High Court dresses down RTB

gossamerfabric

Here the High Court not so politely tell the RTB that they must do better.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/high-court-overturns-e20000-award-to-tenants-living-in-damp-and-mouldy-apartment-1681015.html

Tuath have the resources to go to High Court. Other Landlords do not.

So much in this report to unpack beyond the actual Damp.

I have a damp apartment. I invested in a dehumidifier to address my damp issues. Landlord invested thousands to address issue unsuccessfully…can't fault them there. I like where I live so I make do.

This family appear to like where they live…they have been there since 2006.

Who can blame them…Grand Canal dock is very convenient to everything.

No wonder they are turning down alternative accommodation offered by Tuath.

6708 euro in rent per year is a relative bargain.

Theirs is one of 60 apartments owned by Tuath in the block.

18 years in what appears to be social housing hasn't been enough of a leg-up for them to become self-sufficient.

surname is interest too.

L1011

Interesting that in this case, the damp was absolutely not lifestyle related; and not the common "my flat is so damp! but I dry all my clothes on clothes horses and never open the windows and blocked all the air vents…"; it actually is an (incredibly) faulty building.

gossamerfabric

If I as a landlord had discovered I had purchased a new built property which turned out to have damp issues, had tried to accommodate tenant in a similar quality of dwelling but the tenant demands specific performance in the terms of eliminating damp which is impossible as landlord to do and all efforts would be futile and then RTB fine me 20,000 I would be enraged.

Tuath can be accused of many things but they can't be accused of being brazen slumlords.

Claw Hammer

It wouldn't be the first time the RTB has been found to have erred in l=aw.

https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/8684c2d3-cfee-496b-9cd8-991cf0aded42/2020_IEHC_635.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/8684c2d3-cfee-496b-9cd8-991cf0aded42/2020_IEHC_635.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/d4bf60b3-ccb0-40e9-828c-63a0fe9e9cfc/2023_IEHC_491.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

dennyk

Sounds like the issue at hand was that the RTB expected Tuath to somehow force the OMC to take action to remedy the faults in the building that were allowing water ingress, and the high court deemed that would be outside of what the law requires of a landlord; landlords are obligated to make repairs to the parts of the property under their actual control, but not to try to make a third party take action to repair some other part of a multi-unit development that is the responsibility of the OMC. In essence, the issues at hand are outside of the landlord's actual control in this case, so the RTB's judgement against the landlord for failing to remedy those issues was an overstep.