Leaving property. No lease signed.

splashuum

A friend of mine has got himself in a small situation with a Landlord.
Renter is unsure of his rights.

Started renting a room in February. Never signed a lease. Therefore wasnt registered with RTB. (LL lives in property)
Gave notice that they were leaving in April.
(they had to leave house and job due to c-19 )
Renter had someone to replace them in the property but LL declined due to health concerns.
Landlord is now keeping a large amount of the deposit as only 15 days notice was given rather the normal 28.

In general, what are the tenants rights in this scenario? Is the standard 28 days notice even applicable?

Graham

Does the landlord live in the property?

splashuum

Graham wrote: »

Does the landlord live in the property?

yes

Graham

It sounds like your friend is a licensee rather than a tenant.

Licensees don't have the protection of the Residential Tenancies Act or the RTB.

Small claims court may be a low-cost option for your friend to pursue the return of the deposit.

splashuum

Thanks for info. Technically the 28 days rule doesn't hold any bearing here so?

Graham

None at all.

It's all down to what the two parties agreed/negotiate.

splashuum

Final Q. Is it possible to be be registered with the RTB without having signed a lease?

splashuum

splashuum wrote: »

Final Q. Is it possible to be be registered with the RTB without having signed a lease?

A written lease is not a legal requirement, but tenancies must be registered, so yes, you can register a tenancy without a written lease.

But bare in mind, licensee agreements are not registered with the RTB as they are not tenancies.

Graham

As a lease is not a legal requirement for a tenancy to exist, yes it is possible for a tenancy to be registered without a lease.

You wouldn't register a licensee with the RTB.

A tenant (not a licensee) has the protection of the RTB regardless of registration status.

Sarn

Tenancies are supposed to be registered with the RTB, however, that wouldn’t affect the ability of a tenant to use the RTB if a dispute arose. The RTB isn’t relevant in this case as it doesn’t cover licencees.

Fol20

splashuum wrote: »

A friend of mine has got himself in a small situation with a Landlord.
Renter is unsure of his rights.

Started renting a room in February. Never signed a lease. Therefore wasnt registered with RTB. (LL lives in property)
Gave notice that they were leaving in April.
(they had to leave house and job due to c-19 )
Renter had someone to replace them in the property but LL declined due to health concerns.
Landlord is now keeping a large amount of the deposit as only 15 days notice was given rather the normal 28.

In general, what are the tenants rights in this scenario? Is the standard 28 days notice even applicable?

If your friend pays monthly. Then he should give a months notice. The owner has valid concerns for health reasons so I think it is only reasonable that you would only get half your deposit back.

punisher5112

To be honest in normal circumstances until covid they had no rights and to be honest if he wants to leave then do so....

The rent a room is €14k tax free to the home owner and they can turf you or whoever out whenever they like.... With covid it is a grey area but would anyone want to be hanging around if there are major issues.


Did they give much of a deposit?

They should be given this back and I wouldn't be leaving without unless willing to take that hit.

It isn't a normal tenancy and the normal rules enforcement by rtb doesn't come into it as they don't get involved.

Fol20

punisher5112 wrote: »

To be honest in normal circumstances until covid they had no rights and to be honest if he wants to leave then do so....

The rent a room is €14k tax free to the home owner and they can turf you or whoever out whenever they like.... With covid it is a grey area but would anyone want to be hanging around if there are major issues.


Did they give much of a deposit?

They should be given this back and I wouldn't be leaving without unless willing to take that hit.

Why so?

The tenant didn’t provide adequate notice.

splashuum

Sarn wrote: »

Tenancies are supposed to be registered with the RTB, however, that wouldn’t affect the ability of a tenant to use the RTB if a dispute arose. The RTB isn’t relevant in this case as it doesn’t cover licencees.

Is it possible that the tenant could have been registered to RTB by the LL without the tenant knowing?

Edgware

splashuum wrote: »

Is it possible that the tenant could have been registered to RTB by the LL without the tenant knowing?

Dont see the point as it is not a tenancy.
If that was done the tenant should have got a confirmation letter from PRTB and the tenancy would be on the PRTB register (no personal details listed)

Graham

Fol20 wrote: »

Why so?

The tenant didn’t provide adequate notice.

It doesn't sound like he was a 'tenant'.

Without knowing what was agreed between the parties, there is no way of knowing whether the notice was 'adequate'.

There is no statutory provision for notice periods for a licensee.

punisher5112

Fol20 wrote: »

Why so?

The tenant didn’t provide adequate notice.

Swings and roundabouts....

The tenant is a licensee.... They aren't in a normal tenancy that would be say a house share or on their own but where the LL doesn't reside there....

They have no rights so no agreement was made anyway and even if it were the LL could still turf one out under normal circumstances.

splashuum

If the landlord resides in the property the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 is not applicable to anyone living in the property.

True?

Graham

I guess a landlord could offer a tenancy if he were ill-informed or wanted to come under the jurisdiction of the RTB.

Assetbacked

Fol20 wrote: »

Why so?

The tenant didn’t provide adequate notice.

What is adequate notice for a licencee?

Answer: there is no legal requirement to give any notice. Perhaps they contractually agreed to notice. If not then the deposit should likely be returned.

Caranica

splashuum wrote: »

If the landlord resides in the property the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 is not applicable to anyone living in the property.

True?

True. You have been told repeatedly that this is a license situation not a tenancy. No RTB registration, no protection under the RTA.

splashuum

Caranica wrote: »

True. You have been told repeatedly that this is a license situation not a tenancy. No RTB registration, no protection under the RTA.

"I guess a landlord could offer a tenancy if he were ill-informed or wanted to come under the jurisdiction of the RTB "

This confused me slightly. As it seems it may be possible.

Fol20

Assetbacked wrote: »

What is adequate notice for a licencee?

Answer: there is no legal requirement to give any notice. Perhaps they contractually agreed to notice. If not then the deposit should likely be returned.

In the real world. It’s normally the frequency rent is paid.ie weekly,fortnightly or monthly. In this case I would assume monthly and the fact the op says they gave 15 days notice instead of a month. Gl trying to fight this as I assume your talking about disputing maybe a few hundred euro especially when he probably knows himself he didn’t give enough notice.

Graham

Not difficult/expensive to fight. €25, small claims court.

Caranica

splashuum wrote: »

"I guess a landlord could offer a tenancy if he were ill-informed or wanted to come under the jurisdiction of the RTB "

This confused me slightly. As it seems it may be possible.

The word "guess" was the clue. This is a license not a tenancy.

Fol20

Graham wrote: »

Not difficult/expensive to fight. €25, small claims court.

Sorry, i meant the OP might potentially loose a few hundred if they are expecting the full deposit back vs half a deposit. If its only a few hundred especially when he didnt give a lot of notice, i would chalk it up as its not worth the hassle.

ted1

splashuum wrote: »

A friend of mine has got himself in a small situation with a Landlord.
Renter is unsure of his rights.

Started renting a room in February. Never signed a lease. Therefore wasnt registered with RTB. (LL lives in property)

He is a Liencee and these aren’t registered with PRTB. He has no protection and can be asked to leave on the spot. Likewise he can leave whenever he wants

ted1

splashuum wrote: »

Final Q. Is it possible to be be registered with the RTB without having signed a lease?

Yes.

Caranica

ted1 wrote: »

Yes.

If it was a tenancy.

ted1

Caranica wrote: »

If it was a tenancy.

That wasn’t part of the question..

Caranica

ted1 wrote: »

That wasn’t part of the question..

But if you read the OP's posts you'll see the question was asked in the hope that their friend was a tenant. They're clearly a licensee. RTB and RTA are irrelevant to them.

endacl

splashuum wrote: »

"I guess a landlord could offer a tenancy if he were ill-informed or wanted to come under the jurisdiction of the RTB "

This confused me slightly. As it seems it may be possible.

Could offer a flight to the moon on the back of a purple chicken if he liked.

RTB wouldn’t apply to that either. Because a flight to the moon on the back of a purple chicken isn’t a tenancy.

No. It’s not possible.

I know of someone in a similar situation except the LL does not live in the property.

Does giving only two weeks notice automatically allow the LL to retain half of the deposit (2 weeks rent for the following month) even though the tenant had paid for the month and left at the end of the month?
They paid monthly with no signed lease

TheChizler

cisk wrote: »

I know of someone in a similar situation except the LL does not live in the property.

That makes it a completely different situation though.

It depends on if there was a lease and how much time remaining in it, and how long they've been there. Plus the landlord has to make an effort to replace them and if they do they can only keep the equivalent amount that the place was unoccupied for.

Bikerman2019

splashuum wrote: »

A friend of mine has got himself in a small situation with a Landlord.
Renter is unsure of his rights.

Started renting a room in February. Never signed a lease. Therefore wasnt registered with RTB. (LL lives in property)
Gave notice that they were leaving in April.
(they had to leave house and job due to c-19 )
Renter had someone to replace them in the property but LL declined due to health concerns.
Landlord is now keeping a large amount of the deposit as only 15 days notice was given rather the normal 28.

In general, what are the tenants rights in this scenario? Is the standard 28 days notice even applicable?

If they rented a room in a house with the landlord living there, there is nothing to register with the RTB.
If it is under the rent a room scheme, there is no lease.
If it the agreement is a months notice and tenant doesnt give it, he should lose his deposit unless landlord agrees.
If the landlord is renting a bedroom out in his house, where he lives, your friend has no fecking right to demand a replacement tenant the landlord doesnt want, to take it over. If I rented my spare room out to johnny, and johnny agreed to give a months notice, I would not accept two weeks notice and give a refund just because johnny says mary will move in.


That is not johnnys decision.

TheChizler

TheChizler wrote: »

That makes it a completely different situation though.

It depends on if there was a lease and how much time remaining in it, and how long they've been there. Plus the landlord has to make an effort to replace them and if they do they can only keep the equivalent amount that the place was unoccupied for.

Thanks, the person was there just over a year and rented a room. There are 4 people in total and rent is paid to a tenant who pays the landlord so it seems to be rented as a house and an informal arrangement between the tenants.

Because of C19 the other tenants did not want a replacement in for a few months but are still enforcing a 28 day notice period. As the tenant who left was blocked from getting a replacement a strict enforcement of a 28 day notice seems unfair. And to note it seems the landlord has not registered with the RTB.

dennyk

cisk wrote: »

Thanks, the person was there just over a year and rented a room. There are 4 people in total and rent is paid to a tenant who pays the landlord so it seems to be rented as a house and an informal arrangement between the tenants.

If the person was paying their rent to another tenant instead of the landlord, then that person was a licensee of that other tenant, not a tenant themselves. They could have requested to become a full tenant and that request could not have been unreasonably refused by the landlord, but if they made no such request before leaving, then they were still a licensee when they left and most of the provisions in the RTA don't apply to them, including the tenant notice periods.

However, that also means the RTB will not intervene in their dispute with their licensor; they would need to pursue the matter in small claims court if they feel their deposit was wrongfully withheld. Whether it was wrongful will depend on the terms of their agreement with their licensor; if there was no written agreement providing a required notice period for the licensee, then the licensor might find it difficult to defend their withholding of the deposit.

The OP's friend is in a similar situation; as they were living in the landlord's residence, they are a licensee and will need to pursue the landlord for the deposit in small claims court. Again, statutory notice periods do not apply to licensees (the only requirement is that a licensee must be given "reasonable notice" by the licensor when the licensor terminates the agreement) , so without a written license agreement stipulating a specific notice period, the licensor might end up losing a small claims case.

TheChizler

dennyk wrote: »

If the person was paying their rent to another tenant instead of the landlord, then that person was a licensee of that other tenant, not a tenant themselves.

Not necessarily. I've lived in houseshares where everyone was named on the lease but only one person paid the landlord for convenience. It's very common.

TheChizler

cisk wrote: »

Thanks, the person was there just over a year and rented a room. There are 4 people in total and rent is paid to a tenant who pays the landlord so it seems to be rented as a house and an informal arrangement between the tenants.

Because of C19 the other tenants did not want a replacement in for a few months but are still enforcing a 28 day notice period. As the tenant who left was blocked from getting a replacement a strict enforcement of a 28 day notice seems unfair. And to note it seems the landlord has not registered with the RTB.

Depends on if they were renting from the landlord and just paying through the other person or they were subletting from one of the tenants. Who did they arrange moving in with? Are they named on a lease? What was agreed when they moved in?

Landlord not being registered won't have any effect, they're still protected if they're tenants.

Thanks folks, yeah it seems like it’s just the convenience factor of one tenant paying the landlord. The original tenants have moved on at different times. They simply got a replacement for their room each time so now it’s a whole new group of people in the house.

The landlord seems happy once they get paid and never made an effort to formalise the arrangement.

splashuum

Said landlord sent a blank unsigned res tenancy act 2004 lease via email to my friend prior to the let. LL claiming this along with a “verbal agreement” should suffice for the a notice period. Would that hold any ground in small claims?

Graham

I don't imagine it would.

I'd just start the small claims process at this point.

splashuum

splashuum wrote: »

Said landlord sent a blank unsigned res tenancy act 2004 lease via email to my friend prior to the let. LL claiming this along with a “verbal agreement” should suffice for the a notice period. Would that hold any ground in small claims?

Contracts can be both verbal and/or written. If your friend verbally agreed to a notice period at the start of the rental, then he/she entered a contract which included a agreed notice period. The problem is proving it, that is why a written rental agreement is advantageous. If the LL sent an email with a notice period on it, again this is proof that a notice period was a condition which your friend agreed to.

This is new information that wasn’t in your op. While the reference to the 2004 Act is confusing as the tenancy regs do not apply, it may state a notice period which your friend accepted before taking the room.

Graham

Dav010 wrote: »

If the LL sent an email with a notice period on it, again this is proof that a notice period was a condition which your friend agreed to.

In that case I'm about to send you an email saying you agreed to give me one million dollars.

Graham

Graham wrote: »

In that case I'm about to send you an email saying you agreed to give me one million dollars.

And I’d agree if you let me rent your Caribbean Island.

If the property owner verbally agreed and sent an email about notice period before the ops friend moved in, it’s hard to claim he/she didn’t know. Presumably the friend either gave the owner his/her email address or it was a reply to an application to the room.

Claw Hammer

Dav010 wrote: »

Contracts can be both verbal and/or written. If your friend verbally agreed to a notice period at the start of the rental, then he/she entered a contract which included a agreed notice period. The problem is proving it, that is why a written rental agreement is advantageous. If the LL sent an email with a notice period on it, again this is proof that a notice period was a condition which your friend agreed to.

This is new information that wasn’t in your op. While the reference to the 2004 Act is confusing as the tenancy regs do not apply, it may state a notice period which your friend accepted before taking the room.

A notice can't be incorporated in the lease. That is a statutory provision and any such purported agreement would be of no effect, even if it could be proved.

Graham

The landlord appears to be voluntarily putting himself under the jurisdiction of the RTB.

I think that's probably good news for the OPs friend.

OP, looks like your friend can register a dispute via the RTB.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

A notice can't be incorporated in the lease. That is a statutory provision and any such purported agreement would be of no effect, even if it could be proved.

That is interesting. Citizens Information appears to disagree with you.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/sharing_accommodation_with_your_landlord.html


An written agreement to rent a room in your landlord’s home should set out notice period.

dennyk

As the OP's friend lives with their landlord, they are a licensee, so there's no statutory notice period applicable. The notice period would be whatever the friend agreed to when entering into the license agreement. If it was specified in the agreement the landlord sent to him via email and he verbally agreed to it, then legally he'd be bound to the agreed notice period, but without a signed agreement it might be harder for the landlord to prove that he actually agreed to the terms in question. It's the OP's friend who will have to bring the matter to court to get his deposit back, however, since the RTB will not mediate deposit disputes for license agreements. It'll come down to a he-said he-said situation, which could really go either way.

Claw Hammer

Dav010 wrote: »

That is interesting. Citizens Information appears to disagree with you.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/sharing_accommodation_with_your_landlord.html


An written agreement to rent a room in your landlord’s home should set out notice period.

That is Citizens Advice commenting on their own fictitious contract.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

That is Citizens Advice commenting on their own fictitious contract.

As opposed to your learned opinion?

What prohibits a notice period in a rental lease?