shashaela wrote: » I came across this thread as i was looking to see if there's a checklist of some sort in relation to HAP inspections? I would also like to put it out there that not all HAP recipients are the same as how they are usually perceived or stereotyped. Yes, hap replaces the old ras system, but it's also available to ANY tenant , including private, who may be at risk of becoming homeless. I've been renting privately for 15 years. Our last address we lived in for 8 years. We had a brilliant reference from our landlord who was selling up, work reference from my husbands job who is in full time employment, we qualified for hap as we were now entering a market of rents that were DOUBLE of what we were paying at the time!!!! HAP (although I don't agree with its hidden agenda) was our only option of keeping a roof over our children's heads. And it still took us 6 months to find somewhere to rent, we got It the week before our termination expired! We paid the landlord upfront ourselves a months rent and deposit. This was returned to us by the landlord once they had received the same from hap dept. We will never own our own home as we dont earn enough for a mortgage and being brutally honest i think we'd be considered too old at this stage for a mortgage too, and with young children. The prospect of ever getting a council home the way the crisis is now, is a distant dream, will probably never happen. So when we rent a home, its not just a house, we make it our home. We look after it as if it was our own home. Repair small things ourselves. Only contact the landlord if there's anything major. Our current hap rental that we're in, we're here 10 months now, still no sign of an inspection. And like most of you landlords, I'm not looking forward to it. The carpet is very old and badly stained, there was broken items left over from previous tenants that we had to get rid off, we bought our own freezer, hoover, smoke/co alarm, draught excluder for the front door as the rubbery part was broke on the original one, covered up the keyhole as anyone outside on the street could easily look through it and see inside the house! There's no fire blanket or extinguisher which I know the inspection will look for, but I can't believe the strictness of the smoke /co detectors. Its one with a 10 year battery but I guess it still doesn't meet their criteria. We bought our own covers for the sofa and chairs as they were badly stained and ripped with the yellow stuffing/filling exposed and hanging out. And the bathroom needs remedial work. All these defects were visible when we moved in but we had no choice but to take the property, and there's a hole in the ceiling that someone tried to cover up, but now the mould is visible. And the LA are paying full market price for this property. If everything was fixed/repaired/replaced it would make living in it a bit easier and comfortable, but that's all going to cost my landlord, who would probably just decide to take in non - hap tenants, so I will keep the chairs covered for inspection, hide the mouldy hole in the ceiling, buy a lot more rugs to hide the dirty carpet, and hide what other defects I can hide, so I can stay in the property and hopefully they won't nit-pick too much about vents, fans, boilers and wobbly banisters. So all in all, we the tenants, spent a small fortune making our rental home liveable, liveable to OUR standards, and it will all probably be for nothing if hap inspections aren't to THEIR standards and proves too costly for my landlord to undertake. So if any knows where I can find info on hap inspection checklist, if there is one, I'd be much obliged
__..__ wrote: » He probably can't evict you if he doesn't pass a hap inspection. It's likely thought that he will sell up if hap becomes a liability for him.
The_Conductor wrote: » If he fails the HAP inspection- it is likely that the local authority will put a stop on paying the rent- and the tenant then ends up in a situation where they are effectively building up arrears. In such a case the landlord would likely initiate proceedings to terminate the tenancy- on the basis of non-payment of rent (and for good measure- the local authority likely won't discuss the case with the landlord on data protection grounds). Its a sort of a catch 22- damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
shashaela wrote: » Surely the LA wouldn't just stop payments based on the inspections without giving a deadline for repairs/renovations and a follow up inspection??? The tenant wouldnt be in arrears as the tenant pays their % directly to the LA, the LA pays the full rent to the landlord
davo10 wrote: » The tenant is in arrears unless full rent is paid each month irrespective of whether it is paid by you directly or LA. The LA are paying the rent on your behalf, if they don't pay, notice can and probably will be served unless you pay the full amount yourself. You asked why LLs try to avoid HAP tenants, unfortunately that is a primary example of why.
The Student wrote: » Nothing would surprise me with the LA. The tenant makes two payments in respect of their rent, one to the LA (based on the differential rate) and one to the landlord if the Rent is higher than the HAP limits. I would be curious to see what would happen in this case. I would expect that yes the landlord would issue a termination notice for non payment of rent. I suspect the LA would let this run until a termination notice was issued by the RTB etc. No wonder landlords avoid the HAP, they take all the risk. Also, the HAP standards are crazy.
davo10 wrote: » LL used to have to provide a tax compliance cert from Revenue and pass property inspection in order to qualify for HAP/RAS payment, I wonder if you requested an inspection knowing it wouldn't pass or informed them that you were not in a position to provide a cert, would this automatically exempt you from renting to HAP/RAS tenants?
The Student wrote: » I suspect if you were not tax compliant Revenue would be told (either officially or unofficially). I would think that if you were not HAP/RAS compliant the LA would issue a notice that you could not rent the property at all as it would not be fit for rental as it does not meet the rental requirements (which in my eyes are completely ridiculous in some respects). I agree there should be no mould etc, but expecting vents in bedrooms when there are windows there and expecting extractor fans in bathrooms to run of separate switches and not connected to the lights is just going to far.
davo10 wrote: » You are assuming LA and Revenue information streams overlap, if they did, the LL would not be required to provide certification. The HAP requirements exceed the minimum requirements required for private rental properties as far as I recall, the LA could not prevent you from renting privately if you meet the minimum standards.
beauf wrote: » Also the LA are a real pain to deal with. In my experience. Like getting blood out of a stone, trying to talk to them.
William Gates wrote: » Good thread with interesting viewpoints and advice so thanks for that everyone. 1) I am currently in the process of trying to rent out my house that I am moving out of. So far, all viewings have been from HAP tenants. The rent that I am looking for is 2500 per month and they are all saying that HAP will pay 1600 and they will pay the 900 difference.........so does the tenant pay this 900 directly to me the LL? 2) More important question.......the house has a converted attic. This was completed before I purchased the property some 12 years ago. I don't think that there is planning permission for this conversion. Will this be an issue in terms of HAP? 3) Other than the scenario where the tenant stops paying rent, what are the risks of the tenants being removed from the HAP scheme or receiving lower HAP payments? 4) Can the Local Authority just decrease payments if they believe the market rent to be lower?
via4 wrote: » The tenant pays the concil. The council pay you. Yes if they stop paying the concil your payment will not be paid in full. I’m not sure about the attic I’m sure it will be fine there will not be an issue there. They will definitely not decrease the payment.
William Gates wrote: » Good thread with interesting viewpoints and advice so thanks for that everyone. 1) I am currently in the process of trying to rent out my house that I am moving out of. So far, all viewings have been from HAP tenants. The rent that I am looking for is 2500 per month and they are all saying that HAP will pay 1600 and they will pay the 900 difference.........so does the tenant pay this 900 directly to me the LL?
The_Conductor wrote: » Eh, no.If the tenant stop paying the council-the landlord gets *nothing*- as in, nothing whatsoever. The landlord does not get the local authority's/council's portion of the rent- the landlords payment is stopped in full........ The risk is 100% pushed onto the landlord- there is no risk whatsoever for the council.And the icing on the cake- if the tenant stops paying the council their portion of the rent- the council won't talk to the landlord or tell them why they're not getting paid- the landlord gets told absolutely nothing- on data protection grounds. The only insurance company who were offering landlord rental insurance (as opposed to buildings cover) in Ireland- have pulled out- in light of this little stunt. Also- there are plenty of instances of rent being unilaterally decreased- normally by a set percentage- not relating to a particular property- rather, across the board (as-in, limits for areas decreased by government dictat). It has happened- its fact.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » That is really outrageous isn't it. If only Eoghan Murphy pulled up his sleeves and brought in a scheme whereby the LAs take a lease from prospective LLs for HAP tenants, then they vet, check, and bring the dwelling up to the standard they require. Then sub let it to the tenant. LA takes responsibility, LL gets paid no matter what. But as you say why would they do that, i.e. take all the risk and the LL takes none. Bizarre. No wonder LLs are leaving in their droves.
The Student wrote: » Here in lies the reason people on HAP find it almost impossible to find accommodation.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » HAP scheme has to be attractive to LLs. If it isn't they may as well take the risk with a private tenant instead. I am at a loss to understand why LAs don't take the head lease and sublet it on their terms. But I think I know why. Too much risk for the LA I suppose.
The Student wrote: » Exactly I asked the LA why they stopped RAS and RA and was told off the record that due to outstanding rent due to the LA they were stopping these schemes. This is why the HAP is designed the way it is.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » The Student wrote: » Exactly I asked the LA why they stopped RAS and RA and was told off the record that due to outstanding rent due to the LA they were stopping these schemes. This is why the HAP is designed the way it is. It is such a dilemma. The LAs need to provide accommodation via HAP, but there are absolutely no incentives for LLs to take it up are there? It's a mess. If Murphy legislated for LAs to sublet the head lease it would all be solved in an instant. The Government are obliged to house people, so they should take on the risk. Totally bizarre that they expect LLs to do this for them with little recompense when things go wrong other than the painful RTB process.
The_Conductor wrote: » The only insurance company who were offering landlord rental insurance (as opposed to buildings cover) in Ireland- have pulled out- in light of this little stunt.
