Rent Increase without notice

Tar.Aldarion

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Got this now:

As others have already said, I'd not be accepting anything or indicating that I accept anything of the sort. There is a possibility they are trying to get you to say yes, only to then claim that you now owe the backdated rent increase.

Facts, as of today include:

1) You do not owe any rent for previous month or two
2) Any rent review they wish to foist upon you going forward must comply with the RTA
3) That includes sending it by registered post, email is (again) worth SFA
4) It also needs to be 2 years after the last rent review or 2 years after the tenancy commenced
5) It also cannot begin until at least 90 days after you've RECEIVED the notice
6) It also must include details of comparable properties (size, nature, type, scale, what floor the apartment is on, number of beds, balconies etc. etc.)
7) You can dispute any review you perceive as unfair with RTB within 28 days of receiving it
7) You do not have to let them know all of this....If they don't comply with the above and you wanted to play hardball, you can wait until the 90 days is up and say "sorry, that rent review notice is not valid, please try again". The 90 days starts again from day 1.

That last point is up to you. If I was dealing with a LL directly, I'd be more inclined to be nicer. But an agency should know all of this and they're paid handsomely for the privilege. If they f'd up with the initial rent increase, the LL may well be within his rights to extract the extra cash from them, not you. I know if I was in their boat, that's exactly what I'd be doing.

Whatever you do, do not say "I am agreeable to your email" or they will try to pin the backdated rent increase on you.

Tar.Aldarion

Thanks. I will think about it. My main issue is the sudden arrears. They may have sent it but it got lost/stolen. I could offer a compromise of not paying the arrears and paying the increased rent from now and along with them posting reviews in future email it as well. Or else do as you guys suggest.

pc7

Are rent reviews allowed in RPZ at the minute with Covid, or are things back in action again in that regard, I thought things had been frozen?

pc7

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Thanks. I will think about it. My main issue is the sudden arrears. They may have sent it but it got lost/stolen. I could offer a compromise of not paying the arrears and paying the increased rent from now and along with them posting reviews in future email it as well. Or else do as you guys suggest.

Do not pay anything extra at all at this point, you have not received valid notice, wait until you receive it but the notice period will still stand.

ibarelycare

Regardless of the notice, if you're in Dublin you're in a RPZ so the maximum they can increase it by is 4% every 2 years.

Batattackrat

pc7 wrote: »

Are rent reviews allowed in RPZ at the minute with Covid, or are things back in action again in that regard, I thought things had been frozen?

If your impacted by Covid such as getting the PUP payment they are.

OP the letting agent has messed up big time and are trying to cover themselves. Tell them when you receive a letter with the rent increase and three months notice you will pay.

A registered letter with a signature is what they should have done, a follow up call and email and even delivering the letter themselves in person.

They have no comeback here.

MacDanger

Pure speculation but I wonder if the agency is trying to cover their ass here i.e. did the LL ask the agent to review the rent, the agency made a balls of it and is now trying to recover because the LL will (rightly from their point of view) be expecting to see the increased amount coming in

Dav010

ibarelycare wrote: »

Regardless of the notice, if you're in Dublin you're in a RPZ so the maximum they can increase it by is 4% every 2 years.

It’s 4% per annum and if there hasn’t been a rent review for a while, there is a calculator on the RTB site which can be used to calculate a higher rent increase within the regs.


Op. In relation to what they said to you, tell them rent reviews must be in writing, an email is not a valid method of service.

jimmycrackcorm

MacDanger wrote: »

Pure speculation but I wonder if the agency is trying to cover their ass here i.e. did the LL ask the agent to review the rent, the agency made a balls of it and is now trying to recover because the LL will (rightly from their point of view) be expecting to see the increased amount coming in

Hardly covering their asses when they have a receipt showing they sent out letters on September 29th. So in a dispute, the onus is to prove that notice was ent on time. Based on the receipt, it would point to have been done.

Was it valid? Supposedly sent 90 days as required, is the increase a valid one? I'm assuming that is hardly wrong. So it comes down to whether or not it's proveable that the op received the notice. Perhaps requiring a signature of receipt should be required, but that also means anyone refusing to sign for delivery can get around that.

Reminds me of when my ex went to court over a speeding fine that she didn't get in the post, just a summons later hand-dropped in the letterbox. Told the judge she would have paid the fine had she received it, but sometimes we get post for a similar address nearby. The judge asked if we had complained about this to An Post, which we hadn't as we would not have been aware sometimes of mail that didn't arrive, also asked the Guard if the fines had been sent out. He said they had, that was as much proof as was required.
The lesson is, I guess, that unless the agency can be shown to be totally incompetent, an RTB hearing could likely conclude that they sent out the notice as required.

It'll come down to the word of the agency vs the op. At the end of the day, in the worst case, opening a dispute with the RTB would just delay the extra payment.

Tar.Aldarion

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Hardly covering their asses when they have a receipt showing they sent out letters on September 29th. So in a dispute, the onus is to prove that notice was ent on time. Based on the receipt, it would point to have been done.

Was it valid? Supposedly sent 90 days as required, is the increase a valid one? I'm assuming that is hardly wrong. So it comes down to whether or not it's proveable that the op received the notice. Perhaps requiring a signature of receipt should be required, but that also means anyone refusing to sign for delivery can get around that.

Reminds me of when my ex went to court over a speeding fine that she didn't get in the post, just a summons later hand-dropped in the letterbox. Told the judge she would have paid the fine had she received it, but sometimes we get post for a similar address nearby. The judge asked if we had complained about this to An Post, which we hadn't as we would not have been aware sometimes of mail that didn't arrive, also asked the Guard if the fines had been sent out. He said they had, that was as much proof as was required.
The lesson is, I guess, that unless the agency can be shown to be totally incompetent, an RTB hearing could likely conclude that they sent out the notice as required.

It'll come down to the word of the agency vs the op. At the end of the day, in the worst case, opening a dispute with the RTB would just delay the extra payment.

The receipt does show the correct date, and there are multiple, so I assume that the other apartments in this block had their rent increased too. They may have not sent it by mistake, or it got lost or stolen and at the end of the day it seems to be what you say, my word vs theirs. I have complained to them and to the management agency about post being stolen in the last few months but nothing at all is being done about it.

While the RTB do say that the post should be registered, I would imagine they could accept that they likely sent it so I should pay. Though I have no idea about the rules, as in does there need to be proof of receipt, not merely sending?

As for the worst that can happen, they can be dicks if I try to dispute, not getting maintenance done for months, kicking me out at the next part IV renewal etc, things like that. Increasing the rent every 12 months on the dot (instead of 17 like this time).

Padre_Pio

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

The receipt does show the correct date, and there are multiple, so I assume that the other apartments in this block had their rent increased too. They may have not sent it by mistake, or it got lost or stolen and at the end of the day it seems to be what you say, my word vs theirs. I have complained to them and to the management agency about post being stolen in the last few months but nothing at all is being done about it.

What do your neighbors say? Did they get the same letter?

Caranica

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Thanks. I will think about it. My main issue is the sudden arrears. They may have sent it but it got lost/stolen. I could offer a compromise of not paying the arrears and paying the increased rent from now and along with them posting reviews in future email it as well. Or else do as you guys suggest.

You'd be crazy to do this. They legally cannot increase your rent until 90 days after you've received valid notice so you have at least 3 months at your current rent.

Do not agree to the email thing, it is not what the law says.

JoChervil

OP, this proof, which they sent is only about certain amount of letters posted to a certain area. So it not a proof. Ask them to show you a Certificate of Posting on which your name and full address should be written. If they didn't ask for it at the post office, so it is their fault because now they have no proof.

I would ask about new rent review and start paying it in three months, if you agree with it.

The DayDream

Smee_Again wrote: »

As far as I can see this can only really go 3 ways -

• OP pays the increased rate backdated to January
• Agency issues OP with a valid notice and he pays the higher rate in 3 months
• OP/Agency raises a dispute with RTB who may or may not decide valid notice was issued

I wouldn't take the first option when option 3 is there, and if I was the agency I wouldn't risk option 3 because it could delay matters for months when option 2 is there.

This is the best advice (Ive been in several RTB disputes) but agents are thick as pig shíte when it comes to these matters.

My advice is open a dispute right away, you can do it online, it used to cost 15.00, because it's the only way you can get it through their heads that they didn't issue a valid notice. No point arguing with them as they'll always dig their heels in until you actually file the dispute.

If the RTB decides there was no valid notice (which is likely, a list of random tracking numbers is no proof at all of a valid notice) you wont be liable for that increase until valid notice is served, and then whatever the notice period is.

I'll bet they've been sitting on their hole doing nothing and are just now deciding to try and chance their arm by blaming the tenant.

The DayDream

Caranica wrote: »

You'd be crazy to do this. They legally cannot increase your rent until 90 days after you've received valid notice so you have at least 3 months at your current rent.

Do not agree to the email thing, it is not what the law says.

100%. Please listen to the advice given. This is why these agents get away with murder and fleecing people when they can't even do their job right they still bully people into paying money they don't even owe. They're scamming you, they never sent any letter or you would have got it. Those numbers are not proof, have you seen a copy of the letter. Why would they wait til now to contact you, wouldn't they want to make sure you got the letter and you agreed to the increase?

No, they think this is a better way, hit you with an arrears notice to scare you into paying. Hit them back with a dispute through RTB, which unlike their BS, IS totally valid. You'll save a lot of money and stop them trying to scam you again.

As above, why would you pay when you don't owe it? They didn't offer valid notice, that means you don't owe them the increased rent, and you dont owe it from 90 days after the valid notice is served. That could take these muppets another month or more.

File the RTB dispute online. Ive been in this situation, without 100% proof of valid notice the landlord loses these every time. For the cost of the dispute filing (15 euro) you will save yourself at least 5 or 6 months of that increased rent cost.

riffmongous

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Hardly covering their asses when they have a receipt showing they sent out letters on September 29th. So in a dispute, the onus is to prove that notice was ent on time. Based on the receipt, it would point to have been done.

Was it valid? Supposedly sent 90 days as required, is the increase a valid one? I'm assuming that is hardly wrong. So it comes down to whether or not it's proveable that the op received the notice. Perhaps requiring a signature of receipt should be required, but that also means anyone refusing to sign for delivery can get around that.

Ah here, if you refuse to sign for it it's not like the postman just throws it in the bin afterwards and marks it as delivered This case is the exact reason why you need to use registered post, and it's going to be an expensive lesson learned for the agent

Fkall

ibarelycare wrote: »

Regardless of the notice, if you're in Dublin you're in a RPZ so the maximum they can increase it by is 4% every 2 years.

The permitted rent increase in a RPZ is 4% p.a.

Winegum1

Definitely open up a dispute. You did not receive the notice end of.
You've also said you complained before about post going missing so that's on your side too.

Unless its registered they really don't have a leg to stand on. Plenty of people refuse letter at doors, parking fines etc. Some won't sign for a family member because they know its a fine or something and it just gets sent back.
Nothing can be done without your signature, as someone said above. It'll be a lesson for them to register in future.

Subutai

Winegum1 wrote: »

Definitely open up a dispute. You did not receive the notice end of.
You've also said you complained before about post going missing so that's on your side too.

Unless its registered they really don't have a leg to stand on. Plenty of people refuse letter at doors, parking fines etc. Some won't sign for a family member because they know its a fine or something and it just gets sent back.
Nothing can be done without your signature, as someone said above. It'll be a lesson for them to register in future.

OP does not need to open a dispute. All they need to do is continue to pay their rent as they've been doing. Leave it to them to open a dispute, if they're foolish enough to go down that route OP will happily continue paying his current rent for a few months while the case makes its way to arbitration where the landlord will lose, and then they'll additionally get the statutory increase notice period.

Seve OB

Fkall wrote: »

The permitted rent increase in a RPZ is 4% p.a.

is this new?
i also thought it was every 2 years

The DayDream

Subutai wrote: »

OP does not need to open a dispute. All they need to do is continue to pay their rent as they've been doing. Leave it to them to open a dispute, if they're foolish enough to go down that route OP will happily continue paying his current rent for a few months while the case makes its way to arbitration where the landlord will lose, and then they'll additionally get the statutory increase notice period.

But this is a thickheaded idiot typical Irish agent who can't figure out how to offer a valid notice and probably thinks they can just evict the OP if they don't start paying. And will probably get an invalid notice for that too. They could even escalate to things like changing locks.

Opening a dispute yourself now is better IMO, as this is the point when the claims of landlord and tenant don't match up. This is the time of the dispute. If the tenant just keeps paying rent it looks like they just ignored all communications until they were chased down by RTB.

Ive never had a LL try and open a dispute on me they always try bully boy tactics and i won my cases after opening the disputes myself so that's what I recommend but that's just my experience.

jimmycrackcorm

The DayDream wrote:

100%. Please listen to the advice given. This is why these agents get away with murder and fleecing people when they can't even do their job right they still bully people into paying money they don't even owe. They're scamming you, they never sent any letter or you would have got it. Those numbers are not proof, have you seen a copy of the letter. Why would they wait til now to contact you, wouldn't they want to make sure you got the letter and you agreed to the increase?

That's a lot of rubbish.
Any one of us can say we didn't get a letter. There is no actual system of proof.

Even signing for a letter can be done by anyone.

As I said in my post, it'll come down to their word against his and if they can show that they send it valid notices then they'll win in a case.

You're assuming that agencies operate without doing the basic thing they are in business for. That can't be true otherwise they'd be all out of business by now.

Seth Brundle

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

That's a lot of rubbish.
Any one of us can say we didn't get a letter. There is no actual system of proof.

Even signing for a letter can be done by anyone.

As I said in my post, it'll come down to their word against his and if they can show that they send it valid notices then they'll win in a case.

You're assuming that agencies operate without doing the basic thing they are in business for. That can't be true otherwise they'd be all out of business by now.

They can't show this though!

Claw Hammer

Seth Brundle wrote: »

They can't show this though!

Residential tenancies Act 2004
6.—(1) A notice required or authorised to be served or given by or under this Act shall, subject to subsection (2), be addressed to the person concerned by name and may be served on or given to the person in one of the following ways:

(a) by delivering it to the person;

(b) by leaving it at the address at which the person ordinarily resides or, in a case in which an address for service has been furnished, at that address;

(c) by sending it by post in a prepaid letter to the address at which the person ordinarily resides or, in a case in which an address for service has been furnished, to that address;

(d) where the notice relates to a dwelling and it appears that no person is in actual occupation of the dwelling, by affixing it in a conspicuous position on the outside of the dwelling or the property containing the dwelling.

Tar.Aldarion

I think his point is that nowhere does it show a name or address and even An Post don't know this information.

Claw Hammer

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I think his point is that nowhere does it show a name or address and even An Post don't know this information.

Your point being?

Seth Brundle

There is no evidence that they posted anything to the OP nor is there any evidence that they posted a notice of rent increase to the OP.

Time

Neither of the two parties here can definitively prove it was delivered or that it wasn’t. The RTB will have to look at this on balance of probabilities and on that the Agency has a lot of backup while the tenant has none.

Claw Hammer

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There is no evidence that they posted anything to the OP nor is there any evidence that they posted a notice of rent increase to the OP.

If someone from the agency states that they posted it and that the document they have is the receipt, that is evidence.

MacDanger

Claw Hammer wrote: »

If someone from the agency states that they posted it and that the document they have is the receipt, that is evidence.

It's evidence that they posted something to somebody but it's not evidence that they posted something to the OP