RTB wont take my case - tenant

Rosina1969

Hi, I'm a tenant with an eviction notice. The landlord is refusing to give back the deposit. I lodged a case with the PRTB but got a letter from them today saying they cannot take my case as they cannot verify the landlord's address. Has anyone any experience of this? He is registered with the PRTB.

Reading so many threads saying PRTB are 'tenant friendly' Not in my case. In fact nothing has been 'tenant friendly' in this current apartment. Anyone got any ideas?

I have his address, his phone number, his bank details. He cant have moved because it's a big family home where he lives, he's in his 60s I'd say, maybe 50s. How can they not 'verify' his address when he is registered with them. So fecked off with the whole bloody thing. More stress every day.

ted1

Rosina1969 wrote: »

Hi, I'm a tenant with an eviction notice. The landlord is refusing to give back the deposit. I lodged a case with the PRTB but got a letter from them today saying they cannot take my case as they cannot verify the landlord's address. Has anyone any experience of this? He is registered with the PRTB.

Reading so many threads saying PRTB are 'tenant friendly' Not in my case. In fact nothing has been 'tenant friendly' in this current apartment. Anyone got any ideas?

I have his address, his phone number, his bank details. He cant have moved because it's a big family home where he lives, he's in his 60s I'd say, maybe 50s. How can they not 'verify' his address when he is registered with them. So fecked off with the whole bloody thing. More stress every day.

Had he giving a reason why he won’t give it back ? Have you moved out yet ?

Rosina1969

I wasn't going to get into all the reasons he wont return it, cos I was interested in the PRTB's letter saying they cannot verify his address which is why they are not taking the case?

reason anyway is that apartment is being repossessed and sold. have been paying rent to a property company since September. they insist that the landlord must return the deposit as he was the one I paid it to. bank says the same. landlord says 'get lost'. basically.

Macha

Sorry not to be able to help but this is why in many countries, the deposit must be put into a bank account in the tenant's name that can only be released on the approval of the landlord.

You know where your money is, you actually get the interest on it and you don't have landlords disappearing with deposits like this.

Baby01032012

It works both ways. If Rtb can’t verify a landlord or tenants address they can’t take a case. I was taking a case against s tenant who disappeared without paying rent. I gave his phone number PPS and advised them he was receiving welfare payments, despite this they advised they couldn’t verify where he was now and so couldn’t accept a case.

punisher5112

Contact the company your paying and state you want the deposit back before you leave.

If they want you out I can see this been done to be honest as I was in the same boat and they ended up giving me the deposit.

the_syco

Rosina1969 wrote: »

reason anyway is that apartment is being repossessed and sold

Is the property now owned by the original landlord or bank?

If owned by the bank, the landlord may think that they should give you your deposit, as the landlord no longer owns the property.

Who do you pay your rent to, and does said entity control the property?

Rosina1969

Apparently when it is sold the landlord will be entitled to approximately 50% of the sale. That's what I can gather from the latest correspondence.

THe issue however isn't whether he is the owner, it is that he took my deposit, and he has it, nobody else has it.

I just cant understand how they can not find this guy. I mean, he is in his 60's, respected in the community, active in local soccer and GAA clubs, active in the church, has a family and grown up children, a wife. He cant just disappear? I was talking to him on the phone only a couple of weeks ago. I cant believe he has sold up his house so quickly. There must be something going on here. Maybe he put it into his wife's name or something like that. It's actually wicked what he has done, as he would have known when he rented to me, that repossession had started. He's been pocketing my rent, and worse, my rent supplement. Do tax payers even know that their money is going directly into the pockets of landlords, with no compunction on him to use it to pay his mortgage.

LotharIngum

Rosina1969 wrote: »

Apparently when it is sold the landlord will be entitled to approximately 50% of the sale. That's what I can gather from the latest correspondence.

THe issue however isn't whether he is the owner, it is that he took my deposit, and he has it, nobody else has it.

I just cant understand how they can not find this guy. I mean, he is in his 60's, respected in the community, active in local soccer and GAA clubs, active in the church, has a family and grown up children, a wife. He cant just disappear? I was talking to him on the phone only a couple of weeks ago. I cant believe he has sold up his house so quickly. There must be something going on here. Maybe he put it into his wife's name or something like that. It's actually wicked what he has done, as he would have known when he rented to me, that repossession had started. He's been pocketing my rent, and worse, my rent supplement. Do tax payers even know that their money is going directly into the pockets of landlords, with no compunction on him to use it to pay his mortgage.

If it has been repossessed it is not him who they are looking for.

Rosina1969

how do you mean? it is him they are looking for, it says in the letter, or am I not understanding you.

LotharIngum

Rosina1969 wrote: »

how do you mean? it is him they are looking for, it says in the letter, or am I not understanding you.

There was a post above from the_syco.

You need to read it.
Its either repossessed or its not.
If its repossessed how could it be transferred to the wifes name?
You clearly don't have all the info here, so how can anyone tell you what the problem is.

Rosina1969

No I think you misunderstand me.

I'm talking about the family home. THe address he gave me on the lease, and the address the PRTB have for him. His family home. I'm wondering did he put it in his wife's name.

How can a man like this just disappear. It doesn't make sense. He has a well-known name, he is well known in the community, active in local GAA and Soccer clubs and in the catholic church. It doesn't make sense.

The place I am renting is being repossessed and sold. But that is not the issue. Or so the PRTB, Threshold, the property company managing the apartment, and the bank who are selling it. They all tell me that because HE took the deposit, he should be holding it and should return it. The property company wont even entertain me when I say I need my deposit back. They say they don't have it, never had it, and therefore cant return it.

eagle eye

Are you telling me that the banks are evicting a tenant because the landlord defaulted?
How can this s happen? Is there no legal protection for the tenant in circumstances like this?

LotharIngum

Rosina1969 wrote: »

No I think you misunderstand me.

I'm talking about the family home. THe address he gave me on the lease, and the address the PRTB have for him. His family home. I'm wondering did he put it in his wife's name.

How can a man like this just disappear. It doesn't make sense. He has a well-known name, he is well known in the community, active in local GAA and Soccer clubs and in the catholic church. It doesn't make sense.

The place I am renting is being repossessed and sold. But that is not the issue. Or so the PRTB, Threshold, the property company managing the apartment, and the bank who are selling it. They all tell me that because HE took the deposit, he should be holding it and should return it. The property company wont even entertain me when I say I need my deposit back. They say they don't have it, never had it, and therefore cant return it.

Who do you pay rent to now (owner)? That's who owes you the deposit.

Rosina1969

I pay the rent to the property company. But they say landlord owes me the deposit as he is 'holding' it, and I paid it to him. They said sometimes the landlord passes on the deposit, but this landlord still has it. RTB and Threshold agree with this. Should I be chasing the property company?

LotharIngum

Rosina1969 wrote: »

I pay the rent to the property company. But they say landlord owes me the deposit as he is 'holding' it, and I paid it to him. They said sometimes the landlord passes on the deposit, but this landlord still has it. RTB and Threshold agree with this. Should I be chasing the property company?

You should be chasing whoever owns the property.

Rosina1969

IT's not clear who owns it! When it is sold the bank will take 50% and the landlord the other 50%.

cruizer101

I know a lot on here give out about and they do give out some questionable advice but in your case might be worth getting in touch with threshold as they may have experience with other similar cases.
It really is a failing of the government that there isn't better procedures around deposits.

Rosina1969

Yes, have been onto threshold. They say the landlord needs to give back the deposit he collected from me. it is not rent, therefore cannot be refunded by the property company or bank. it's separate money. That's what threshold say anyway.

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

Are you telling me that the banks are evicting a tenant because the landlord defaulted?
How can this s happen? Is there no legal protection for the tenant in circumstances like this?

They are evicting the tenant so they can sell the property with vacant possession and recoup some of the mortgage money they loaned to the original purchaser (the landlord). It's the same as if the LL himself was selling up. Provided proper notice is given, there's nothing a tenant can do. And rightly so, in my opinion.

OP: I'd be calling the Guards. He has stolen your money, plain and simple. If he's that well known it should be easy enough to track him down.

Toots

Guards won't do anything about this, it's a civil matter

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote:

They are evicting the tenant so they can sell the property with vacant possession and recoup some of the mortgage money they loaned to the original purchaser (the landlord). It's the same as if the LL himself was selling up. Provided proper notice is given, there's nothing a tenant can do. And rightly so, in my opinion.

If the tenant has paid up all along should the nit offer the the property first? Maybe even rent to buy option?

TheChizler

Are the property company you're paying your rent to working on behalf of your old landlord or the new owner of the property?

Rosina1969

the property company are working on behalf of the bank who are repossessing the apartment and selling it.

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

If the tenant has paid up all along should the nit offer the the property first? Maybe even rent to buy option?

Maybe. That's a debate for another day, though, and might even be an option if it was simply just a landlord getting out of the market. But this is the mortgage provider here. They don't give a rats about who is in there at the moment, they want a quick sale. There's not a hope in hell they'd entertain a "you rent it from us until the rent pays off what we're owed" type situation though.

In a cruel twist of the knife, they may well end up selling it for les than market value once the buyer pays cash and the sale goes through quickly. Let's say the LL owes €100k and the property is worth €200k (based on the figure of 50% provided earlier). The mortgage provider doesn't give a monkeys whether or not the house is sold for €101,000 or €500,000 because all they're getting is the €100k no matter what. The balance goes to the LL.

Toots

Toots wrote: »

Guards won't do anything about this, it's a civil matter

They'll be able to track him down and/or get an address for him, surely? Especially if he's a big shot locally.

TheChizler

Rosina1969 wrote: »

the property company are working on behalf of the bank who are repossessing the apartment and selling it.

Well to me it sounds like the bank are now your landlord, all responsibilities are transfered over to them when they take charge of the property if I'm not mistaken, including the duty to return the deposit. The RTB wouldn't have a problem verifying the bank's address...

LotharIngum

Deleted User wrote: »

OP: I'd be calling the Guards. He has stolen your money, plain and simple. If he's that well known it should be easy enough to track him down.

That's just silly advice.
You should know already what will happen there. Don't be winding the OP up with that.

Rosina1969

Thanks I'll try the bank and property company again. they wouldn't even listen to me, insisted the deposit was paid to the landlord so he needs to give it back, and that's what threshold and prtb told me as well so who knows. bottom line, I need it to get another place.

TheChizler

If that was true and your old landlord owed your deposit then surely you would have to pay another deposit to the new landlord of the same tenancy, otherwise the new one has no comeback if you break something or leave without notice? IMO they're just trying to save some money and are hoping the old landlord will be foolish enough to pay it to you.

Graham

Advice from the RTB on the subject:

I am a tenant who has been notified that a receiver has been appointed to the rented dwelling. What should I do?

• A tenant should seek a copy of the receiver’s deed of appointment or a letter from the appointing financial institution confirming the appointment having been made to the relevant property before making any rental payments to the receiver or redirecting any standing order to the receiver’s account.
• Once the tenant is satisfied that the receiver is officially appointed then rent must continue to be paid;
• At the commencement of a new tenancy and before paying a deposit to a receiver, the tenant should seek written confirmation from the receiver that the deposit is to be repaid at the end of the tenancy (provided all rental payments are made and the property is left in good condition);
• Where a Deposit has been paid to a Landlord ( prior to the appointment of a receiver) he/she remains obliged to refund the deposit (provided all rental payments have been made and the property is left in good condition).

Source: https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution-process-faqs

Fol20

Rosina1969 wrote: »

IT's not clear who owns it! When it is sold the bank will take 50% and the landlord the other 50%.

It would be clear who owns the property. Every property has deeds and whomever signed this or has a lean on the property own it.

Fol20

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They are evicting the tenant so they can sell the property with vacant possession and recoup some of the mortgage money they loaned to the original purchaser (the landlord). It's the same as if the LL himself was selling up. Provided proper notice is given, there's nothing a tenant can do. And rightly so, in my opinion.

OP: I'd be calling the Guards. He has stolen your money, plain and simple. If he's that well known it should be easy enough to track him down.

This is a civil matter and i doubt guards will get envolved

Fol20

cruizer101 wrote: »

I know a lot on here give out about and they do give out some questionable advice but in your case might be worth getting in touch with threshold as they may have experience with other similar cases.
It really is a failing of the government that there isn't better procedures around deposits.

It is and it isnt. Most disputed losged with RTB are from ll. Deposit claims cost a fraction what rent arears or damage to a property costs. Lets say the deposit is 1500. If a tenant doesnt pay rent for a 9months min. Thats a minimum amount of 13500 not incl damage and or costs to remove tenant

LotharIngum

Graham wrote: »

Advice from the RTB on the subject:


Source: https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution-process-faqs

Pretty sure that when the bank take the property to sell it they have to pay off the liabilities. Its the bank you need to go after.

That post would explain why the RTB are pretending they cant find the landlord. They have it wrong and its easier to just avoid the issue.

TheChizler

Graham wrote: »

Advice from the RTB on the subject:


Source: https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution-process-faqs

Hmm, maybe I'm thinking of the case where a property is sold with the tenant in situ?

Fol20

TheChizler wrote: »

Hmm, maybe I'm thinking of the case where a property is sold with the tenant in situ?

i have only dealt with the sale of a property with tenants in situ and try and avoid if possible. In my case the deposit was deducted from the sale price so i would then carry the deposit going forward. it was still marked at the original agreed price, however i paid x - deposit.

Graham

LotharIngum wrote: »

Pretty sure that when the bank take the property to sell it they have to pay off the liabilities. Its the bank you need to go after.

I've quoted directly from the RTB. As the RTB that are the first (and realistically/economically speaking only) arbiters of Deposit disputes, it's the RTBs interpretation that's of relevance to the OP.

Rosina1969

Where a Deposit has been paid to a Landlord ( prior to the appointment of a receiver) he/she remains obliged to refund the deposit (provided all rental payments have been made and the property is left in good condition).

This is what everyone has told me from Day 1. I received all the documents etc, from the property management company and the bank, it was all correct, and then I started paying rent to them. Before I did I queried the deposit with them, and they referred me to the landlord. Same advice from threshold and rtb.

happyfriday74

While the old landlord owes you the deposit and the bank/Receiver can honour it if they choose to.

While under no obligation to in most cases when a bank/ Receiver is put in control of a property they end up ponying up the deposit back to the tenant- very seldom the old landlord will do so.

Rosina1969

It's wicked that he gets to keep my money though isn't it. I feel so resentful towards him. All that money 1,5000 earned by hard work and paid directly to him after tax. So I would have had to earn quite a lot more to give that to him and he just gets to pocket it.

Rosina1969

happyfriday74 - bank and property company wont even discuss it with me. maybe I should write to them rather than phoning which doesn't seem to get me anywhere. trouble is I have to try and save another deposit now and have to be out of this place in less than 2 weeks.