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

Can I kick her out?

Options
1234568»

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,009 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Ballso wrote: »
    A court order for what? Smoking?

    If people want to protect the sanctity of their homes, maybe don't rent out rooms in them for profit? Greedy little piglets

    I think that one sailed over your head. I guess Time was pointing to the absurdity of some of the posts.

    At the risk of pointing out a couple of further truths, all rentals are done so with the aim of making profit, and if their weren’t “greedy little piglets”, where would renters live?


  • Options
    #213
    B.A._Baracus
    Registered Users Posts: 11,171 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    Is she paying rent or contributing bills?
    Is there any documented proof she lives there?
    Does she have a contract?

    Good question.
    Op, is she paying rent? you say digs but also state you are helping her out.

    I really hope she is paying you rent if she is annoying you.


  • Options
    #214
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Ballso wrote: »
    If people want to protect the sanctity of their homes, maybe don't rent out rooms in them for profit? Greedy little piglets


    Fantastic, let's force even more people into renting one bed apartments at €1500 a month.


  • Options
    #215
    finbar10
    Registered Users Posts: 97 ✭✭finbar10


    Here's an Indo article on the topic from a few weeks back:
    https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/coronavirus-crisis-rent-a-room-tenants-are-being-made-homeless-in-a-pandemic-39090017.html

    While it sounds like some issues are legally a bit unclear, for the most part licencees have few rights.


  • Options
    #216
    1874
    Registered Users Posts: 2,382 ✭✭✭1874


    finbar10 wrote: »
    Here's an Indo article on the topic from a few weeks back:
    https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/coronavirus-crisis-rent-a-room-tenants-are-being-made-homeless-in-a-pandemic-39090017.html

    While it sounds like some issues are legally a bit unclear, for the most part licencees have few rights.


    Fairly typical of the Indo, so many things wrong with that article, do we even know if that person is legit?
    They state the person claims, They live with their boyfriend? who is not in Ireland at the moment, it isnt clear, but it seems the first batch of quoted statements are from the same person.
    Either way, typically rent a room (which is a legitimate scheme), is for single occupancy, one portion claims the person is pregnant, there is no obligation for an owner or family to accommodate (meaning entertain) that situation.
    People who live with the owner, that owner is NOT a landlord, mentioned and repeated many times.



    The section where "The Landlord" allowed someone to return due to the legislation, again not a landlord, never applied to them and they were under no obligation to, if that person went on a trip abroad when the Pandemic was well known at that point, then imo he likely knew this was going to happen, I (anyone can) can speculate just as much as the indo


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    Steer55
    Closed Accounts Posts: 226 ✭✭Steer55


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Fantastic, let's force even more people into renting one bed apartments at €1500 a month.

    The Rent a Room Scheme is relatively new phenomenon, it can be fraught with difficulty as OP has pointed out. I would hate having a stranger in my home and would never consider it.

    If a person can't afford a one bedroom apt, Sharing a house with other tennents was always the norm where set rules, expectations and leases are sorted out beforehand.


  • Options
    #218
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    finbar10 wrote: »
    Here's an Indo article on the topic from a few weeks back:
    https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/coronavirus-crisis-rent-a-room-tenants-are-being-made-homeless-in-a-pandemic-39090017.html

    While it sounds like some issues are legally a bit unclear, for the most part licencees have few rights.
    For the most part, licensees have no rights.

    Also, I'm reading these bits;
    The young doctor, who has been working on the frontline during the coronavirus chaos, said she had to take annual leave from work to try and sort alternative accommodation.
    “I’m pregnant, immunocompromised and essentially being made homeless during a pandemic.
    So the chances of her bringing the virus home with her seems to be higher than normal?


  • Options
    #219
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    B.A._Baracus wrote: »
    Good question.
    Op, is she paying rent? you say digs but also state you are helping her out.

    I really hope she is paying you rent if she is annoying you.

    There are actually saps who let pretty girls sleep on couches/have a box room indefinitely in the hope there might be a chance of a relationship. That crap runs out in the late 20's when girls stop being cute and guy move on to a real relationship. They are a breed made for another breed, they find each other.

    If she is not paying and she has no contract let her go home to her parents.


  • Options
    #220
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,407 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    the_syco wrote: »
    For the most part, licensees have no rights.

    Also, I'm reading these bits;


    So the chances of her bringing the virus home with her seems to be higher than normal?

    That doesn't necessarily mean she has a higher chance of getting infected, could either affect severity or length of illness, or all.


  • Options
    #221
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,009 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    This thread is becoming a parody, now we are on to a discussion about licensees more likely to be infected.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    Time wrote: »
    The key there is that "it is understood", unfortunately the text of the legislation doesn't agree. Maybe it's the spirit of the law, but it's not the actual law.

    As I said the context of and the wording of the act would be taken into account by a judge if it came to it.


  • Options
    #223
    Time
    Registered Users Posts: 993 ✭✭✭Time


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    As I said the context of and the wording of the act would be taken into account by a judge if it came to it.

    I hate to break it to you, but judges can't interpret clear language like "all tenancies" to include something that is not a tenancy. The Oireachtas has sole power to legislate, the judiciary is bound to work on the presumption that the Oireachtas meant the words used in the law, there are some exceptions to this under s.5 of the interpretation act which you're free to go look at, but this is not one of them. If the wording was "all rentals" that might be ambiguous enough.

    Can you give me a single case from when the act was commenced in 2006 that would indicate that is not what would happen?


  • Options
    #224
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Time wrote: »
    I hate to break it to you, but judges can't interpret clear language like "all tenancies" to include something that is not a tenancy. The Oireachtas has sole power to legislate, the judiciary is bound to work on the presumption that the Oireachtas meant the words used in the law, there are some exceptions to this under s.5 of the interpretation act which you're free to go look at, but this is not one of them. If the wording was "all rentals" that might be ambiguous enough.

    Can you give me a single case from when the act was commenced in 2006 that would indicate that is not what would happen?

    This isn't 2006, it's 2020 and we're in the middle of a lockdown because of a global pandemic....... "usual" rules no longer apply.


  • Options
    #225
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,009 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    This isn't 2006, it's 2020 and we're in the middle of a lockdown because of a global pandemic....... "usual" rules no longer apply.

    But you can’t make rules up to suit your opinion. All anyone can do is read the legislation and follow it. Tenancies are effected by the legislation.


  • Options
    #226
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    This isn't 2006, it's 2020 and we're in the middle of a lockdown because of a global pandemic....... "usual" rules no longer apply.

    They've suspended the rule of law and the entire legal system?


  • Options
    #227
    Time
    Registered Users Posts: 993 ✭✭✭Time


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    This isn't 2006, it's 2020 and we're in the middle of a lockdown because of a global pandemic....... "usual" rules no longer apply.

    The constitution always applies


  • Options
    #228
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,160 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Dav010 wrote: »
    But you can’t make rules up to suit your opinion. All anyone can do is read the legislation and follow it. Tenancies are effected by the legislation.

    I don't want to be a spelling/grammar Nazi, but this is one of those rare examples of the spelling mistake giving the sentence the opposite meaning to the one intended.


  • Options
    #229
    dubrov
    Registered Users Posts: 3,549 ✭✭✭dubrov


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    I don't want to be a spelling/grammar Nazi, but this is one of those rare examples of the spelling mistake giving the sentence the opposite meaning to the one intended.

    I'm going to have to call grammar Nazi on this one.
    The intention is clear irrespective of the spelling.


  • Options
    #230
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,160 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    dubrov wrote: »
    I'm going to have to call grammar Nazi on this one.
    The intention is clear irrespective of the spelling.

    My point is it means the exact opposite of what is intended, which is ironic, given the topic involved.


  • Options
    #231
    dubrov
    Registered Users Posts: 3,549 ✭✭✭dubrov


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    My point is it means the exact opposite of what is intended, which is ironic, given the topic involved.

    I am going to have to call out your incorrect use of the term "exact opposite" which is ironic given the point you were trying to make :D.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,009 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    My point is it means the exact opposite of what is intended, which is ironic, given the topic involved.

    Which part are you saying means the opposite of what was intended? Just to put this to rest?


  • Options
    #233
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,160 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Which part are you saying means the opposite of what was intended? Just to put this to rest?

    Tenancies are effected by the legislation.


  • Options
    #234
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,009 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    Tenancies are effected by the legislation.

    Yes Claw Hammer, tenancies are effected by the legislation, they cannot be ended during the emergency period. But it is being debated whether licensee agreements are effected by it. And as the subject of this thread lives with the owner, she is not a tenant as defined by the RTA or the 2019 amendment.


  • Options
    #235
    Grolschevik
    Registered Users Posts: 3,472 ✭✭✭Grolschevik


    This is funny in the context of a thread that hinges so much on the correct interpretation of language...


  • Options
    #236
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,160 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Yes Claw Hammer, tenancies are effected by the legislation, they cannot be ended during the emergency period. But it is being debated whether licensee agreements are effected by it. And as the subject of this thread lives with the owner, she is not a tenant as defined by the RTA or the 2019 amendment.

    You still haven't seen the spelling mistake or are not aware of it. No tenancies were effected by the legislation. To effect means to create something which was not there before, which did not happen. Had it happened the newly effected tenancies would have acquired rights which did not happen and means the exact opposite of your proposition.


  • Options
    #237
    tina1040
    Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭tina1040


    This has been going on for a week! Has the girl been sent home yet?


  • Options
    #238
    ARCADEMANIAC
    Registered Users Posts: 7 ✭ARCADEMANIAC


    get her out of there if she's giving you grief now imagine another 2 months of this

    Ive rented out property before and was sorry for it but I wasn't living with them

    you need to put yourselves first with everything that's going on I think its fair for you to have your own space with your own family


Advertisement