Landlord in Cork in trouble for tenants house parties.

Pauliedragon

A Landlord in Cork is being held accountable for late night parties in his properties and I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on this. First up I'm not a tenant or a landlord so have no vested interest either way I just don't know what to think. Is it fair that someone who might live hours away be responible for a few idiots who seemed fine originally or is it a case of you own the property it's your responsibility? I can't make up my mind.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-40017473.html

KevRossi

He's been aware for months about what is going on and has done little or nothing to stop it.

Gardai, University and Council have done very little as well. It's absurd that it can go on for this length of time with nothing more than a 'fcuk you' to the neighbours and residents.

redarmyblues

KevRossi wrote: »

He's been aware for months about what is going on and has done little or nothing to stop it.

Gardai, University and Council have done very little as well. It's absurd that it can go on for this length of time with nothing more than a 'fcuk you' to the neighbours and residents.

What should be done?

Limpy

The UL in Limerick engaged with residents from the nearby houses before to set up a system where student's could be reported. 1th offence a warning and fine, second offence was a dismissal.

CoffeeBean2

I don't quite understand this case. First off, if you read the different stories you would see that the LL is in his 80's and the delay with him dealing with the problem tenants may have something to do with him cocooning during the pandemic.

He has also faced issues in the past with it taking over 18 months to have a non-paying drug dealer removed from one of his properties, so he would be well aware of how difficult it is to remove someone from a property.

Other than asking the tenants to cop on and keep the noise down, is there anything else that he could legally do when evictions are currently banned?

Surely the people that are making the noise in the first place should be targeted rather than a man in his 80's that is not allowed to evict the offending tenants?

Don't get me wrong, the noise / parties are wrong, but the people throwing the parties should be in court not the LL.

Pauliedragon

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

I don't quite understand this case. First off, if you read the different stories you would see that the LL is in his 80's and the delay with him dealing with the problem tenants may have something to do with him cocooning during the pandemic.

He has also faced issues in the past with it taking over 18 months to have a non-paying drug dealer removed from one of his properties, so he would be well aware of how difficult it is to remove someone from a property.

Other than asking the tenants to cop on and keep the noise down, is there anything else that he could legally do when evictions are currently banned?

Surely the people that are making the noise in the first place should be targeted rather than a man in his 80's that is not allowed to evict the offending tenants?

Don't get me wrong, the noise / parties are wrong, but the people throwing the parties should be in court not the LL.

That's the same thing that got me thinking. If my renter neighbour is a dealer should the landlord be held responsible? The landlord in this case has put cctv at the house so should my landlord be able to sit at home and see who is entering and leaving the house I'm renting? What's the gdpr rules with that etc. Let's say I'm renting with my wife and my mistress is seen by the landlord on cctv popping over for an afternoon session and he decides to blackmail me. What's the rules there?

Stepping Stone

He lives five minutes away and owns multiple houses. It’s been going on for years. He could have done something about it after the first year but he choose to ignore it. He’s obviously one of those landlords who have terrible properties, attract terrible tenants but just don’t care. He’s obviously a wealthy man, so he could pay someone to manage it all for him or if he’s not able, just sell up.

Can’t say that I have any sympathy for him.

Icantthinkof1

I found it strange as well that the landlord was taken to Court and not the tenants?
Perhaps it was that he turned a blind eye to it and should have issued them with warnings/ start the eviction process and failed to do that allowing it to go on longer then it should?
I feel so sorry for the residents there constantly having to deal with college eejits hopefully the pup payments will stop for them and with college possibly taking place online they might feck off home and torment their parents instead

SusieBlue

I live extremely close to this area and while I fully sympathise with the fact that it’s unfair on the locals, they are in such a serious minority I can’t understand why any of them even want to live there in the first place any more.

The college road area is all but part of the UCC campus apart from in name. Student houses outnumber local residents at a rate of about 20/1.

And while I’m obviously not suggesting that locals be forced to move, I don’t know what they expect to change.
It is the residential area for the university campus and even if they get this one house under control, what’s to say that another problem house won’t pop up next year?

I was listening to a local man complaining on the radio last week who said he bought his house on college road 20 years ago and now his kids can’t even play outside because of the students - why on earth would you buy a house on college road and expect it to be a good place to bring up a family?
There were problems with noise and parties 20 years ago and there’s still problems now, this isn’t a new phenomenon. There is no peace and quiet in the general area.

Where my parents live (extremely close by), out of 15 houses there are 2 with students in them. They are a decent gang and they don’t give any trouble.
But my dad said years ago that it ever got to the point where they are severely outnumbered by rental properties, and couldn’t get any peace, they would probably cut their losses move.
He knows it’s a likely possibility and while he loves his house, he values his peace and quiet more and being surrounded by youngsters would be a nightmare for him.
Their house is valued at a very decent price because of its proximity to the college so it would work to their advantage.

And again, no one should have to sell up their family home and move because of troublesome neighbours. But living in a college campus area surrounded by students would be my idea of hell, whether they had parties or not. The campus isn’t going to get any smaller, if anything it’s only going to expand further. Any time building student specific accommodation is proposed, it gets objected all round.
Something has to give here.

Atlantic Dawn

Why are the media not camped outside the houses in question trying to record the comings and goings or else interviewing those living there?

DubCount

The residents should not have to put up with the noise problem. I dont buy the "students will be students" view. Everyone should be expected to respect their neighbours - even students.

I do have to sympathise with the LL. He is now the subject of a court order to take "steps" to deal with the problem. What steps can he safely take? He cant evict with the current eviction ban - an even without it he risks the pro-tenant RTB siding with the tenants, or the tenants simply overholding. I just dont understand why the learned judge can issue an order to the tenants - they are the ones causing the noise after all.

Yet another advert for not becoming a LL in Ireland.

mrslancaster

Feel sorry for the neighbours who have to put up noisy late night parties but I regularly read on this forum how it takes months to remove tenants for non payment of rent or anti social behaviour.

What does that landlord do if he issues a notice to quit at the moment & the parties or noisy behaviour continues?

The RTB website says the process takes at least 16 weeks? Will he end up back in court?

Crimsonred

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

I don't quite understand this case. First off, if you read the different stories you would see that the LL is in his 80's and the delay with him dealing with the problem tenants may have something to do with him cocooning during the pandemic.

He has also faced issues in the past with it taking over 18 months to have a non-paying drug dealer removed from one of his properties, so he would be well aware of how difficult it is to remove someone from a property.

Other than asking the tenants to cop on and keep the noise down, is there anything else that he could legally do when evictions are currently banned?

Surely the people that are making the noise in the first place should be targeted rather than a man in his 80's that is not allowed to evict the offending tenants?

Don't get me wrong, the noise / parties are wrong, but the people throwing the parties should be in court not the LL.

The tenants moved in during the month of May, which is when the trouble started, his cocooning didn't prevent him from moving tenants into his properties during that time.

There is a process for reporting UCC students during college year for engaging in anti-social behaviour btw.

The guards are ineffective at dealing with noisy students, it is the landlord's responsibility to keep them under control.

The fact that he is 80 is irrelevant.

y0ssar1an22

mrslancaster wrote: »

Feel sorry for the neighbours who have to put up noisy late night parties but I regularly read on this forum how it takes months to remove tenants for non payment of rent or anti social behaviour.

What does that landlord do if he issues a notice to quit at the moment & the parties or noisy behaviour continues?

The RTB website says the process takes at least 16 weeks? Will he end up back in court?

worse. he cant even evict them. bizarre case. blame the landlord who can do **** all to resolve this.

here's an idea: give him the power to evict problem tenants, problem solved!

mrslancaster

Crimsonred wrote: »

......The guards are ineffective at dealing with noisy students, it is the landlord's responsibility to keep them under control.

The fact that he is 80 is irrelevant.

But seriously, how does he do that?
One way is obviously to remove them but issuing a notice for breach of tenancy agreement during covid goes through RTB & can take 16 weeks.

So if the students continue with the parties & noise, what would you say he should do to sort the problem in the meantime? He can't just call around without agreement of the tenants. Any suggestion?

tjhook

If the tenants had stopped paying rent, there's feck all the landlord could have done about it in the current environment. What can he do about them making too much noise?

I have every sympathy for the neighbours, and agree that "something has to be done". I just don't see what power the landlord has to do anything.

The court seems to have said he has to "take steps" without giving him the power to do so. Why are the students considered to be uninvolved bystanders in all this? I wonder if a similar approach would be taken by the courts towards the council if a council tenant is causing trouble?

Crimsonred

mrslancaster wrote: »

But seriously, how does he do that?
One way is obviously to remove them but issuing a notice for breach of tenancy agreement during covid goes through RTB & can take 16 weeks.

So if the students continue with the parties & noise, what would you say he should do to sort the problem in the meantime? He can't just call around without agreement of the tenants. Any suggestion?

I suspect that these short term summer lets are informal and that they wouldn't have been registered with the RTB, these students would have only been in place until the end of August anyway in a normal year.

The two "party houses" have been named in the Irish Times :

They alleged Mr O’Reilly was “the person responsible for the following noise, namely loud music, persistent shouting and rowdy and aggressive behaviour during the day, into the night and the early hours of the morning” at 11 Highfield Avenue, College Road and 4 Dunedin, Connaught Avenue.

I don't see either on the RTB register, unless I am missing something.

redarmyblues

redarmyblues wrote: »

What should be done?

Heads cracked. Whatever it takes to stop them.

And not the landlords, but the people responsible.

housetypeb

Crimsonred wrote: »

...
The guards are ineffective at dealing with noisy students, it is the landlord's responsibility to keep them under control...

How is it the landlords,or even the guards, responsibility to tell adults how to behave in their own home?
If they're breaking any laws,why go after the landlord and not them?

Crimsonred

housetypeb wrote: »

How is it the landlords,or even the guards, responsibility to tell adults how to behave in their own home?
If they're breaking any laws,why go after the landlord and not them?

The adults in question are students aged between 18-22, they took these houses for the summer to party because they were denied the chance to head abroad this year, they are under the impression that they can't be evicted because of the covid regulations but it would appear that they now can be.

The guards cannot force tenants to keep the noise down, they will tell you that it's a civil matter although they do call to party houses to ask for the noise to be turned down.

So, if the tenants are immature brats and the guards are ineffective, who else but the landlord, who owns and benefits from the property, can be held responsible?

A landlord owes to each person who could be affected (for example by antisocial behaviour) a duty to enforce the responsibilities of the tenant(s) in the tenancy. In cases where a landlord fails to enforce a tenant’s responsibilites, a person directly and adversely affected may take a case against the landlord through the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB).

https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/third-party-dispute-resolution-services

beauf

Crimsonred wrote: »

....The guards cannot force tenants to keep the noise down, they will tell you that it's a civil matter although they do call to party houses to ask for the noise to be turned down.

So, if the tenants are immature brats and the guards are ineffective, who else but the landlord, who owns and benefits from the property, can be held responsible?
....

When did the LL get more authority than a Garda, or Local Authority?

So if neighbours complain about a tenant being antisocial then the LL can evict them. But you have to follow the RTB procedure...

https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/third-party-dispute-resolution-services

Please note that an Adjudicator or a Tribunal hearing the matter have no power to direct the removal of the tenants from the property in question unless a valid Notice of Termination has expired.

So did the neighbours not follow this process?

Crimsonred

beauf wrote: »

When did the LL get more authority than a Garda, or Local Authority?

So if neighbours complain about a tenant being antisocial then the LL can evict them. But you have to follow the RTB procedure...

https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/third-party-dispute-resolution-services



So did the neighbours not follow this process?

See my previous regarding the two houses named as not being registered with the RTB.

Also, the residents took legal advice and obviously felt they had a case which is why they went to the courts, the surprise is that it was heard so quickly.

The RTB third party complaint process is an alternative alright and maybe they are pursuing that course of action aswell.

As for the guards. they are ineffective in dealing with noise complaints, if they weren't then this matter would never have gone before the courts.

housetypeb

Crimsonred wrote: »

The adults in question are students aged between 18-22, they took these houses for the summer to party because they were denied the chance to head abroad this year, they are under the impression that they can't be evicted because of the covid regulations but it would appear that they now can be.

The guards cannot force tenants to keep the noise down, they will tell you that it's a civil matter although they do call to party houses to ask for the noise to be turned down.

So, if the tenants are immature brats and the guards are ineffective, who else but the landlord, who owns and benefits from the property, can be held responsible?



https://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/third-party-dispute-resolution-services

So the law doesn't actually allow Guards to deal with the problem,therefore it's the landlords problem?
The law is very clear that it's considered the tenants home, landlords are not there to stand watch and police others people's behaviour in their own homes.
It's making landlords responsible for the lack of clear laws and penalties that the police could use for anti social behaviour,whether owner or renter, - penalties that the landlord could then use to evict quickly.

whisky_galore

Crimsonred wrote: »

The tenants moved in during the month of May, which is when the trouble started, his cocooning didn't prevent him from moving tenants into his properties during that time.

There is a process for reporting UCC students during college year for engaging in anti-social behaviour btw.

The guards are ineffective at dealing with noisy students, it is the landlord's responsibility to keep them under control.

The fact that he is 80 is irrelevant.

People live healthy lives into their 80s and beyond, nothing more than usual ah shur god love him, he's 80.

martinr5232

So if a home owner with a morgtage decides to act like a cnut like these students who is gonna be responsible ??

housetypeb

Think I'm gonna tell my tenants to go to bed at 10 every night, early to bed, early to rise and all that, it'll be good for them.

Graham

Crimsonred wrote: »

See my previous regarding the two houses named as not being registered with the RTB.

See previous comment where you were told it makes no difference.

martinr5232

housetypeb wrote:

Think I'm gonna tell my tenants to go to bed at 10 every night, early to bed, early to rise and all that, it'll be good for them.

Absolutely seeing as you are their parental figure god forbid those young adults should have to act like it. Any wonder civilisation is the way it is.

Crimsonred

Graham wrote: »

See previous comment where you were told it makes no difference.

That's great, I was replying to a post regarding the RTB, the fact that the houses are not registered is relevant, if only to illustrate how the landlord conducts his affairs.

The residents may have informed the RTB that there were tenants in these two houses to force the landlord to register, either way, as of today, the houses mentioned in the IT article are not registered.

Crimsonred

housetypeb wrote: »

Think I'm gonna tell my tenants to go to bed at 10 every night, early to bed, early to rise and all that, it'll be good for them.

They can stay up all night so long as they don't keep their neighbours awake.

How would you feel about being prevented from getting a night's sleep night after night by partying tenants next door?

Bear in mind that ringing the guards is a waste of time.

housetypeb

Crimsonred wrote: »

They can stay up all night so long as they don't keep their neighbours awake.

How would you feel about being prevented from getting a night's sleep night after night by partying tenants next door?

Bear in mind that ringing the guards is a waste of time.

I would hate it.
But what if they were the owners having parties?
What makes the landlord the man to quieten the neighborhood rather than the guards in this case.

Crimsonred

housetypeb wrote: »

I would hate it.
But what if they were the owners having parties?
What makes the landlord the man to quieten the neighborhood rather than the guards in this case.

In that case you have to try and reason with them and if that fails decide whether it's worth the hassle of initiating legal proceedings against them, putting up with the noise, or selling up.

The laws regarding noise pollution in a domestic setting need to be reviewed and updated because they are not fit for purpose, giving the guards powers to effectively deal with the problem would also be a major step forward.

Never thought the day would arrive when I'd be defending a landlord, but alas, here we are.

The landlord can do the square root of f*ck all. The tenants should be reported to the gardai and dealt with accordingly.

beauf

housetypeb wrote: »

I would hate it.
But what if they were the owners having parties?
What makes the landlord the man to quieten the neighborhood rather than the guards in this case.

It's being outsourced to landlords just like the housing crisis. Because the authorities that should be dealing with don't want to.

Maybe landlords should just bypass the RTB and go direct to court now, for all other disputes and evictions.

housetypeb

Crimsonred wrote: »

...

The laws regarding noise pollution in a domestic setting need to be reviewed and updated because they are not fit for purpose, giving the guards powers to effectively deal with the problem would also be a major step forward.

Exactly, the law,and its enforcement is the problem, blaming and expecting the landlord to solve the problems of society seems a step too far.

beauf

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Never thought the day would arrive when I'd be defending a landlord, but alas, here we are.

The landlord can do the square root of f*ck all. The tenants should be reported to the gardai and dealt with accordingly.

Well the article implies the landlord can evict them. But falls short on actually saying that. I thought all disputes have to go to the RTB but this suggests they don't. You can skip that useless step and go to court for evictions. Calls into question the registration fee too, what's the point of that now.

Stark

Not allowed evict anyone during Covid restrictions. Possibly till the end of the year. Poor guy would probably be vilified by the social media socialist types if he did evict them.

Deleted User wrote: »

Never thought the day would arrive when I'd be defending a landlord, but alas, here we are.

Generally hated them as a class back when laws were weighted in ****ty landlords' favour and I had plenty of issues with bad landlords through the years. But I think things have swung round in recent years so the law is largely in ****ty tenants' favour now. If I was in a position of owning a house I no longer wanted to live in, I would definitely sell up rather than taking the risk of renting it out.

He is too old to run his business properly that is a fact and not agist so keeping on top of the student and making sure they don't get out of hand has become difficult or else he just does not care but I would say it is the former.

I would hazard a guess he is a wealthy man so why not either sell or pass it on to his sons or daughters if he has any or to some family member he is in his 80s why would he want to be dealing with this at that age.

martinr5232

mariaalice wrote:

He is too old to run his business properly that is a fact and not agist so keeping on top of the student and making sure they don't get out of hand has become difficult or else he just does not care but I would say it is the former.

Why is it up to a landlord to police a tennants behaviour be it student or any other tennant ?? Surely once you are an adult its time to take responsibilty for your own actions.

Crimsonred

martinr5232 wrote: »

Why is it up to a landlord to police a tennants behaviour be it student or any other tennant ?? Surely once you are an adult its time to take responsibilty for your own actions.

Because the RTB says so?

The landlord has a responsibility to neighbours (third parties) who are affected by the behaviour of tenants.

A good landlord will check references, have a lease agreement in place etc before renting out his property, as a means to protect himself from hassle down the line, but not all landlords are that conscientious, more so when dealing with short term lets such as in the area around UCC where the big money is to be made during college term.

Renting out to students causes major hassle but the profits to be made clearly are too much to resist for some.

I think there is general agreement on here that the laws regarding the whole area are not fit for purpose.

Graham

Here's the funny thing

From the RTB

A landlord owes to each person who could be affected (for example by antisocial behaviour) a duty to enforce the responsibilities of the tenant(s) in the tenancy.

A landlord is largely restricted in the means he can use for enforcement. These means might be summarised:

ask the tenant nicely.
write the tenant a strongly worded letted
write a letter terminating the tenancy for breaching the conditions of the tenancy.

If none of that works, landlord has to revert to the RTB.

The issue in this case from what I can make out is the landlord hasn't gone through the above steps and followed through with the RTB.

beauf

Landlord can't if it's not registered.

The tenants can, and so can a third party, the residents. But they didn't either.

They all bypassed the RTB and went to court.

beauf

Crimsonred wrote: »

Because the RTB says so? ...

Oddly enough the RTB can only fine a landlord. They can't evict a tenant or fine them. That ultimately has to go to court.

So really what the RTB says is pointless. No one other than a court can evict these tenants.

Crimsonred

beauf wrote: »

Landlord can't if it's not registered.

The tenants can, and so can a third party, the residents. But they didn't either.

They all bypassed the RTB and went to court.

Why didn't the landlord register these tenancies?

The residemts were entitled to go to court, the landlord will have to pay their costs and his name is all over the national media .

My guess is that he has been reported to the RTB too.

Crimsonred

beauf wrote: »

Oddly enough the RTB can only fine a landlord. They can't evict a tenant or fine them. That ultimately has to go to court.

So really what the RTB says is pointless. No one other than a court can evict these tenants.

Going to court was a risk for the neighbours, if they lost they would have faced substantial legal costs and the landlord would be in a stronger position going forward.

newuser99999

Crimsonred wrote: »

The tenants moved in during the month of May, which is when the trouble started, his cocooning didn't prevent him from moving tenants into his properties during that time.

How do you know when they moved in exactly?

Graham

Crimsonred wrote: »

Why didn't the landlord register these tenancies?

Where was that reported? I haven't seen it mentioned in the (admittedly very limited) articles I've read.

Crimsonred

newuser99999 wrote: »

How do you know when they moved in exactly?

UCC students moved out in late March because of covid-19 and students started to move back into the area in May, during lockdown.

The hassle from the two houses started in May, as reported in the media.

Crimsonred

Graham wrote: »

Where was that reported? I haven't seen it mentioned in the (admittedly very limited) articles I've read.

The addresses of the two houses was mentioned in an Irish Times and I could not find them on the RTB register.

TheChizler

Crimsonred wrote: »

The addresses of the two houses was mentioned in an Irish Times and I could not find them on the RTB register.

Which is notoriously out of date

Spanish Eyes

I doubt there is anything a LL can do now since RTB says tenants are paramount. That is the problem right there, it should be fifty fifty at the very least.

So a LL takes a case to RTB for ASB. Might take a few months. The LL might need proof. CCTV cannot operate from another person's house.

Such a fkn mess.

What a pity that the College doesn't say something. They are always silent. I'd ask them to make a statement on the matter at the very least!

I'd never let a property in this country ever. But that's what Gov want, yep the REITS to take over the country for rentals. All cheer now.