The eviction ban

dontmindme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454111#Comment_120454111

However the RTB will not allow LL's to deal with tenants on email, they insist on snail mail. Dentists and doctors use text messages.

On one side you're talking about the breaking of a legally binding lease agreement, and on the other side you're talking about not missing a doctor/dentist appointment...

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454130#Comment_120454130

Incorrect. There is seldom a valid leases agreement in place. Mostly the tenancy is covered by government regulations. Remember every tenancy after six months is now considered to be a tenancy of unlimited duration so there is no such thing as a lease agreement covering the duration of the tenancy, it only now is valid to cover the terms and conditions of that lease.

An email containing an original document is considered a valid legal document in many cases. My point about doctor's and dentist's dealing in texts is an example of the way the world has moved on.

As an aside if a tenant is ending a tenancy and dose it via email or text to the LL is it valid or are they required to give it via snail mail

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454020#Comment_120454020

Hysteria. Any time I've rented it has been completely up to the landlord to accept me or someone else as their tenant. Nobody has forced them to select a specific tenant.

Your argument appears to be against any form of regulation. All businesses are subject to regulation.They set clear standards and expectations for all involved. If someone doesn't like it, then don't be in the business.

It might surprise you that just over 40% of applications to the RTB for adjudication are made by landlords and by and large, when compared to the alternative of going through the courts, can cheaply and speedily resolve disputes between Landlord and Tenant, affording protections to both parties without having to resort to the courts.

https://www.realestate.bnpparibas.ie/market-research-and-insights/experts-opinion/residential-tenancy-board-friend-or-foe

"So is the RTB working as it should be? And the answer in the main is YES and on balance it is a friend rather than a foe."

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454239#Comment_120454239

If a LL illegally terminates a tenancy will the RTB enforce there judgement

If a tenant overhold will the RTB enforce there judgement

Guildenstern

It may not be obvious to many but social housing and it's relative security of tenure is becoming a whole lot attractive than having to suffer and struggle with whatever the PRS throws at you. Hard to see anything but a further reduction in small one property type amateur landlords.

Income levels for access to social housing will increase as well. Assuming the private renter is unable to move into ownership.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454336#Comment_120454336

Problem with that is the majority of social housing is with those small landlords. That's whats leaving the market. The larger landlords have mostly stayed away from that end of the market.

So your premise is relying on the govt to build and supply it. Which it won't.

At the moment larger landlords can mitigate none income generating rentals, over holding, through economy of scale. Once more of that burden falls on them it will eventually become non viable.

It's just as usual kicking the can just a bit further down the road.

It might be more attractive to a renter. But who will supply it.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454239#Comment_120454239

You're comment just ignores so much legislation its ridiculous.

They don't want to be the business. They are leaving hence the eviction ban.

Not joining the dots.

Guildenstern

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454504#Comment_120454504

Is not the majority of social housing with the council's, 140k homes, and AHBs, 45k homes?

Genuine question as I'm not sure how many private landlords are purely meeting the needs of those on HAP for example.

The only solution is of course to build and build.

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454290#Comment_120454290

Enforcement is a matter for the courts. According to the linked article in my earlier post, disputes arise in only a very small proportion of tenancies and taking a court action is even rarer. "We have found due to the prohibitive cost the litigation ceases with the issue of the determination order from the RTB with the Tenant vacating the property if they fail in the claim."

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454671#Comment_120454671

They have never enforced a determination order for a LL AFAIK. They have for tenants

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454522#Comment_120454522

It doesn't ignore legislation. I' ve clearly stated that all businesses are regulated.

Where a poster has made a specific claim I disagree with e.g. that it is too difficult to serve a valid notice of termination or landlords have no choice in who they rent to or the RTB doesn't do something that is not within their remit, I have countered the claim with a supported counter argument.

I have not set out to address every piece of regulation or legislation that directly or indirectly concerns the rental market.

The eviction ban was brought in for sound reasons during CoViD restrictions, but it is over now. The haitus has caused an additional bottleneck in the pre existing housing crisis which has developed over years and years of poor housing policy but the ban was only a small chapter in it.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454639#Comment_120454639

I mis-wrote. I meant of all landlords with social housing tenants. Not all all social housing.

Of the landlords with social housing tenants the majority of those are small landlords. As they leave the ratio will change.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454865#Comment_120454865

You implied thats it's solely the landlords choice. It isn't.

The reason it isn't because landlords wouldn't take certain tenants, so they changed the legislation.

They needed to do this so the private rental market would be forced to take the tenants that the govt wouldn't build enough housing for.

Eviction ban were lobbied for pre COVID. Same with extending tenancies and changing the rules around what's a valid reason to end a tenancy.

If you are going to change a contract you should do it for new contracts and not force them retroactively on pre existing contacts. People should have an opt out.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454734#Comment_120454734

I'm open to correction. But that's because the legislation empowers the RTB to act against landlords, with fines etc.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454671#Comment_120454671

The point of the RTB is so that disputes don't have to go to court. But it's structured in a way that realistically only the LL will have to go to court to get anything done. Which is prohibitively expensive.

Basically it's structured so the LL has take all financial costs and risks. Not the govt not the tenant. It's to save the govt money.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455054#Comment_120455054

They can make cost findings against tenants as well but the LL is on his own after that.

Basically the system is loaded against the LL. The RTB insists on full details from a LL. They actually insist on you exact name on you PPSN.

You cannot put on B Reeves and if Bass Reeves middle name on initial is in his PPSN then that is required and exact address.

Yet when a tenant raises a dispute the RTB will not take there PPSN before the dispute starts there fore they have no record of the tenant if a similar dispute arises again. Any interaction should require identification and proof of identity.

Flinty997

Can they fine a tenant?

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455029#Comment_120455029

The equal status act has been around for over 20 years - laws against discrimination are nothing new. A landlord still has the choice of tenant, if there are 100 applicants they don't reject 99, they accept 1. The landlord is not forced to accept any specifc tenant.

Regulations have always been subject to change. If I want to carry out work on my house now I have to do it current regulations, not what was in place when I bought it or when it was originally built. The only thing that is constant is change. My mobile phone provider, broadband provider, TV channel provider can change their offering, terms and conditions, price, etc.... continued use is implicit acceptance of the changed terms and conditions. With mobile phone companies spectrum can be reallocated by the regulator. No business can rely on things not changing.

The regulations try to balance public and private good, additions such as the need for a statutory declaration have arisen because some sought to circumvent the regulations.The are still ample genuine grounds for serving a notice of termination.

Flinty997

Are the requirements and checks to borrow 300k from a bank or a 300k property allowed to be the same?

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455436#Comment_120455436

No because the minimum deposit on borrowing 300k is 30k on borrowing a property its a months rent which is less than 1% of it value

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455377#Comment_120455377

They can fine a tenant, they could find them a millions euro, will the tenant pay? No chnace

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455377#Comment_120455377

The RTB doesn't fine but it has and does make determinations against tenants e.g.

DR576/2008 - Notice of Termination dated 28 December 2007, is valid. Tenant shall vacate the dwelling Tenant shall pay €15,865 being arrears of rent totalling €10,865 and €5,000 damages for breach of Tenants obligations

TR188/DR1020/2010 - the Appellant Tenant shall pay the sum of €3,500 to the Respondent Landlord in respect of repairing unauthorised alterations to the dwelling (this is to be off-set against the security deposit of €3,500.00 paid by the Tenants)

I got these from a quick websearch that pulled up an old post from another site - I haven't specifically looked for recent determinations.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455622#Comment_120455622

Seems discriminatory....

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455627#Comment_120455627

In what way does it seem discriminatory? The RTB adjudicates and makes a determination which, based on the facts presented before it, may be in favour of the tenant or in favour of the landlord.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455668#Comment_120455668

It will fine LLs but not tenants amongst other things.

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455692#Comment_120455692

It's technically not a fine but, in case you hadn't noticed, in DR576/2008 above the RTB awarded the landlord €5,000 damages on top of the rent arrears owed.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455750#Comment_120455750

So no fines for tenants.

How much will it cost a landlord to recover "damages". Where does he go to get them?

DownByTheGarden

I met up with some friends last night. one of them had been waiting over 4 years to get a tenant out who hasnt been paying rent.

Last night I found out that a couple of weeks ago he had got a final date for the tenant to move out or he can go down the enforcement route. It took him over 4 years to get to that stage. And still the tenant is hanging on, instead of being in jail for the amount of money he owes and holding one to another persons property worth hundreds of thousands of euro.

No way on earth is there anything right about that situation.

Anyway while we were all shaking our heads in disbelieve the conversation got on to what happening nowadays and why all landlords are getting out.

All socialism ends up with the people who are the providers ending up just giving up providing because, well whats the point working hard and earning anything if its going to be taken off you to give to someone who isnt earning it.

Here we are witht he state basically all but siezing private property that people have worked for to enable othersto have more control over it than the owner. So what you have is the landlords are saying, No, im out, what is the point of me doing all this effort all of my life to be treated like this. And off they go.

We arent too far away now i think from the tax payers thinking the same. Why am i killing myself working and paying all of this tax just for it to be wasted and given away to non tax payers. I they cant reap any rewards from their effort then they will just get sick of putting in the effort.

DownByTheGarden

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120455415#Comment_120455415

Damned right regulations are always subject to change. Rental regulations change every 6 months or so.

Emblematic

What I don't understand is why the government don't simply research best practices in countries where there is a stable rental market and implement regulations there. I'm thinking of places like Germany, The Netherlands etc.

In places like the Netherlands, you can't be evicted mid-contract unless obviously you aren't paying rent. This works for landlords too as they they have a clear set of rules and they know where they stand.