Leaving property. No lease signed.

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.

Dav010

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.

Dav010

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.

Dav010

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.

Dav010

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?

Aye Bosun

In the absence of a written license agreement, reasonable notice period would be regarded the same as the rental period, you pay weekly - 1 weeks notice, monthly -1months notice. The only recourse the licensee has against the owner occupier is through the small claims courts. The RTB will not go near a owner occupier/licensee dispute.

Aye Bosun

In the absence of a written license agreement, reasonable notice period would be regarded the same as the rental period, you pay weekly - 1 weeks notice, monthly -1months notice. The only recourse the licensee has against the owner occupier is through the small claims courts. The RTB will not go near a owner occupier/licensee dispute.

Graham

Thread is not about evictions.

Claw Hammer

Dav010 wrote: »

As opposed to your learned opinion?

What prohibits a notice period in a rental lease?

Section 69 of the Residential tenancies Act. You should try reading it sometime instead of relying on Citizens Advice.

Dav010

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Section 69 of the Residential tenancies Act. You should try reading it sometime instead of relying on Citizens Advice.

The Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to a rental where the renter lives with the owner.

Section 69 of the RTA is an exception to requirements of Section 66 to 68, these sections refer to Statutory minimum notice periods and where Landlord/tenant are in default. Section 69 allows for a lessor notice period than statutory minimum to be agreed but that agreement to a lesser notice period cannot be a term of the lease.

Section 69 does not however prohibit a notice period from being incorporated in a lease, it prohibits a lessor than statutory minimum notice being included in it. But that is moot in the ops case, as the RTA does not apply.

TheBoyConor

punisher5112 wrote: »

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.

That is nonsense. The "tenant" is not a licencee, he is not even a tenant.

He is a licencee and a licencee only.

Anything to do with tenants, the Residential Tenancies Acts and the Residential Tenancies Board is totally irrelevant to this scenario. It simply does not apply in the case of a licencee renting a room from an owner occupier.

Offer to split the difference and get back 3 weeks rent. That is the best you can do.

Going to the small claims court is a waste of time because you did not have a written licence agreement stating the terms. So there is nothing there to go on only he said she said. there is no place in the courts for that.

Originally Posted by Dav010
That is interesting. Citizens Information appears to disagree with you.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/e..._landlord.html

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

Yeah but that is only a "should" and is just advisory and of course it would make good common sense to do it. However, there is no legal obligation to do so.

Small claims court is going to cost €25 anyway and I cannot imagine 2 weeks room rent is going to amount too such an amount that would justify going to court and wasting a day or two over.
Just ask him to meet you in the middle, give 3 weeks and both get on yer way.

No further talk of RTB, RTA or tenancies. None of them apply. This is a licencee arrangement.

TheBoyConor

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?

If the landlord sent an RTA type lease to his licencee then it seems that the landlord is equally as clueless about the whole thing as the OPs friend.

Dav010

TheBoyConor wrote: »

Yeah but that is only a "should" and is just advisory and of course it would make good common sense to do it. However, there is no legal obligation to do so. .

Absolutely agree, my post and that link was only in response to a nonsense post that said a notice period could not be incorporated into a lease.

Claw Hammer

Dav010 wrote: »

The Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to a rental where the renter lives with the owner.

Section 69 of the RTA is an exception to requirements of Section 66 to 68, these sections refer to Statutory minimum notice periods and where Landlord/tenant are in default. Section 69 allows for a lessor notice period than statutory minimum to be agreed but that agreement to a lesser notice period cannot be a term of the lease.

Section 69 does not however prohibit a notice period from being incorporated in a lease, it prohibits a lessor than statutory minimum notice being included in it. But that is moot in the ops case, as the RTA does not apply.

You were asking about a rental lease, not a licence. If you look at the other sections of the act you would notice that the parties cannot contract out of the provisions relating to termination so a landlord cannot claim to rely on the termination date in the lease.
As you have shifted ground to owner occupiers, the reality is that no owner occupier will give a fixed term but they may impose a minimum notice period on a licencee. Citizens Advice is talking rot about agreeing a term. An owner occupier will give month to month but will always reserve the right to terminate in any event.

Dav010

Claw Hammer wrote: »

You were asking about a rental lease, not a licence. If you look at the other sections of the act you would notice that the parties cannot contract out of the provisions relating to termination so a landlord cannot claim to rely on the termination date in the lease.
As you have shifted ground to owner occupiers, the reality is that no owner occupier will give a fixed term but they may impose a minimum notice period on a licencee. Citizens Advice is talking rot about agreeing a term. An owner occupier will give month to month but will always reserve the right to terminate in any event.

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.

Actually if you look back at my post you quoted when saying that a notice period can’t be incorporated in a lease, I make no mention of a lease, only a rental agreement. Your statement is inherently wrong as it applies to both a lease, and a licence anyway, notice periods can be included in both.

There is no need to read the RTA, it doesn’t apply here. And, your interpretation of section 69 and how it relates to this thread is wrong, Section 69 refers to lesser notice periods agreed by both LL and tenants and how this cannot be a term in the contract. Ironically, the notice period the ops landlord is insisting on, 28 days, would be the correct statutory notice period for a tenancy of less than 6 months, if it applied. So section 69 would not come into this even if it was a tenancy.

The CA link I posted gives advice on both the rights of those sharing a room with a property owner, and what should be agreed before you move in, including notice period. Had you read that link, instead of telling me I should spend more time reading the RTA, you would have seen that the RTA does not apply to rentals where the renter lives with the owner.

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Section 69 of the Residential tenancies Act. You should try reading it sometime instead of relying on Citizens Advice.

Let’s just leave it at that about notice periods in leases, I see on another thread the op has applied to the SCC, so they can decide on the deposit.