Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please 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. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Covid tenant issues.

Options
«1345

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Ap2020
    Registered Users Posts: 39 ✭Ap2020


    What the landlord was doing in this situation was always asking for trouble. Depending on move in dates, the covid changes may have saved them if the tenant has only been there since, say, late October.

    If you have a holiday home that you rent out you need that lease to be shorter than six months, otherwise your tenant will gain part 4 rights and the entire process for an eviction, which can ultimately end in the district court, has to be gone through. The tenant doesn't need any particular excuse in those circumstances, only the belief that your claim to want the property back for your own use is not genuine.


  • Options
    #3
    stinkbomb
    Registered Users Posts: 263 ✭✭stinkbomb


    What makes you think its an "excuse"? It's not like covid hasn't affected peoples lives. The tenant has every right to stay in the property, and would have done if covid had never happened.
    What you have here is an amateur landlord who doesn't know what they are doing and has been lucky up until now.


  • Options
    #4
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    stinkbomb wrote: »
    What makes you think its an "excuse"? It's not like covid hasn't affected peoples lives. The tenant has every right to stay in the property, and would have done if covid had never happened.
    What you have here is an amateur landlord who doesn't know what they are doing and has been lucky up until now.

    The tenant agreed to a contract of 9 months. Now is using covid as an excuse. They signed a contract for 9 months.


  • Options
    #5
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    handlemaster wrote: »
    The tenant agreed to a contract of 9 months. Now is using covid as an excuse. They signed a contract for 9 months.

    Have to agree with the others, once the LL agreed a lease over 6 months, he/she has to accept that the tenant has part 4 rights. The tenants legal rights under the RTA trump any term clause in the letting agreement.


  • Options
    #6
    eleventh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 436 ✭✭eleventh


    It's an example of a landlord with enough experience but yet is ignorant of the law, dealing with a tenant who's not honest.
    In other words, a rare case. Vast majority of tenants are honest, the last thing they'd want is to create a conflict.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    stinkbomb wrote: »
    What makes you think its an "excuse"? It's not like covid hasn't affected peoples lives. The tenant has every right to stay in the property, and would have done if covid had never happened.
    What you have here is an amateur landlord who doesn't know what they are doing and has been lucky up until now.

    ..and people are baffled why so many properties are left empty...


  • Options
    #8
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Landlords have to realise the govt doesn't want to build or supply housing. They are making it the Landlords problem, so the Govt don't have to deal with it. Or pay for it in many cases, not this one as far as we know.

    The vast majority of tenancies do not end up in over staying. But if they do the landlord is in their own. So you have factor that in any financial planning.


  • Options
    #9
    brisan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,242 ✭✭✭brisan


    beauf wrote: »
    ..and people are baffled why so many properties are left empty...

    The landlord didn’t know the law
    Had it handy for a few years renting out for 9 months of the year
    Is he even registered with the RTB as he was legally obliged to do
    Did he even know it existed ?
    Did he care or did he think I’ll get someone to pay the mortgage on my holiday home so I can use it for free for 3 months of the year ?
    If he was that should have been his first port of call
    Was he paying taxes ??
    He should have rented the property out for 5and a half months a year but obviously wanted the extra 3 and a half months rent
    His ignorance of law has now come back to bite him on the ass
    Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law
    Tenants have rights as well
    Maybe too many rights at times and some do take the mickey but those rights were conferred for very good reasons


  • Options
    #10
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    The reason was people got kicked out for no reason and because there is no supply they couldn't find anywhere else.

    Many years later and this tenant still has the same issue. No supply can't move anywhere else. So all those holiday homes and fair deal homes all remain empty.

    At some point you'd hope someone will join the dots.


  • Options
    #11
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    brisan wrote: »
    The landlord didn’t know the law
    Had it handy for a few years renting out for 9 months of the year
    Is he even registered with the RTB as he was legally obliged to do
    Did he even know it existed ?
    Did he care or did he think I’ll get someone to pay the mortgage on my holiday home so I can use it for free for 3 months of the year ?
    If he was that should have been his first port of call
    Was he paying taxes ??
    He should have rented the property out for 5and a half months a year but obviously wanted the extra 3 and a half months rent
    His ignorance of law has now come back to bite him on the ass
    Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law
    Tenants have rights as well
    Maybe too many rights at times and some do take the mickey but those rights were conferred for very good reasons


    Why ask if the landlord was registered, paying taxes etc. This always seems to be an easy go to statement of attack on landlords. The LL should have realised that the tenant would have rights after 6 months, thst was a big mistake.But equally the tenant should be honoring the contract that they signed. It was clear from the outset it was for 9 months only.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    brisan wrote: »
    The landlord didn’t know the law
    Had it handy for a few years renting out for 9 months of the year
    Is he even registered with the RTB as he was legally obliged to do
    Did he even know it existed ?
    Did he care or did he think I’ll get someone to pay the mortgage on my holiday home so I can use it for free for 3 months of the year ?
    If he was that should have been his first port of call
    Was he paying taxes ??
    He should have rented the property out for 5and a half months a year but obviously wanted the extra 3 and a half months rent
    His ignorance of law has now come back to bite him on the ass
    Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law
    Tenants have rights as well
    Maybe too many rights at times and some do take the mickey but those rights were conferred for very good reasons

    If your questions are meant to be rhetorical, you are making a lot of baseless assumptions. The LLs tax affairs are not the concern of the tenant, their rights are not affected by them. The tenant is not “paying the landlords mortgage”, they are paying to rent the house, whether the LL has a mortgage or not is immaterial.

    While I am in agreement with you that the LL has only his/herself to blame in this situation, and it could be a harsh lesson to learn, speculating about any other aspect of the LLs standing with the RTB and Revenue is trite.


  • Options
    #13
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    The whys aren't important. The fact is the legislation and the rules make it nonviable to rent short term and even long term is now high risk, with little protection for the LL.

    If you want to increase supply that would seem to be counter intuitive. But thats what people seem to want.


  • Options
    #14
    brisan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,242 ✭✭✭brisan


    Dav010 wrote: »
    If your questions are meant to be rhetorical, you are making a lot of baseless assumptions. The LLs tax affairs are not the concern of the tenant, their rights are not affected by them. The tenant is not “paying the landlords mortgage”, they are paying to rent the house, whether the LL has a mortgage or not is immaterial.

    While I am in agreement with you that the LL has only his/herself to blame in this situation, and it could be a harsh lesson to learn, speculating about any other aspect of the LLs standing with the RTB and Revenue is trite.

    Why did the landlord go to the papers
    Surely the RTB is the first port of call , hence why I asked did he know it existed
    I am sure there are a few accidental landlords who are not registered
    If you ring the RTB as a landlord or a tenant the first question they will ask is. Is the property registered
    If you’re a landlord you will have to register to make a complaint
    If the property is not registered the tenant will still be able to make a complaint but the landlord will be chased to register
    Unless the whole article is a fabrication to fill paper space which is not beyond the bounds of possibility


  • Options
    #15
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    brisan wrote: »
    Why did the landlord go to the papers
    Surely the RTB is the first port of call , hence why I asked did he know it existed
    I am sure there are a few accidental landlords who are not registered
    If you ring the RTB as a landlord or a tenant the first question they will ask is. Is the property registered
    If you’re a landlord you will have to register to make a complaint
    If the property is not registered the tenant will still be able to make a complaint but the landlord will be chased to register
    Unless the whole article is a fabrication to fill paper space which is not beyond the bounds of possibility

    I suspect that letters like this to the papers are not always bone fide. A few years ago, some letters in Ben Dunnes’s column bore a striking resemblance to opening posts on this very site.

    But leaving that aside, it isn’t uncommon for people to post on Boards.ie looking for advice, at the same time as getting advice from both solicitors and/or RTB. It is a free resource.


  • Options
    #16
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I assume because it's just dawned on them why during a housing crisis it makes more sense to leave a place like this empty, if you aren't using it full time.


  • Options
    #17
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,271 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    stinkbomb wrote: »
    What makes you think its an "excuse"? It's not like covid hasn't affected peoples lives. The tenant has every right to stay in the property, and would have done if covid had never happened.
    What you have here is an amateur landlord who doesn't know what they are doing and has been lucky up until now.

    No he does not have a right as it’s needed for family use


  • Options
    #18
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,271 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    brisan wrote: »
    The landlord didn’t know the law
    Had it handy for a few years renting out for 9 months of the year
    Is he even registered with the RTB as he was legally obliged to do

    Does he need to?
    I’d say he may be exempt. A 9 month holiday let or perhaps online
    https://www.rtb.ie/register-a-tenancy/is-your-property-exempt-from-registration


  • Options
    #19
    brisan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,242 ✭✭✭brisan


    ted1 wrote: »
    Does he need to?
    I’d say he may be exempt. A 9 month holiday let or perhaps online
    https://www.rtb.ie/register-a-tenancy/is-your-property-exempt-from-registration

    Under what section there would he be exempt ?
    Would you normally issue a lease for a holiday letting no matter how long the let
    In his original letter the landlord says he made it clear it was a 9 month tenancy


  • Options
    #20
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    brisan wrote: »
    Under what section there would he be exempt ?
    Would you normally issue a lease for a holiday letting no matter how long the let
    In his original letter the landlord says he made it clear it was a 9 month tenancy

    There is no mention of a written lease in the letter.


  • Options
    #21
    stinkbomb
    Registered Users Posts: 263 ✭✭stinkbomb


    ted1 wrote: »
    No he does not have a right as it’s needed for family use


    No, thats not the case. It's not needed for family use, as a home. It's wanted for family use, as a holiday getaway.

    The facts are simple: The tenant was there more than 6 months and acquired part 4 rights to stay. The landlord was either ignorant of the rules or thought s'he would get away with it.
    The tenant did nothing wrong, simply used the rights given to him/her in law.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,271 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    stinkbomb wrote: »
    No, thats not the case. It's not needed for family use, as a home. It's wanted for family use, as a holiday getaway.

    The facts are simple: The tenant was there more than 6 months and acquired part 4 rights to stay. The landlord was either ignorant of the rules or thought s'he would get away with it.
    The tenant did nothing wrong, simply used the rights given to him/her in law.

    And he can be evicted as it’s needed for family use. He can be offered it back once the family are finished


  • Options
    #23
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,767 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Have to agree with the others, once the LL agreed a lease over 6 months, he/she has to accept that the tenant has part 4 rights. The tenants legal rights under the RTA trump any term clause in the letting agreement.

    Can I ask what would be the situation if the OP or any 'LL had a fixed term lease for less than 6 months and the tenant refused to leave when the time was up. Would the tenant still gain part4 rights?


  • Options
    #24
    brisan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,242 ✭✭✭brisan


    Dav010 wrote: »
    There is no mention of a written lease in the letter.

    He stated that the tenant was informed it was a 9 month TENANCY

    How many landlords actually issue a lease nowadays
    Either in paper form or an online lease ???


  • Options
    #25
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    brisan wrote: »
    He stated that the tenant was informed it was a 9 month TENANCY

    How many landlords actually issue a lease nowadays
    Either in paper form or an online lease ???

    I would suspect most.


  • Options
    #26
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,271 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    brisan wrote: »
    He stated that the tenant was informed it was a 9 month TENANCY

    How many landlords actually issue a lease nowadays
    Either in paper form or an online lease ???

    Most would.


  • Options
    #27
    stinkbomb
    Registered Users Posts: 263 ✭✭stinkbomb


    ted1 wrote: »
    And he can be evicted as it’s needed for family use. He can be offered it back once the family are finished


    Again, you are wrong. It is not NEEDED for family use, its WANTED for family use, as a temporary holiday home. That is not a valid reason for eviction under the rules.


  • Options
    #28
    stinkbomb
    Registered Users Posts: 263 ✭✭stinkbomb


    brisan wrote: »
    He stated that the tenant was informed it was a 9 month TENANCY

    How many landlords actually issue a lease nowadays
    Either in paper form or an online lease ???

    Pretty much all of them.


  • Options
    #29
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,875 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Even if the tenancy was less than six months, surely the process to evict if they overhold or do not pay is the same.

    The only thing here is the fact that tenants of less than six month lease need no reason for eviction, and do not gain Part 4 rights. But for the owner/landlord the problem is still the same surely.


  • Options
    #30
    brisan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,242 ✭✭✭brisan


    stinkbomb wrote: »
    Pretty much all of them.

    I thought as much
    We used to give one and so did my brothers
    However I know two who dont and never have


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    neris
    Registered Users Posts: 20,039 ✭✭✭✭neris


    Doesnt sound to far off the story line in the Ross OCarroll Kelly podcast/column from last weekends times


Advertisement