Licensee renting troubles

Smoke420meme

I moved in with a friend a month ago, I'll call him john. We had an agreement that I'd pay John rent for a room in a house that he is renting and living in. I thought it would be a good idea to let the landlord know I was living there and to get added to the lease. So my John asked the landlord if I could be added to the lease. The landlord turned around and said he doesn't want my friend to be subletting or to have a licensee as it's a breech of the lease/contract. I guess you have to tell your landlord about any guests or subtenants which John didn't do. His reason for not adding me was over crowding but there are 3 rooms in the house and 1 person for each room. Not sure what his issue is.

So now the LL is sending someone from the agency to inspect the property, we assume it's just so the agent can gather evidence to prove that I'm living here. I've been told by threshold that if they find evidence that I'm living here, they can issue a 28 day warning notice to the tenant John and if it's not resolved in 28 days, they can issue an eviction notice.

We are not doing anything bad in the property, we are maintaining it and not disturbing neighbours or anything like that. Keeping it very clean and making it nice with furniture we bought. Now I'm feeling very hopeless as I think I will be kicked out soon.

I don't know what will come of the inspection. I assume an agent will arrive, take a look around the property and take photo's of the rooms. He will probably tell the LL that he suspects someone is living in the spare room. The landlord will pressure John into kicking me out, by threatening warning notices or eviction. I don't think John has been here for 6 months so he probably doesn't have a part 4 tenancy yet.

Anyone know how fucked I am or have any advice? I'm starting a new job this week and this stress is so horrible and miserable.

houseyhouse

You will have to leave. John could maybe stay even with eviction notices etc but you have no rights because you’re not a tenant. Not moving in extra people without permission is a clause in almost any rental lease. Where are you living before? Can you go back there?

Smoke420meme

Was renting in a house share, can't go back now. Homelessness it is.

houseyhouse

That’s rough. Get back on to Threshold for advice. Your best bet might be to appeal to the landlord’s better nature. From their perspective another tenant brings no advantages. There’s more wear and tear on the property but no increased income. If the whole place is rented as a single unit they can’t increase the rent because of the RPZ legislation (assuming it’s in an RPZ) but if it’s rented by the room they may be able to start charging you separately. If you stay, your friend could also get evicted. I really don’t have good advice for you but I hope you find something.

Del2005

How long has John been renting?

(7) A person who is lawfully in occupation of the dwelling concerned as a licensee of the tenant or the multiple tenants, as the case may be, during the subsistence of a Part 4 tenancy may request the landlord of the dwelling to allow him or her to become a tenant of the dwelling.

If he's in Part 4 then you've a chance to get onto the RTB as the landlord has to allow you become a tenant. The only potential issue is that John might not have been authorised to allow a licencee but that's an issue between John and the Landlord not you and the landlord, as you have a signed licencee agreement with John 😉

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2004/act/27/section/50/enacted/en/html#:~:text=(7)%20A%20person%20who%20is,a%20tenant%20of%20the%20dwelling.

Smoke420meme

I Don't think John has been renting for 6 months which I think is how long it takes for a part 4 tenancy to be enacted.

spaceHopper

Can you pay the LL more rent?

Smoke420meme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616904#Comment_119616904

It's in a rent pressure zone so don't think it's legal to pay more and the LL seems to like everything to be above board.

1874

The landlord has fair reason to refuse, they never agreed to this person or Licensees/subleters, could be from the point of view of fair wear and tear, consideration of neighbours regarding parking spaces whether they are limited due to being allocated or even when not as that can cause problems. Basically, I cannot understand where any person who was not originally assigned to the lease can be granted rights unless they were approved by the landlord, because as nice as it seems, it opens the landlord up to problems/liability they never agreed to take on, in some cases (not saying this instance) it can assist criminal activity.

No person should be able to have an automatic entitlement to a tenancy unless the landlord has signed off on it, regardless of their duration, its an example of well meaning (mostly) do gooders interfering but who have zero actual experience of problems it can cause.

In this case and many others, the person may be legit and genuine, but I still see zero reason they should be allowed to live there without the landlords consent, as its an RPZ, the landlord cant up the rent to account for this unplanned person on the tenancy as that would be breaking the law, I dont see why tenants or potential tenants should be allowed circumvent the law either, but it is accepted in other aspects of Part4, Tenancies and renting in general.

Thankfully I am not a landlord anymore, but anyone with an ounce of experience would say it should rightfully be at the landlords discretion OR any notice to request to be added to a lease should have a 6 months trial period (not as it seems to be, just claiming someone is there 6 months and automatically has part4 rights), ie a landlord should be notified formally, and if they dont outright refuse immediately, then the licensee has 6 months before they can be granted part4 rights from that first notification, where the landlord can say still decline them up to the end of the 6 months (in the case it didnt suit them/they had given some leeway to the licencee and found they still weren't happy with them or the situation).

Smoke420meme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119618216#Comment_119618216

You can really tell you used to be a landlord. Zero compassion for tenants and tonnes of compassion for the landlord. I'm glad you aren't a landlord anymore either. But sadly a lot of landlords out there are like you. More concerned with wear and tear than human life.

JustJoe7240

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620338#Comment_119620338

That's a load of bollox to be fair. A LL is well entitled to look after their asset.

Naturally You're not entitled to be added to a lease on a whim just because a fella renting another room said you can.

meijin

licensee is really a visitor... and has about the same rights

does the LL really have the power to control who visits the house and stays overnight? one night? one week? or where is the limit?

what about a partner? also not allowed by a landlord?

the lease might say "no subletting", but the licensee is not a sublet situation

houseyhouse

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620866#Comment_119620866

In my experience the lease often states the number of nights a visitor can stay in a month. This seems a little petty but it is the only way to avoid the problem you describe.

houseyhouse

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620338#Comment_119620338

If you had two coats would you lend one to a coatless stranger for the winter for free because you care more about human life than wear and tear on your coat? If not, then you must also have ‘zero compassion’, no?

I know it’s a terrible situation for renters at the moment but painting all landlords as big baddies is simplistic. The reality is the LL hasn’t vetted you, and if they let you become a tenant and you were to cause problems they can’t get you out for years. They also can’t charge extra rent to cover the additional costs an extra tenant brings. Landlords did not devise this system. Populist politicians and tenant advocacy groups created this situation and it has backfired massively for regular, rule-abiding tenants.

Claw Hammer

So John is renting a 4 bed house on his own?

Ginger83

You appear to be caught in an awkward situation where you will more than likely have to leave.

Your mate John would be benefiting from you paying him reducing his rent but it was a big mistake leaving your previous accommodation without getting permission from John's landlord.

One of the biggest issues facing the landlord is if they needed to end the tenancy for whatever reason and John agreeing to move but you refusing.

meijin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621581#Comment_119621581

where did it say there are 4 bedrooms?

where did it say nobody else lives in the house?

why do you invent a fake story?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621749#Comment_119621749

I think you are missing the point CH is making, but carry on.

Sorry, just to clarify as I am unclear on this - is John passing on the money his friend is paying him to the landlord, or is he keeping it himself?

Surely someone renting a room in a private property, can't rent out a vacant room and just keep the money?

Or is John renting the whole house?

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621749#Comment_119621749

He says 3 rooms. I added John in for a fourth.

1874

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620338#Comment_119620338

Ok, so as the other poster replied, what if someone renting decides on their own bat that their mate/sibling/cousin can stay, what if the landlords policy doesnt cover for example a smoker or not without being notified or the landlord doesnt want to deal with the problems associated with that after the original guy that rented has left, what if the landlord wants to vet the person themselves? what if the person drives a car, and everyone in the house has cars and the landlord doesnt want to have his tenants block access because they are considerate of the neighbours? what if they decided they just want X number of people and let it on that basis, its not about compassion or lack of it, but when you give an inch people take a mile, next it will be 2 people staying or more, it can also cause problems in that, maybe the other tenant didnt want or agree to this chap staying or felt obligated to agree. I am completely on board that there is a huge problem, but one which has not been caused by smalltime landlords who are fleeced/scapegoated/hassled for providing accommodation. I got out because of the hassle and one sidedness and the delays to deal with problems.

The current situation has been created by successive Govts across a few areas, 1. Not facilitating more home builds, not influencing councils in the last decade to make land available at a price and ensuring their developer mates are held accountable for not building crap on land that started out as public/state land. 2. Having laws in place to deal with delinquent tenants (and landlords) because the current setup encourages bad tenants & bad landlords, thats not to say their arent good landlords or good tenants, but good tenants are paying for the acts of foolish/idiotic decisions, which may be well meaning or they may be based on the fact the State (successive Govts) know the cost involved in providing accommodation would be huge, instead of rewarding smalltime landlords they are fleeced and blamed.

Your post is significantly indicative of this blame and reduces the potential for a problem down to it being a lack of compassion, its not that simple, it is not the responsibility of private landlords to fix the problems of the state, such as providing longterm accomodation, smalltime landords dont make Policy, but renting would be possible and viable for all if the Govt made the right laws/decisions, instead it is all stick and very limited carrot for landlords, so little that Landlords are leaving in droves, yet you still blame landlords for not having compassion, when in fact many have been (including myself) compassionate. Compassion doesnt pay the bills and there is only so much that can be given when the landlords own responsibilities and family are affected, many landlords are in that situation (some accidental, others not, neither of which should mean they have more or less rights), many other landlords just extract what they can (I had to put money in to make up costs) that was a fact of the situation I was in. It could in fact save the State and consequently taxpayers billions to supplement available accommodation provided by the state for rental with that provided by private landlords. So those that cant or dont want to/need to buy have a that option, but there needs to be something in it for landlords, so by the time you deduct tax, pay down debts it is not an easy task to balance the monthly budget. Buying shouldnt be a necessity to avoid a rental trap, I dont agree with it, but I do see it as necessary in this Country. I believe neo-liberal policies have influenced many Nations policy to provide less and less accomodation and just let it be a free for all where the whole thing is foisted onto the market and a capitalist free-market policy drives the entire process. I dont agree with that, I believe housing should be affordable such that it should be a less important consideration in peoples lives.

1. If a small number of problems were fixed and dealt with that would help (not completely) solve many of the problems that exist, basically you have Threshold and by inaction tacit support from the RTB for tenants and tenant landlord problems not to be dealt with, that means bad tenants get away with a lot that wouldnt be tolerated elsewhere. So if a landlord isn't allowed bend the rules (shouldn't be) why do you think tenants should be? The landlord never agreed to what is raised here and is within their rights to refuse.

meijin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622742#Comment_119622742

"His [LL] reason for not adding me was over crowding but there are 3 rooms in the house and 1 person for each room"

irrelevant to the question being asked by OP anyway - or what's your point?

meijin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622774#Comment_119622774

What if there is a couple, and they have a baby? Does the LL have the right to kick them out?

1874

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622800#Comment_119622800

Not sure if you are being serious?

Are the couple the original tenants? or someone a tenant invited to stay? if the the latter then yes, they can tell (not ask) them to get out,so Yes they do have a right.

1874

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622788#Comment_119622788

For clarification, is the OP saying this is a 3 bedroom house and there are 3 original tenants? if so what room is the OP occupying?

Either way, the landlord is within their rights to refuse, if not an RPZ, the landlord may have taken the original number of tenants into account when setting the rent, which if so, confirms making deals favourable to a tenant can backfire (plenty of landlords being compassionate cant even increase the rent closer to market rates, let alone actual rates), so it is very difficult for a landlord to be compassionate and not risk getting stung. Same for other breaches of tenancy (by the tenants, not the OP, they aren't a tenant, Licensee or a subletter, because the Landlord has confirmed they have declined this) therefore landlord should deal with this formally as is their right and treat it like the contract is being reneged upon.

Gamergurll

...

houseyhouse

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622800#Comment_119622800

It depends if it’s overcrowded. There’s an official definition, I believe. If it’s a one bed, I think that technically it would be when the child turns 1.

Edited to add: not advising this, just answering in respect of what the rules are as I understand them.

spaceHopper

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119617842#Comment_119617842

OK so he's let a 3 bed house to two people, you have come in as a 3rd. There is nothing in it for the LL and having 3 flatmates leads to falling-out's then the tenants expect the LL to act as social worker and get involved. There is no upside to the LL for this.

How are you going to give them an upside or remove any risk for you 3 been there v the LL reletting it to somebody else. You need to figure this out for them and present them with a win win.

Another way of looking at it is that they LL approved of two people, he doesn't know you and you could be unreliable and cause hassle for them.

I had it with a tenant, they asked to let a friend stay in their flat while they went travelling, they were a good tenant so we said yes, this then turned in to two years or traveling and different friends, parties front door left open and Guards called....

Smoke420meme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625693#Comment_119625693

So like it's a catch 22 because legally he can't accept more money from us, could do under the table but he seems like he wouldn't do that. Also if we offer him more money for me to stay there, then that's admitting that I'm here and grounds for him to use that as evidence for an eviction.

Might chance my arm if he does try **** us out.

mrslancaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119647509#Comment_119647509

How will your friend feel if you're the reason he gets a notice to leave because of a breach of contract?

lau1247

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119647509#Comment_119647509

Take a walk in his shoe and you can see why he wouldn't agree to do it off book. It might suit you now to offer to do that but from his point of view, if future relationship goes sour. You could threaten to report him to Revenue/RTB etc as a parting shot. There is absolutely no upside for him as far as I can see.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119647509#Comment_119647509

The law is that if you are renting an entire property you are entitled to sublet to a licensee regardless of what is in the lease. The law trumps any lease. The landlord needs to be notified but has no say on the matter.

• Licensee – is a person allowed to reside in a rental property but has no rights as a tenant. A licensee in a private rented dwelling is there by invitation of the tenant, the relationship of a licensee is with the tenant and not with the landlord. The tenant is under a statutory obligation to inform the landlord of the identity of resident in the dwelling however, the landlord is not in a position to to accept or veto the individual concerned as he/she would with a tenant. The tenant is responsible for all of the acts and commissions of their licensee, should the licensee breach an obligation applying to the tenancy the tenant will be in breach – example of breach could be anti-social behaviour or redecorating without the landlord’s written consent.

Subletting is very different to a licensee situation

• Subletting – is where a tenant permits another party to lease the rental property and they move out. The rent is paid by the other party to the tenant and the tenant pays the landlord. There is an obligation on the tenant to get the landlord’s consent in writing for a subletting, subletting can only take place with the consent of the landlord.

For landlords renting a whole property to anyone is a bonkers decision as they cede control and all rights to the tenant. They can get licensees in, they can Airbnb it and there is not much you can do. A better way is to rent individual rooms on a licence basis but that is a lot of effort for a small time landlord. Hence the movement of small time landlords from the market.

For example someone renting a 4 bed house for a few years at under market rate, say 1000 a month. He could decide to keep one room for himself and rent the others out at 600 a month pocketing 800 a month. The landlord cant increase the rent because its in a RPZ. He cant do anything about the tenant, and he has no say or access to the excess rent. And to top it all off the tenant does not pay any tax on the excess income because he is covered under the rent a room scheme. Bonkers

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653418#Comment_119653418

That is not what subletting is, there is no such law which entitles a tenant to sublet, it can only be done with the consent of the LL, who can refuse.

The text you quoted relates to licensee rights when in situ, it does not relate to their right to be there in the first place. The last line of your quote would seem to be the relevant one, if the licensee being there breaches the lease, then the lead tenant is in breach of it.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653424#Comment_119653424

Not correct.

Licensing arrangements in private rented accommodation are often confused with sub-lettings and assignments. 

There is a difference between the above mentioned and it is important that landlords know the distinction.

The main difference is that when a tenant assigns or sublets the rental accommodation, they no longer live in it. However, if a tenant takes in a licensee, the licensee shares the accommodation with the tenant.

If your tenant takes a student or any other licensee under the rent a room scheme you cannot object as a landlord.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653452#Comment_119653452

Ok, before you post anymore rubbish, read this:

https://www.rtb.ie/beginning-a-tenancy/types-of-tenancies-and-agreements/subletting-and-assignment

When you post about entitlements, we can only assume you mean legal entitlements, for that, it is important to know the distinction between subletting and taking in a licensee.

While the op’s posts are not very clear, it seems this apartment was rented to 3 people, there are 3 there, op makes 4, which would breach the lease. Op might clarify. Also, worth pointing out that the tenants have not yet been there for 6 months so do not have Part 4 rights.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653503#Comment_119653503

I can only assume you are an amateur landlord who does not understand the law. Im a professional Landlord. What you posted deals with subletting. Im not going back and forth but you need to specifically focus on licensees and get away from sub-letting. Taking a licensee is not sub letting. Note point 4.

https://www.rtb.ie/beginning-a-tenancy/types-of-tenancies-and-agreements/licences

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653513#Comment_119653513

This is what YOU posted:

“The law is that if you are renting an entire property you are entitled to sublet to a licensee regardless of what is in the lease.”

Has the lead tenant moved out? If not, please stop referring to “sub letting”, professional landlord or not, the op’s situation has nothing to do with subletting.

Also, as a professional landlord, if you rent a 3 bed house to 3 tenants, how many licensees would you be happy for them to take in, 1, 3, 8? The op’s friend has a lease, presumably for three people to rent that property, has one moved out? there is no law that entitles more people than that to rent there. If you know one, post it, what you posted is not it.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653540#Comment_119653540

Im not sure what you are referring to regarding the lead tenant. If they have moved out then it is subletting and not allowed. If he has rented the whole property and is still resident then the op is a licensee.

The law does not restrict the amount of licensees. Again it is up to the owner/tenant, nothing to do with amount of bedrooms. Yes it could be 8 and even unlimited and tenancy law does not have any clarity on this. There is no legislation in Ireland on the amount of persons that can occupy any dwelling, rented or not as long as fire, health and safety issues etc are not present.

On a side note I would never rent a full dwelling to anyone as it is a minefield. There is easier ways to be a full time landlord.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653665#Comment_119653665

There most certainly is legislation related to the number of people occupying a house, as a professional LL, you should know this.

Show me the legislation which allows a tenant to add more occupants in breach of their lease.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653689#Comment_119653689

No there is not. If you dont know your facts stop posting misinformation.

Breach of a lease is irrelevant. Leases are not worth the paper they are written on. The law is what takes precedent.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653859#Comment_119653859

Which law permits unlimited tenants, or even tenants in excess of the lease agreement to occupy a house?

Please post the link to this law.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119654163#Comment_119654163

You are using wrong terminology. Again I am referring to licensees. There is 3 categories. Landlord Tenant and licensee. There is only legislation that licencees are allowed but no upper limit is given.

• Licensee – is a person allowed to reside in a rental property but has no rights as a tenant. A licensee in a private rented dwelling is there by invitation of the tenant, the relationship of a licensee is with the tenant and not with the landlord. The tenant is under a statutory obligation to inform the landlord of the identity of resident in the dwelling however, the landlord is not in a position to to accept or veto the individual concerned as he/she would with a tenant. The tenant is responsible for all of the acts and commissions of their licensee, should the licensee breach an obligation applying to the tenancy the tenant will be in breach – example of breach could be anti-social behaviour or redecorating without the landlord’s written consent.

A tenant can invite as many licencees to the house as they wish and there is no limit on how long they can stay as long as the landlord is informed. A licensee is not a tenant and the property is therefore not sublet so not in breach of any lease term. Note the text in bold.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119654497#Comment_119654497

Where is that from?

I was advised of the same when creating my lease agreements (a long time ago now but after the RTB act), so not surprised, but curious to know more about it!

dennyk

There is no entitlement in the law to allow tenants to bring in licensees. The only thing the law requires is that the landlord is given the names of anyone who is in regular occupation of the property. However, the law also does not otherwise restrict or prohibit tenants from taking in licensees. As such, the landlord can add terms to the tenancy agreement that prohibit the tenant from taking in licensees, and if the tenant breaches that term then their tenancy could be terminated due to that breach. If the landlord doesn't add such a term to their agreement, however, then they have no statutory right to prevent the tenant from taking on a licensee.

This is in contrast to rights which are explicitly granted to the tenant by law and cannot be overridden by a tenancy agreement (e.g. minimum notice periods or Part 4 tenancy rights), and to rights which are explicitly granted to the landlord by law and apply regardless of whether they are in a tenancy agreement (such as the right to deny permission to sublet the property or assign the lease to another party).

Regarding the number of licensees a tenant can bring on, while that isn't explicitly limited in the RTA itself, it would be effectively limited by the Part 4 grounds for termination, one of which is "[t]he dwelling is no longer suitable to the accommodation needs of the tenant and of any persons residing with him or her having regard to the number of bed spaces contained in the dwelling and the size and composition of the occupying household". In other words, if the tenant invites a dozen licensees to live in his 3br house, the landlord can terminate the tenancy on the basis that the house is now overcrowded if the tenant doesn't correct the issue.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119654497#Comment_119654497

You are misinterpreting the highlighted part, the LL cannot veto the individual “concerned”.

The LL cannot veto the licensee chosen by the tenant, but that by no means entitles the tenant to allow anyone in addition to the number recorded on the lease to live there.

Despite what you claim, there is no legislation which entitles the tenant to breach the lease and allow as many people they want to live in a rented property.

If you are correct, post the relevant legislation.

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119653540#Comment_119653540

Unless something is proscribed by law, it is permitted.

It may be debatable whether a clause in a tenancy agreement would take precedent over a tenants right to peaceable enjoyment of their home (including having guests or licencees) but no explicit permission would be required.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119654756#Comment_119654756

I estimate some of this is your own personal opinion?

I wouldn't deduce, in the manner you explained above, that a landlord can successfully terminate based on a lease term prohibiting licences, but maybe you have more information on it.

I think the legal advice I received wouldn't be different from other legal advice, unless my solicitor at the time was useless, and I did want such a term in the lease.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119655038#Comment_119655038

That is the question I am asking the other poster, he/she claims it is an entitlement, and that the entitlement can over ride the terms of a lease. In this case, what entitlement over rides the terms of John’s lease? Is it a statutory entitlement provided for in the RTA that a tenant can let as many people as they want live in a rented property even though the lease prohibits anyone above the number on the lease? Could you link to it please.

John has a lease for three people to live in the property, he cannot sublet and cannot bring in additional licensees to the three on the lease. What legislation gives statutory rights making that non binding?

thugtomas

The landlord has fair reason to refuse, they never agreed to this person or Licensees/subleters, could be from the point of view of fair wear

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119655101#Comment_119655101

Section 12(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancy Act obliges a landlord to allow the tenant of the dwelling to enjoy peaceful and exclusive occupation of the dwelling

and

section 18(1) which states no provision of any lease, tenancy agreement, contract or other agreement (whether entered into before, on or after the commencement of this Part) may operate to vary, modify or restrict in any way section 12 or 16.

In that the act in section 16(k) specifically prohibits assigning or subletting without the landlord's consent but is silent on the matter of a licensee and section 16(n) obliges the tenant to notify in writing the landlord of the identity of each person (other than a multiple tenant) who, for the time being, resides ordinarily in the dwelling. It is clear that occupants (a licensee for example) other than the tenants are provided for and allowed by the act.

At either extreme it would be clear if a tenant or landlord were in breach of their obligations but there is room for some debate in the middle ground but I would say three tennants in a four bedroom house taking in a licensee in the fourth bedroom would not in itself be a breach of the tenants obligations, provided of course they notify the landlord in writing of the additional occupant.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119656510#Comment_119656510

Back to the subletting again? Has John moved out and sublet the property? No according to the op, John is still there, so why are you bringing up subletting terms in the RTA?

The landlord is not inhibiting peaceful enjoyment of the tenancy but restricting the tenancy to the number of tenants on the lease. The op stated in the opening post that it is a three bedroom house, not four.

So again, what legislation over rides the lease agreement limiting the the tenancy to the number of tenants agreed in the lease? What you posted does not answer that question.