nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Eviction process

TattooedLady

We are buying a house that currently has tenants. They were given notice at the start of October and informed the seller they planned to move out 2nd April.

Now I know there's a hold on notices of termination while level 5 is happening.

The tenants told the sellers last week they haven't found anywhere to go yet. They are also refusing to let the landlord get anyone in for maintenance on the house (there's a possible rodent problem as droppings were found and leak in one the showers and few other bits of maintenance that need doing). According to their solicitors and ptrb it's grounds for eviction when they won't allow maintenance to be carried out.

I suppose my question is if it goes this way how long does eviction process take? They would be doing it via their solicitor. Obviously we are hoping they leave the end of next week as planned but just trying to understand what happens if they don't.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

PalLimerick

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/116685021#Comment_116685021

What if the tenant was like me and fought back would you be prepared for that? Illegal evictions are not easy to carry out.

Claw Hammer

Landlord21 wrote: »

What sort of timeframe would that be?

You can get an adjudication quite quickly (within weeks) but there is the possibility of and appeal to the Tribunal as well as the possibility of proceedings in the courts going on for years.

The_Conductor

Landlord21 wrote: »

What sort of timeframe would that be?

If all steps of the process are appealed by the tenant- and the landlord eventually has to go to court to get an enforcement order for the detemination order, 9 months is a minimum- if the landlord has done everything perfectly- and if anything at all is wrong, or not properly documented, it could literally take years.

Landlord21

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It is not a defence for a tenant to say they can't source alternative accommodation. The landlord will get a determination order from the RTB if that is the case.

What sort of timeframe would that be?

Claw Hammer

Landlord21 wrote: »

Hi sorry to post on old thread.

Can I ask, what if tenants genuinely can't find accommodation. They don't damage property, allow landlord in to do work (if required) and even continue to pay rent?

Basically the opposite of the horror stories you hear. If there is a genuine case of not being able to secure a new home.

Will HAP , for instance still pay rent when tenants time is up officially? Or does HAP cease paying when the date of the Eviction comes up?

I have tenants they may overhold*, as mentioned could be a matter of not finding a new place as opposed to wrecking the house etc..

I know its my property and I can sell but has there been cases of tenants just refusing to go but still paying rent??

*Very good tenants and always pay on time. No issues with them.

It is not a defence for a tenant to say they can't source alternative accommodation. The landlord will get a determination order from the RTB if that is the case.

Landlord21

Hi sorry to post on old thread.

Can I ask, what if tenants genuinely can't find accommodation. They don't damage property, allow landlord in to do work (if required) and even continue to pay rent?

Basically the opposite of the horror stories you hear. If there is a genuine case of not being able to secure a new home.

Will HAP , for instance still pay rent when tenants time is up officially? Or does HAP cease paying when the date of the Eviction comes up?

I have tenants they may overhold*, as mentioned could be a matter of not finding a new place as opposed to wrecking the house etc..

I know its my property and I can sell but has there been cases of tenants just refusing to go but still paying rent??

*Very good tenants and always pay on time. No issues with them.

JimmyVik

dapop wrote: »

One of the main drivers for the RTB (then PRTB) being set up was to relieve the courts of the burden of dealing with landlord and tenant issues. These claims were often spurious. The quasi legal system of the RTB effectively acts as a specialist system to interpret the legislation - all they do is interpret the law and whether it has been adhered to - and issue findings.

In theory it is a good idea to filter cases before the courts need to be involved but where it fails is in the time it takes. It needs to be much quicker and have a set timeframe.

I was a landlord in the UK and if I had needed to end a tenancy through the courts I knew it would take three months if done correctly. No uncertainty; property would be vacant in three months.

I know one person trying to evict non rent paying tenants for going on 3 years now.
I know another few of them coming up to 2 years now and still no sign of movement.

dapop

JimmyVik wrote: »

RTB gives everyone the impression that you can ONLY deal with tenants through the RTB.
It would be much better if you could elect to bypass the RTB and go directly to court to hear your case.
THE RTB is just a blocking mechanism and of no use whatsoever to a landlord with a delinquent tenant.

One of the main drivers for the RTB (then PRTB) being set up was to relieve the courts of the burden of dealing with landlord and tenant issues. These claims were often spurious. The quasi legal system of the RTB effectively acts as a specialist system to interpret the legislation - all they do is interpret the law and whether it has been adhered to - and issue findings.

In theory it is a good idea to filter cases before the courts need to be involved but where it fails is in the time it takes. It needs to be much quicker and have a set timeframe.

I was a landlord in the UK and if I had needed to end a tenancy through the courts I knew it would take three months if done correctly. No uncertainty; property would be vacant in three months.

JimmyVik

blowin3 wrote: »

The RTB is the problem for sure. We were the ones that was made feel guilty when we went to the RTB our evidence was shot down by the RTB and not allowed while the tenant was given free will to say what they wanted. But you also have a landlord and more important a council paying HAP if these two work against you with the RTB you have no chance. We spoke to a solicitor and was basically told the cost was a big risk going down the legal route.

So where does that leave the house owner or good tenant " shout up and put up" was what we were basically told. When I hear the minister talk about MIXED private/social housing I shiver when I see whats happed here with us.

Even the owner of the property gets stonewalled by the council.
Its 100% the council.
As you say, all these stories have made me weary of ever buying in a new estate unless i know 100% the social houses are on the other side, far away from the house i would be buying.
Maybe thats an unpopular opinion, but if the council treat neighbors like this and allow anti-social behavior, best not to roll the dice at all.

blowin3

the_syco wrote: »

Is he allowed to evict them?

The RTB is the problem for sure. We were the ones that was made feel guilty when we went to the RTB our evidence was shot down by the RTB and not allowed while the tenant was given free will to say what they wanted. But you also have a landlord and more important a council paying HAP if these two work against you with the RTB you have no chance. We spoke to a solicitor and was basically told the cost was a big risk going down the legal route.

So where does that leave the house owner or good tenant " shout up and put up" was what we were basically told. When I hear the minister talk about MIXED private/social housing I shiver when I see whats happed here with us.

DubCount

the_syco wrote: »

Is he allowed to evict them?

He cant evict them without reason.

If he tries to evict them for anti-social behaviour, they bring a case to the RTB for unlawful eviction and the RTB are likely to issue the LL with a fine for illegal eviction and may re-instate the tenancy.

If he doesnt evict them, the neighbours can take the LL to the RTB who will probably issue with a fine for not dealing with the issue.

Its the RTB catch 22. There isnt a safe route through the minefield - just a decision on which mine to stand on.

the_syco

blowin3 wrote: »

The adjudicator gave them a warning on the determination order. That was 18 months ago and they are still there the LL has made feeble attempts to move them

Is he allowed to evict them?

blowin3

JimmyVik wrote: »

The right decision if you ask me.
Maybe the residents should be taking the RTB to court instead, as they are the ones keeping the tenants in there.

Also I find it funny that a case can be brought against a landlord to the RTB for not doing something about anti social tenants, and yet the RTB are the very ones preventing a landlord removing said anti social tenants.

We will do you if you dont remove them, but we will do you if you dont remove them.

I agree mostly. But for one thats been through the mill regarding tenants LL and the RTB.
A member of the Garda went to one on the hearings where he read out 16 breachs of the peace that was logged onto the Pulse system. The adjudicator gave them a warning on the determination order. That was 18 months ago and they are still there the LL has made feeble attempts to move them but I am sure he is still getting his HAP payments. But the sad thing is myself and my family we are the ones that have to move because you find very fast the only rights you have is to pay your tax.

rightmove

JimmyVik wrote: »

The right decision if you ask me.
Maybe the residents should be taking the RTB to court instead, as they are the ones keeping the tenants in there.

Also I find it funny that a case can be brought against a landlord to the RTB for not doing something about anti social tenants, and yet the RTB are the very ones preventing a landlord removing said anti social tenants.

We will do you if you dont remove them, but we will do you if you dont remove them.

Again all logical points. the RTB and the anti LL sentiment is the result of policy driven by emotions not logic and this is where we end up

JimmyVik

rightmove wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/landlord-of-so-called-party-house-during-covid-19-pandemic-relieved-by-high-court-quashing-of-order-40312244.html

The right decision if you ask me.
Maybe the residents should be taking the RTB to court instead, as they are the ones keeping the tenants in there.

Also I find it funny that a case can be brought against a landlord to the RTB for not doing something about anti social tenants, and yet the RTB are the very ones preventing a landlord removing said anti social tenants.

We will do you if you dont remove them, but we will do you if you dont remove them.

rightmove

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/landlord-of-so-called-party-house-during-covid-19-pandemic-relieved-by-high-court-quashing-of-order-40312244.html

rightmove

endacl wrote: »

The Dutch had a bright idea some years ago. I’d vote for any party that would house antisocial tenants in shipping containers, miles away from decent people.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2012/dec/04/liberal-amsterdam-plans-scum-villages

Except in ireland the decent ppl are the ones most likely to end in the containers to get away from AS tenants

endacl

The Dutch had a bright idea some years ago. I’d vote for any party that would house antisocial tenants in shipping containers, miles away from decent people.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2012/dec/04/liberal-amsterdam-plans-scum-villages

mrslancaster

friends had to sell up because of AS behaviour from council tenant neighbours. Same as above, house was leased to council & the tenants caused a lot of problems over parking, litter, intimidation, dogs,all night parties to name a few.
Friends contacted council who wrote to the tenant. They organised mediation but tenant didn't show up. Friend got their car windows smashed & house egged for contacting the council. it had previously been a nice road with friendly neighbours but many sold up. The buyers of my friends house eventually sold up too.

What's the solution in that type of situation? If councils move troublesome tenants it just moves the problem.

JimmyVik

blowin3 wrote: »

I will stick my 10 cents in here. I have the tenants from hell living next door to us. We had 3 hearings ( where we the neighbors were questioned like we were wrong) with the RTB where the tenant was found to be guilty of severe anti social behavior.

The outcome they are still living there and been serviced by HAP and St Vincent de Paul its a total joke to be honest thats RTB I am talking about.

The outcome for us we have sold what was our happy home once and getting out and moving to another country....Thats how bad its been for us.

I have a friend who leased their apartment to the council for 25 years. He asked them to put a quiet tenant in.
Now they are terrorizing the neighborhood. My friend is getting calls from neighbours and the management company. All threatening to take him to the RTB, which they cant.

He asked the council to do something about it but they havent.
So everyone is after him to evict the councils tenant, which he cant.

He did AirBnB for a couple of months 2 years ago and got complaints about suitcase noise from the neighbours.

So when airbnb was banned he was going to sell, but the council approached him and leased it for 25 years.

I bet all those neghbours and the management company wish it was airbnb now

Seriously though, the council are the worst for dealing with anti-social tenants. They just dont care.

blowin3

I will stick my 10 cents in here. I have the tenants from hell living next door to us. We had 3 hearings ( where we the neighbors were questioned like we were wrong) with the RTB where the tenant was found to be guilty of severe anti social behavior.

The outcome they are still living there and been serviced by HAP and St Vincent de Paul its a total joke to be honest thats RTB I am talking about.

The outcome for us we have sold what was our happy home once and getting out and moving to another country....Thats how bad its been for us.

JimmyVik

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It is not an impression. It is the law.

Residential Tenancies Act 2004

182.—(1) On and from the commencement of Part 6, proceedings may not be instituted in any court in respect of a dispute that may be referred to the Board for resolution under that Part unless one or more of the following reliefs is being claimed in the proceedings—

(a) damages of an amount of more than €20,000,

(b) recovery of arrears of rent or other charges, or both, due under a tenancy of an amount, or an aggregate amount, of more than €60,000 or such lesser amount as would be applicable in the circumstances concerned by virtue of section 115 (3)(b) or (c)(ii).

(2) In this section “dispute” has the same meaning as it has in Part 6.

What a horribly stacked system.
And its costing totally innocent people tens of thousands of Euro.

Claw Hammer

JimmyVik wrote: »

RTB gives everyone the impression that you can ONLY deal with tenants through the RTB.
.

It is not an impression. It is the law.

Residential Tenancies Act 2004

182.—(1) On and from the commencement of Part 6, proceedings may not be instituted in any court in respect of a dispute that may be referred to the Board for resolution under that Part unless one or more of the following reliefs is being claimed in the proceedings—

(a) damages of an amount of more than €20,000,

(b) recovery of arrears of rent or other charges, or both, due under a tenancy of an amount, or an aggregate amount, of more than €60,000 or such lesser amount as would be applicable in the circumstances concerned by virtue of section 115 (3)(b) or (c)(ii).

(2) In this section “dispute” has the same meaning as it has in Part 6.

JimmyVik

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

End of the article is the key point, after the RTB order they sat on it and told the RTB to deal with it. They should have been competent landlords and immediately took the RTB order to the courts themselves.

RTB gives everyone the impression that you can ONLY deal with tenants through the RTB.
It would be much better if you could elect to bypass the RTB and go directly to court to hear your case.
THE RTB is just a blocking mechanism and of no use whatsoever to a landlord with a delinquent tenant.

DubCount

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

End of the article is the key point, after the RTB order they sat on it and told the RTB to deal with it. They should have been competent landlords and immediately took the RTB order to the courts themselves.

For me, the key point is the RTB ruling is not enforceable. This means the RTB process adds nothing and is simply a waste of time. Landlords should be entitled to go directly to court, or engage bailiffs for an eviction on the basis of a RTB ruling - anything else is just adding red tape and delay.

Claw Hammer

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

End of the article is the key point, after the RTB order they sat on it and told the RTB to deal with it. They should have been competent landlords and immediately took the RTB order to the courts themselves.

Pay for a dog andf then bark yourself?

Cuddlesworth

rightmove wrote: »

someone has to pay for the politicians playing virtue monopoly and not have firm but fair eviction processes

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/were-at-our-wits-end-couple-left-27000-out-of-pocket-as-tenant-hasnt-paid-rent-in-two-years-40278913.html

End of the article is the key point, after the RTB order they sat on it and told the RTB to deal with it. They should have been competent landlords and immediately took the RTB order to the courts themselves.

rightmove

someone has to pay for the politicians playing virtue monopoly and not have firm but fair eviction processes

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/were-at-our-wits-end-couple-left-27000-out-of-pocket-as-tenant-hasnt-paid-rent-in-two-years-40278913.html

JimmyVik

1874 wrote: »

Id say the only reason there as many private rentals is is because, people are waiting to get out, cant get out, or dont know what the reality is.
It is a joke, that serves bad tenants and landlords and not good tenants or landlords.

Thats for records that havent been expunged, I know this happens because I took a case against someone and when they left, they were able to get the record of the case removed.
I still have the case outcome wth an embossed stamp from when it was still the PRTB.

So glad I got out when I did.

I know that happens, but there are still plenty of wild and wonderful cases up on the RTBs site that havent been taken down yet.
I actually found then kind of entertaining at first, but they would make you sick reading them after a while.

And you know the reason they take them down is so as any future landlords cant go on the RTB and while vetting names in case he finds the name of some scum bag that wrecked a previous landlords property.

1874

JimmyVik wrote: »

Will I tell them?

OK. Even if they wreck your house and stop paying you rent while you are trying to evict them....

If they ask you to fix a broken tap, washing machine or cooker, or anything else, you have to get it fixed or you will be fined by the RTB.

Yes, the RTB, the very people who wont let you evict the people who have effectively taken your house and wont give it back, while they wreck it and take YOU to the RTB for not fixing it.

Id say the only reason there as many private rentals is is because, people are waiting to get out, cant get out, or dont know what the reality is.
It is a joke, that serves bad tenants and landlords and not good tenants or landlords.

JimmyVik wrote: »

Go to the RTB site and use the search function.
You can get anything you want there.

Im not going to do it for you. Im sick of the sight of that website.
If you want to believe im lying, thats fine with me too.

Thats for records that havent been expunged, I know this happens because I took a case against someone and when they left, they were able to get the record of the case removed.
I still have the case outcome wth an embossed stamp from when it was still the PRTB.

So glad I got out when I did.