If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)
Hi all, The AutoSave Draft feature is now disabled across the site. The decision to disable the feature was made via a poll last year. The delay in putting it in place was due to a bug/update issue. This should serve as a reminder to manually save your drafts if you wish to keep them. Thanks, The Boards Team.
Hello all! This is just a quick reminder to 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.

Company letting v normal letting

  • 13-04-2022 8:14pm
    Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭ size5

    We currently have a house up for rent and are sorting through potential tenants.

    We have been approached by a local company to see would we consider letting the house to the company. They want in for new employees whom are settling in Ireland.

    They are saying the advantage been the rent will always be paid, they would look after setting people up in the house etc.

    My fear is that has we would have no control as to who goes into the house, would l the company actually care if damage is done to the property!

    Appreciate any advise on the matter


  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

    Way better than having Part IV tenants!

  • Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭ suilegorma

    If they are a reputable company, like a multinational or something then if go with it, making sure there was a clause in the lease returning the property in it's original condition. I'd also try to get a long term lease out of them too. If I was to rent out a property I'd honestly try to find a company let rather than let it myself!

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,407 ✭✭✭ Caranica

    No, don't do it. Went down that route, they packed the house well above bed spaces, constantly changing tenants, doors and windows constantly being left open, alarm going off, grass/garden not looked after and blaming damage on people who'd left. Oh and the rent was only paid on time once. Don't believe the hype.

    Private lettings weren't perfect either but we had more control over who and how many people were there. Selling was the best thing we did.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,140 ✭✭✭ black & white

    Would totally depend on the company for me. High end multinational or similar would tempt me, food industry or hospitality would make me run a mile.

  • Administrators Posts: 51,059 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭ awec

    Would the food industry or hospitality really pay to relocate staff here? I doubt it.

    I would imagine it's one of the MNCs, in which case I'd say it's possibly the lowest risk way of letting out your gaff on the market today. I think the overwhelming majority of landlords would absolutely jump at the chance.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭ size5

    Thank you for your thoughts

    The company does appear to be a MNC and they are very local so I can see why they want the property. They appear to be genuine , just my concern is different people in the property, means more things can go wrong. i.e. cutting grass etc, washing machine etc

    Also if damage done to the property what's the difference between them and a normal tenant>

  • Administrators Posts: 51,059 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭ awec

    Is it a company you recognise? You don't have to name them on here, but I was assuming it's a fairly major company.

    The difference is the company will be far better to deal with than a tenant. Remember if you have an issue with a particular tenant you are essentially going to be reporting this directly to their employer.

    Also worth pointing out that these companies are paying to relocate very talented staff who have excellent career prospects etc, it's very, very unlikely you're going to end up with undesirable tenants. Again, this is just my opinion.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,140 ✭✭✭ black & white

    Local hotel rented a couple of houses some years ago for staff coming from overseas, ended up packing them in 2 or 3 to a room so that is what I was referring to.

  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

    Op, you will retain control of your property.

    You will not be bound by crippling 6 year PartIV tenancies.

    You will not need years to evict non paying tenants.

    You will have recourse for damages, as deadbeat tenants will just fck off and not pay for damages they cause.

  • Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭ size5

    Cheers for the above-but will I not be getting the company to sign a lease and also having to register with the RTB

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭ mrslancaster

    Why would letting to a company be any different to any other individual or couple? If the company signs the tenancy agreement and then sub-lets to their employees, why wouldn't the RTA rules still apply?

    The only difference seems to be that the landlord agrees to sub-letting up-front and has no say in choosing the occupants. Landlord would have the same obligations to the company plus the sub-tenants.

  • Registered Users Posts: 17 Jaysus_1984

    I think the company, assuming its an MNC, might use the house for 2 reasons - based on the few companies I've worked for.

    1. To house immigrant staff for a month or two until they find a house to rent.

    2. To house people flying in on business visas to attend conferences, etc.

    In either case, you're almost guaranteed to have people who will take care of the house better than if it were their own house, do as to not get into hassles with their employers and make a good (in many cases, initial) impression. There will be zero chances of any part IV nonsense, because these companies will simply relocate their staff to another similar property if you ever wanted to sell your house - assuming a 1-2 month notice in your contract with them.

    Get these questions clarified via email or get additional clauses added to the contract for maintenance of gardens and bins and stuff, and whether they would cover 100% of the utilities including things like TV licenses, and you're sitting pretty! Given the way things are right now, this is a much better option than private rentals!

  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

    Because short term let's are exempt from PartIV tenancy rules.

  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

    As long as the let's are short-term, then you're fine.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭ mrslancaster

    How is it a short term let?

    The landlord will not be managing the lettings like an airbnb and if they were doing that they'd need planning permission. The company will be the tenant who will 'sub-let' to their employees for varying lengths of time.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭ mikemac2

    A hotel I worked in did this. Rented a house and brought in agency staff from abroad. You can guess it became a party house, work hard, play hard! Not a landlords dream

    It happens these days also. I heard a radio report recently in Kerry where hospitality businesses cannot get staff so a business owner rented a house and put their workers there.

  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

    From the first post I was assuming that thesese were short term corporate lets.

    Reasonable assumption for MNCs relocating people.

  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

    From the RTB...

    Exemptions from the planning permission requirements

    You do not have to apply for planning permission if:

    • Your property is not in a Rent Pressure Zone (RPZ)
    • Your property is in an RPZ, but you let rooms or the entire property out for 15 days or more at a time
    • Your property already has planning permission to be used for tourism or short-term letting purposes
    • Your property is used for corporate or executive lets. For example, lettings provided for people coming to Ireland under employment contracts.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭ mrslancaster

    Thought that was just for PPR and if its for a second property in a RPZ being used for STL (up to 15 days), then change of use planning permission needed.

  • Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭ MakersMark

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭ size5

    Just to clarify we were renting the house out to Tenants as per normal. Got contacted by the company, but probably need to clarify with the company tomorrow.

    My own view was the company would sign the lease and could put whom they wanted in the house(within reason). If tenants were changing , it wouldn't really affect us, as company would look after switch over etc. So although technically they are short term lets(company employees), to us it would be a long term let(company signed lease) and subject to all the RTB conditions.

    However from the advise here perhaps I should say to company, yes we'll rent house, when you change tenant we'll clean house etc. However could charge more rent(rent very low in this property) and not subject to normal rental conditions.

    appreciate all feedback

  • Registered Users Posts: 717 ✭✭✭ macvin

    I'd go for a single lease with the company and let them put whoever they like in it.

    But they would be responsible for cleaning between tenants and any repairs needed from tenant use and that at the end of the tenancy it is to be handed back in similar condition.

    Once it's a company that will have "quality" tenants, that would be my choice.

    As above, you don't want "seasonal" staff such as hospitality, students, construction workers etc

    I would also add in a strict capacity limit with only bedrooms to be used for sleeping, just to cover yourself.

  • Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭ size5

    by single Lease you mean lease and register with the RTB?

  • Registered Users Posts: 717 ✭✭✭ macvin

    Yes. Lease it to the company. Have a few reasonable terms and conditions, and let the investment work for you without hassle.