experience can request everything and anything and expect a plumber to come out within 3 hours on the weekend. Having no shower in the house is a bit much however from the attitude he showed after a small comment, it would lead me to believe, he might be like this in real life as well.

Browney7

Fol20 wrote: »

Well we are getting his opinion here also. In my case, its all based on the relationship with the tenant, with some i have had very good ones where i will fix whatever they want and get people out asap. Others based on experience can request everything and anything and expect a plumber to come out within 3 hours on the weekend. Having no shower in the house is a bit much however from the attitude he showed after a small comment, it would lead me to believe, he might be like this in real life as well.

I'm sure if someone responded to a thread started by you if you were looking for advice dealing with a delinquent tenant and based on the detailed post you were labelled "a right pain in the arse" you wouldn't exactly be responding with a response filled with puppy dogs and rainbows.

TJ Mackie

Brbiyer wrote: »

Also, she is not giving us a proper reference. I had a friend ring her to test the waters- she said that we paid the rent promptly but thats all she is prepared to say- what landlord is going to rent us another property with a reference like that.

She is under no obligation to give you any reference. Your future living arrangements are not her concern or obligation.

Frankly, it was a mistake to list her as a referee in the first place considering your strained relationship to date.

Remove her as a reference for any future application, and just say you've been living in your own property to any future landlords.

Fol20

Browney7 wrote: »

I'm sure if someone responded to a thread started by you if you were looking for advice dealing with a delinquent tenant and based on the detailed post you were labelled "a right pain in the arse" you wouldn't exactly be responding with a response filled with puppy dogs and rainbows.

I would defend myself and argue the valid points that have been mentioned, his response didnt do this however and was a little rude. Lets get back on point before we hijack the thread

The_Conductor

1. The landlord has to properly terminate the tenancy- with the requisite notice, and a statutory declaration declaring the reason for the termination.
2. Her son renovating his property- and needing somewhere to stay- is valid.
3. She is under no obligation to tell you what is happening to the property after her son- and it would be better for both the landlord and the tenant to not speculate.
4. The list of items you listed- some are perfectly fine- others- such as demanding outdoor lights- are not. The property is rented 'as-is'. If it did not have outdoor lights when you moved in- most normal people would ask for permission to install some- possibly notion activated lights at the door or something. It doesn't say anywhere that a property has to have outdoor lighting. It was cheeky seeking it. The other items though- the shower and the septic tank- are standard items- most people have their septic tanks emptied periodically (there are specific regulations governing it). The shower- that could be hard-water- or any of a long list of other things. Providing there is hot water present- its not an emergency- but it would normally be expected to be repaired in a reasonable time frame.
5. Hard-water- is a curse in this country. Some people have water softeners or water softening devices- a majority of people don't. Once again its not specified anywhere that you should have one.

You've very obviously rubbed the landlord up the wrong way- some of the things were not your fault- but you took liberties with others (such as outdoor lighting). The landlord very obviously sees you as a troublemaker- and wants you out. At this point- you can frustrate and draw out the termination of the tenancy- but it is going to happen- and you have to plan for that.

Obviously you're looking elsewhere now- if you do find somewhere- you might be in a position to offer to leave your current residence asap- providing the landlord gives you a reasonable reference- if his/her reference means that much to you.

Brbiyer

Thanks for all the helpful messages and there have been quite a few of them!
I don't think my demands have been unreasonable. I have waited beyond the prescribed time period before asking again for toilets, showers and septic tank to be repaired/maintained.
As for the outdoor lights- there it wasn't a case of changing a light bulb. The house is also in the country with no street lightning. Its health and safety.

Wheres Me Jumper?

myshirt wrote: »

It sounds like it may be a mechanism to get you out, and not bona fides, agreed. But it also sounds like you are a right pain in the arse. If the relationship has went sour, just move on.

i have to concur. as a LL if i had a tenant like you i would seek to get rid asap.
nothing personal but as one poster already said, life is too short and there are too many good people desperately seeking accommodation to be dealing with this.

OP try to learn from this and move on.

Nekarsulm

Brbiyer wrote: »

Thanks for all the helpful messages and there have been quite a few of them!
I don't think my demands have been unreasonable. I have waited beyond the prescribed time period before asking again for toilets, showers and septic tank to be repaired/maintained.
As for the outdoor lights- there it wasn't a case of changing a light bulb. The house is also in the country with no street lightning. Its health and safety.

She should have got the septic tank investigated ASAP, in everyones interest.
As another poster stated, the normal thing to do would be to ask if you could fit a sensor light unit at the back door.
30 euro in Woodies would see you sorted.
Demanding them as "health snd safety" because there is no street lighting is fairly ridiculous.

RossieMan

Brbiyer wrote:

The house is also in the country with no street lightning. Its health and safety.

You should have stated this when renting the house. As had been said, it's generally rented as is. No demands for extras a few months down the line. And perhaps face to face or a phone call is better? Texting can make you come across worse than you want it to. Similar to this forum sometimes.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Why anyone would want to be a landlord anymore is beyond me.

q85dw7osi4lebg

The_Conductor wrote: »

1. The landlord has to properly terminate the tenancy- with the requisite notice, and a statutory declaration declaring the reason for the termination.
2. Her son renovating his property- and needing somewhere to stay- is valid.
3. She is under no obligation to tell you what is happening to the property after her son- and it would be better for both the landlord and the tenant to not speculate.
4. The list of items you listed- some are perfectly fine- others- such as demanding outdoor lights- are not. The property is rented 'as-is'. If it did not have outdoor lights when you moved in- most normal people would ask for permission to install some- possibly notion activated lights at the door or something. It doesn't say anywhere that a property has to have outdoor lighting. It was cheeky seeking it. The other items though- the shower and the septic tank- are standard items- most people have their septic tanks emptied periodically (there are specific regulations governing it). The shower- that could be hard-water- or any of a long list of other things. Providing there is hot water present- its not an emergency- but it would normally be expected to be repaired in a reasonable time frame.
5. Hard-water- is a curse in this country. Some people have water softeners or water softening devices- a majority of people don't. Once again its not specified anywhere that you should have one.

You've very obviously rubbed the landlord up the wrong way- some of the things were not your fault- but you took liberties with others (such as outdoor lighting). The landlord very obviously sees you as a troublemaker- and wants you out. At this point- you can frustrate and draw out the termination of the tenancy- but it is going to happen- and you have to plan for that.

Obviously you're looking elsewhere now- if you do find somewhere- you might be in a position to offer to leave your current residence asap- providing the landlord gives you a reasonable reference- if his/her reference means that much to you.

:pac:

Ray Palmer

In any reference I state if the the person paid the rent on time. Other than that it is the dates of tenancy. I am not going to be held legally responsible for a tenants behaviour and I am not going to say what I thought of them.

Wheres Me Jumper?

Magdalena Modern Supertanker wrote: »

Why anyone would want to be a landlord anymore is beyond me.

there are many very good tenants out there.

The_Conductor

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

there are many very good tenants out there.

Certainly there are- however, from a regulatory perspective- its now practically a fulltime job.

Wheres Me Jumper?

The_Conductor wrote: »

Certainly there are- however, from a regulatory perspective- its now practically a fulltime job.

no it's not.


i own a number of rental properties and i wouldn't even classify it as a part-time role tbh.

Fol20

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

no it's not.


i own a number of rental properties and i wouldn't even classify it as a part-time role tbh.

I don’t think he meant it literally. It’s a figure of speech. Some months it can be quiet and some it can really ramp up. You also need to keep on top of legislation just in case your caught out. I would classify as part time however depending on the amount of properties you have.If you had enough properties potentially 50+, I could see it being a full time job.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Fol20 wrote: »

I don’t think he meant it literally. It’s a figure of speech. Some months it can be quiet and some it can really ramp up. You also need to keep on top of legislation just in case your caught out. I would classify as part time however depending on the amount of properties you have.If you had enough properties potentially 50+, I could see it being a full time job.

A better way to put it - if you have a full time job already you have no time to be a landlord in this country. Calls and call outs at all times of the day. Attending the property at all hours etc etc. Keeping taxes in check, making sure you don't end up in court. Effort

Browney7

Fol20 wrote: »

I don’t think he meant it literally. It’s a figure of speech. Some months it can be quiet and some it can really ramp up. You also need to keep on top of legislation just in case your caught out. I would classify as part time however depending on the amount of properties you have.If you had enough properties potentially 50+, I could see it being a full time job.

I'd imagine if you'd 50 properties at an average of 800 a month you wouldn't need a 50k per annum salaried job now to be fair...

q85dw7osi4lebg

Browney7 wrote: »

I'd imagine if you'd 50 properties at an average of 800 a month you wouldn't need a 50k per annum salaried job now to be fair...

How will they get by on a day to day basis? People seem to think landlords don't have to pay tax or mortgages from their rental income.

Browney7

Magdalena Modern Supertanker wrote: »

How will they get by on a day to day basis? People seem to think landlords don't have to pay tax or mortgages from their rental income.

If they can't get by generating a rent roll of 40k per month they only have themselves to blame

Wheres Me Jumper?

Browney7 wrote: »

If they can't get by generating a rent roll of 40k per month they only have themselves to blame

i dont have a rent roll of 40k, sadly.
maybe i'm lucky &/or perhaps i have very good tenants, but if managed properly it really is hassle-free.

compared to a 9-5 office job there is no comparison. that said i treat my tenants well, but the first sniff of trouble and they're out.

Fol20

Browney7 wrote: »

If they can't get by generating a rent roll of 40k per month they only have themselves to blame

Tbh. You need to know the business before you can say that. If they own 50places unemcumbered generating let’s say 50k a month. You would still expect expenses of at least 10-20pc. Then including tax would leave you with say 20k. Nothing to scoff at but most wouldn’t be like this.

Most however will also have a mortgage of let’s say ltv of 50pc. Realistically including payments, I would expect your expenses to go up to 40+pc and that’s not including principle payments. When you include the principle. Your net take home with what your left with wouldn’t be much for the amount of money involved. This is also with rents at their highest ever. Your mortgage payments are not linked with your rental payments and you will need to continue to pay them at the existing rate even when rent will go down at some point in the future. It’s not all happy and dandy in landlord land is what I’m trying to say.

Fol20

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

i dont have a rent roll of 40k, sadly.
maybe i'm lucky &/or perhaps i have very good tenants, but if managed properly it really is hassle-free.

compared to a 9-5 office job there is no comparison. that said i treat my tenants well, but the first sniff of trouble and they're out.

You could be lucky. A lot of the time it’s fine however, the times when you need to get your solicitor involved for tenants or even for contractors, it eats up a lot of time and stress. Or if there’s a leak in the place or you need to do some odd jobs. Most of the time it’s fine however trying to schedule stuff can take up a surprising amount of time.

skD13

Sorry if going off original topic, but regarding the time consuming aspects of being a landlord. Why not use an agent to manage the property? For around 6% of the monthly rent they take all the calls, triage and arrange repairs. And their fee is tax deductable. We use an agent on our 1 rental property and they are excellent. I never have to deal with tenants.

handlemaster

OP has their own property. Move back to it.

Wheres Me Jumper?

Fol20 wrote: »

You could be lucky. A lot of the time it’s fine however, the times when you need to get your solicitor involved for tenants or even for contractors, it eats up a lot of time and stress. Or if there’s a leak in the place or you need to do some odd jobs. Most of the time it’s fine however trying to schedule stuff can take up a surprising amount of time.

i do honestly believe if you treat people with respect they will reciprocate (99% of the time). i try not to be greedy by increasing the rent at every opportunity. some LLs are greedy, and will inevitably get a tenant who feels he/she is being screwed. this can lead to problems where no problems should exist.

much better to have tenants who are content, respect their neighbours and the property, and will stay in the property for say 5 years, than be greedy and be dealing with new tenants every 12 months IMO.

the_syco

Brbiyer wrote: »

Another time, both the showers stopped working- again she said that it was strange that had happened- I don't know what she thinks a family of 2 adults and 2 children do with the showers!- Never mind the fact that the water is really hard and they have no water softer here to protect their appliances.

I'm guessing that the showers stopped working due to the hard water. It sounds like a hard water area. Have you looked at cleaning the brushes of the shower, or looking at cleaning out the heads of the showers? These are often the first to get blocked in a hard water area.

Brbiyer wrote: »

Now, I did insist that she organise to have external lights put in as we live in the country side and its pitch dark- I think that's basic and safety and that she is required to do that really- she was very cross with me that stage.

You knew when renting the place that it had no outdoor lighting. Do you expect her to provide lighting all the way to the main road as well?

Brbiyer wrote: »

Now she has slapped me with a notice- it is not a valid notice as it's not a statutory declaration. I am going to dispute that. I was wondering do I have a leg to stand on ass she only wants the property or her son fora few weeks

How do you know it's only for a few weeks?

Brbiyer wrote: »

Also, she is not giving us a proper reference.

Brbiyer wrote: »

she said that we paid the rent promptly

So she has given you a reference. What did you expect?

Brbiyer wrote: »

while I have to move my whole family and the children are in in school in the area.

Didn't you already do this when you moved to this area?

handlemaster wrote: »

OP has their own property. Move back to it.

I wonder if they've rented it out, and can't get back in?

Old diesel

I don't see the outside light as particularly terrible a thing to ask for.

Legally you don't need it.

That doesn't mean it's a feature a rural house shouldnt have though.

I think the rental model of the future is going to have to take a more positive outlook on tenants requests for improvements - well small ones at least.

I mean if the tenant wants a 5 bedroom house and this one is only 3 bed - that's unrealistic.

But putting in an outside light isn't unreasonable given the rural location.

Fol20

Old diesel wrote: »

I don't see the outside light as particularly terrible a thing to ask for.

Legally you don't need it.

That doesn't mean it's a feature a rural house shouldnt have though.

I think the rental model of the future is going to have to take a more positive outlook on tenants requests for improvements - well small ones at least.

I mean if the tenant wants a 5 bedroom house and this one is only 3 bed - that's unrealistic.

But putting in an outside light isn't unreasonable given the rural location.

I beg to disagree, if anything it should go the other way, Why do ll need to provide a microwave sure? The food a microwave cooks with isnt healthy in any way. I would prefer if we used the american/eu model where the ll provides nothing and the tenant needs to get their own washing machine,couch,bed etc. The tenant can paint the walls whatever they want, put stuff on walls etc as long as they bring it back to the original state when they leave. This allows tenants feel more at home, have more control over their house yet at the same time, stops ll from being pestered for small stuff and they are no longer required to provide crap they would prefer not to buy. More often than not it would guarantee longer tenusre as tenants will move less due to extra costs of moving yet at the same time, turnover costs are less for ll. I think its a win win for both sides, but i doubt it will ever happen in my time.

Old diesel

Fol20 wrote: »

I beg to disagree, if anything it should go the other way, Why do ll need to provide a microwave sure? The food a microwave cooks with isnt healthy in any way. I would prefer if we used the american/eu model where the ll provides nothing and the tenant needs to get their own washing machine,couch,bed etc. The tenant can paint the walls whatever they want, put stuff on walls etc as long as they bring it back to the original state when they leave. This allows tenants feel more at home, have more control over their house yet at the same time, stops ll from being pestered for small stuff and they are no longer required to provide crap they would prefer not to buy. More often than not it would guarantee longer tenusre as tenants will move less due to extra costs of moving yet at the same time, turnover costs are less for ll. I think its a win win for both sides, but i doubt it will ever happen in my time.

You as a landlord may want unfurnished but where does what the tenant want fit into things.

Do tenants want furnished or not????.

The option should be there to decide whether a tenant wants furnished or not.

Current rent rates should be enough imo for a furnished place. That doesn't make an unfurnished place wrong if the savings allow you to furnish it.

To my mind an outside lIght is something that goes in once and only comes out if it's gone wrong.

And does today's busy professional in Dublin working for Google etc even have the time to furnish a place and paint it knowing they will be painting it and ripping stuff out again at two months notice at some random point in the future.

Aren't longer tenures exactly what the landlords don't want as it stops them selling as required with vacant procession.

Nekarsulm

I get the impression it wasn't the actual fitting of outside light, nor their cost that led to ill feeling.
The method of "insisting" they be provided for "health and safety" reasons would get my back up too......

"You'll catch more flies with honey, than with vinegar"

Old diesel

Nekarsulm wrote: »

I get the impression it wasn't the actual fitting of outside light, nor their cost that led to ill feeling.
The method of "insisting" they be provided for "health and safety" reasons would get my back up too......

"You'll catch more flies with honey, than with vinegar"

The tenant probably feels it is a health and safety risk - the problem is with a lot of rural houses - it can be very dark outside with no light. Especially when walking away from the house (with your back to the windows).

We'd have to see the location at night* to see the full extent of the issue or lack of one.

You can of course use a torch - phones even have one built in these days which are better then nothing. But that can be awkward when trying to deal with a couple of kids and bit's and pieces that have to come out of the car at the same time.

There's no need for a difference of opinion on the outside light to produce the reaction it has both from the landlord and on here.

Bear in mind as well the tenant is also annoyed with been blamed for the septic tank issue and the perceived slowness of the repairs to shower etc

*clearly this isn't going to happen

Fol20

Old diesel wrote: »

You as a landlord may want unfurnished but where does what the tenant want fit into things.

Do tenants want furnished or not????.

The option should be there to decide whether a tenant wants furnished or not.

Current rent rates should be enough imo for a furnished place. That doesn't make an unfurnished place wrong if the savings allow you to furnish it.

To my mind an outside lIght is something that goes in once and only comes out if it's gone wrong.

And does today's busy professional in Dublin working for Google etc even have the time to furnish a place and paint it knowing they will be painting it and ripping stuff out again at two months notice at some random point in the future.

Aren't longer tenures exactly what the landlords don't want as it stops them selling as required with vacant procession.

In the states they have both, however the norm is that the tenant provides everything. In ireland it’s reversed however. People would feel more at home if they had their own stuff. Who wants to sleep in a sweaty bed when you don’t know who was on it before.

I would expect prices to be cheaper prices, so it can ease cash flow for tenants.

Yes it goes on once and it might be nice to have but not necessary. I added lights to the side of my own home as it’s dark when I went out there. I had it rented in the past and it’s not necessary however I wanted it. When you get your own place. You could decide to get those however when it’s rented especially when it’s not mandatory and not a safety hazard, it’s completely up to the ll.

I personally want longer tenancies being the norm. If I have tenants moving out every year. On average, it costs me about 50pc of a months rent to tidy it up again for the upcoming tenancy. Contracts for both tenants and ll should be legally binding and enforceable so if both sign a contract for 3-10years. Their locked in for that without any break clauses. It shouldn’t be mandatory to offer these however if they are, it would attract long term tenants that are looking for a ll that are not intending to sell or uproot them.

This system is win win for both

Tenants get security of tenure
Better cash flow with cheaper rent
They can use extra cash flow for buying tangibile assets such as a new bed etc

Landlords have less work
Less costs
Most of the costs they avoid are capital in nature where they would need to pay usc on anyway so less in usc
Less in tax as well

davindub

Fol20 wrote: »

Yes it goes on once and it might be nice to have but not necessary. I added lights to the side of my own home as it’s dark when I went out there. I had it rented in the past and it’s not necessary however I wanted it. When you get your own place. You could decide to get those however when it’s rented especially when it’s not mandatory and not a safety hazard, it’s completely up to the ll.

Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

Definitely in the country, outside lights are absolutely a safety feature. For the sake of 100 euros, you could get it installed by an electrician (never something you would let a tenant organize). You can see from the press personal injury cases get that failure to address foreseeable risks is generally the crux of the case.

Fol20

davindub wrote: »

Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

Definitely in the country, outside lights are absolutely a safety feature. For the sake of 100 euros, you could get it installed by an electrician (never something you would let a tenant organize). You can see from the press personal injury cases get that failure to address foreseeable risks is generally the crux of the case.

If it was a safety hazard,yes I would address it ASAP. I do not think having a light out the front is a safety hazard though. If it was, it would have been required when the house was built however a porch light is optional. The whole point of a business is to minimize expenses. If he started giving tenants everything they want, there would be nothing left over for profit.

davindub

Fol20 wrote: »

davindub wrote: »

Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

Definitely in the country, outside lights are absolutely a safety feature. For the sake of 100 euros, you could get it installed by an electrician (never something you would let a tenant organize). You can see from the press personal injury cases get that failure to address foreseeable risks is generally the crux of the case.

If it was a safety hazard,yes I would address it ASAP. I do not think having a light out the front is a safety hazard though. If it was, it would have been required when the house was built however a porch light is optional. The whole point of a business is to minimize expenses. If he started giving tenants everything they want, there would be nothing left over for profit.

Honestly the absence of something doesnt mean its not required. I think once you have tried to navigate in pitch black a few times, you might see it from the ops point of view.

Fol20

davindub wrote: »

Honestly the absence of something doesnt mean its not required. I think once you have tried to navigate in pitch black a few times, you might see it from the ops point of view.

I have and that’s why I don’t think it’s required. If it was, they would make it mandatory when building rural properties.

4ensic15

mikemac2 wrote: »

I think the outside light is a perfectly reasonable request for a rural house but you didn’t get it due to the bad relationship and the landlady wants you gone.

You weren’t wrong for asking but by launching straight into insisting can put people out.

People have been living in that area for centuries without a light. Why should the landlady fork out for one now?

Wheres Me Jumper?

4ensic15 wrote: »

People have been living in that area for centuries without a light. Why should the landlady fork out for one now?

to request an outside light in this day & age is a totally reasonable request imo. but as mentioned earlier how it's phrased or requested will have an effect on how such a request is received

davindub

Fol20 wrote: »

davindub wrote: »

Honestly the absence of something doesnt mean its not required. I think once you have tried to navigate in pitch black a few times, you might see it from the ops point of view.

I have and that’s why I don’t think it’s required. If it was, they would make it mandatory when building rural properties.

Mandatory? No, it falls under common sense, if you do not address a foreseeable risk that is not difficult or expensive to complete, that is a breach of the duty of care you have to persons on your property. No legislation addresses this, the potential for compensation is the reason you do it.