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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Suspect rental price is higher than it legally should be.

  • 06-05-2022 10:09am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭


    I'm on the hunt for a new place and am interested in one place. Have spoken to LL and they said the last tenants moved out a year ago and they did some work on the house since, rewiring some plumbing etc. Nothing extensive such as increasing floor space etc. I'm sure the rent they are asking for is far more than what they are legally allowed increase it by. From what I know, the property would need to have been vacant for 2 years, or have had extensive refurbishment done on it. I don't think either is the case.

    The thing is, the market is so bad right now, they've probably loads of demand at the price they've listed it for and I don't want to jeopardise my chances of actually securing it by trying to barter as they'll probably get the asking price easy.

    If I end up getting the property, is there anything that can be done once I'm in, to reduce the price back to what it should be?


    What would be considered "extensive" if floor space wasn't increased, or is floor space being increased a must in order for the price to be increased legally?


    Cheers!



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,006 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    You can log a case with the RTB after renting, assuming the last tenants were actually registered and the rent figure given was correct. But its absolutely going to sour the relationship between yourself and the landlord.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,937 ✭✭✭SteM


    Have you spoken to the previous tenant? How are you so sure that the rent was raised above the allowed amount?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,559 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    How are you sure?



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    I'm not 100% sure, but I'm 99% sure they weren't charging that price in that area 2 years ago assuming the previous tenant was there for at least a year . They were probably there for more going by how the LL described the situation, most of the refurb they have done is fixing the place up after previous tenants left it in a terrible state.

    Is it possible to find out from RTB what the previous rent paid was for the address before agreeing to take it?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 648 ✭✭✭MakersMark


    Why don't you look for a cheaper place?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    So you are telling us you don’t know what the previous tenants were paying, but you are 99% sure they LL is charging too much. Can you see the issue with this?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,460 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Why do you want a relationship with somebody you distrust? Do you also think you are good at hiding this distrust?

    I have refused tenants just on the vibe they give off and it is not hard to sense when somebody is angry at the rental price and trying to tease out some way it would cheaper or they get something extra. I doubt you hid yourself without being noticed as someway "off"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 77 ✭✭covidcustomer



    Sorry, I can't post links, on the RTB website under New Tenancy":


    Setting the rent at the commencement of a new tenancy within a Rent Pressure Zone. 

    In the case of a new tenancy in a Rent Pressure Zone, unless the property is exempt from the RPZ rental restrictions, a landlord is required to furnish the tenant, in writing, with the following information at the commencement of the tenancy:

    • The amount of rent that was last set under a tenancy for the dwelling,
    • The date the rent was last set under a tenancy for the dwelling, and
    • A statement as to how the rent set under the tenancy of the dwelling has been calculated having regard to the Rent Pressure Zone calculator.

    Good luck!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,851 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Landlord spends significant funds sorting house after previous tenants leave it in a state, then gets accused without foundation of breaking the law, then potentially ends up dealing with a seriously awkward Tennant who is not happy with terms that they would have agreed to.

    Who would be a landlord as right.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭meijin


    Yes, but some LL's won't.

    Another option is to just pay it, and find out later from the previous tenant, or request the info from the landlord when you have part 4, or towards the end of tenancy, and dispute through RTB if needed.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Homer


    How do you increase the floor space of an apartment? Hypothetical question! Any wonder landlords are leaving the market in droves.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    Nice start to the tenant landlord relationship. In the door looking for rent reduction



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭howiya


    I think it's the way the prospective tenant is going about it that is the problem rather than looking for a reduction.

    In a normal market the rent would settle at what is agreed between the landlord and tenant.

    When I last looked for a rental (late 2017), place was advertised at X per month and we said we were interested but at Y per month. Landlord suggested another value somewhere between X and Y, let's say Z per month even though its not between X and Y in the alphabet, and a deal was done at Z per month.

    Obviously the market is quite different now and landlords don't need to reduce the rent they expect to receive. The point I'm trying to make though is discussing price isn't necessarily a bad start to a relationship. It's the approach suggested in this instance that will lead to a toxic relationship between landlord and tenant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    I don't want to create a landlord vs tenant divide in this thread, but I feel a lot of you may be responding from an ivory tower position and don't realise just how bad it is trying to find somewhere at the moment. I've had daft alerts set up since last year. At first my criteria was a bit beyond the price of my current place which the lease started on 2 years ago, having seen how few properties were going up, I extended the distance and price criteria and have been seeing pretty much all properties being listed now and it's still very few and any suitable ones, you'd be lucky to even get a response from 10% of applications you send. Having spoken to LL's and EA's, I've been told the same properties that may have received 5-10 enquiries in the whole term of being listed a year or two years ago, are now receiving over 100 in the first hours of being listed. The ones that are any way affordable are receiving about 300 enquiries in the first day.

    So negotiating on the price is not possible, they have droves up people lined up willing to pay the asking price so why would they go with somebody who is asking for it for less?

    Those who are asking how I'm sure. As I said, I'm 99% sure, not 100%, but the previous tenants were there for over 7 years, another neighbour right across from this place who moved in 2 years ago is paying 28% less than what is being asked for this place and I think their place is slightly bigger too. There's no way it would have gone for anywhere near what it is listed for now 5+ years ago.

    I know it may sour things, but I don't think having to shut up and accept it in fear of souring the LL/tenant relationship, or in fear of losing the opportunity to finally get a home, while the LL takes advantage of people in crisis and desperation, to maximise their profits, is how things should be.

    So I'm asking, what is considered "extensive renovation"? Is extending floor space a MUST for renovations to be considered "extensive"? I'm assuming giving the place a lick of paint or replacing carpet or putting in a new boiler and the likes wouldn't be considered extensive, but in the absence of floor space being extended, are there any other works that would qualify a property for being able to increase rent before the 2 year period of vacancy?

    cheers!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    How can you possibly be 99% sure without knowing the most important information, what the previous tenant was actually paying? This isn’t a tenant/LL divide, it is a consideration of whether your statements are credible.

    If the LL has a lot of applicants, the chances of you getting the property may be small, particularly if you give off the vibe you are displaying here. Provided he doesn’t you give you a term lease, he can end it before you get Part 4 rights once you start your crusade.

    I doubt there is anyone here who isn’t aware of the difficulties currently for both tenants and LLs, but this is not the way to go about getting a property and will undoubtedly end up with you back looking for a new place to live once you become antagonistic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    Ok, well replace 99% sure, with me having 99% confidence if I was to place a bet that it's more than the legal increase allowed.

    To be 28% higher than a bigger property less than 20 meters from this one, which was rented just 2 years ago, when this property's previous tenants had been there for over 7 years. To be on par with what first time rentals are going for in the same area for the same size/condition/location and to still be pretty pricey for what it is, but tenants being so desperate right now will pay it anyway.

    So for the sake of discussion, without knowing 100%, if we can just hypothesise on the assumption it IS higher, rather than having a discussion on certainty.


    Thanks for your input anyway, by a term lease, do you mean a specific term must be stated on the least (Typically 1 year I guess?).


    I know this isn't the way to go about getting a property which is why I'm posting and which is why I'm not going to mention anything about it until I have rights. I may not even ever bring it up as not to disrupt the relationship, but I would still like to be aware of the law and rights surrounding the question.


    cheers



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Yes, if there isn’t a term like 1 yr on the lease, he can end the tenancy at any time in the first 6 months as you will not have part 4 rights.



  • Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    In you post above you say you were 2 years into your lease. In the other thread you have going, you say you’re there 6 years and have been given 224 days notice.

    Which is it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 127 ✭✭connected1


    Hi OP, you can find the info here

    Basically there has to be a substantial increase in BER, or in floor space, or a combination of 3 smaller improvements.

    Hope that helps

    



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,597 ✭✭✭chiefwiggum


    So simply put, you found a place you would like to live in but want to pay what you want and not what the landlord wants? Yeah, good luck with that!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,559 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    Rightly or wrongly there's nothing stopping the landlord from producing paperwork claiming that alot more work was done if the landlord knew the right people. It could be quite difficult to prove otherwise.

    Having said that there is nothing stopping you from going for it at the current rent price, waiting 6 months to secure part 4 rights and then approaching the subject with landlord or EA. It would not go down well though and you could be seen as a problem tenant. You might like the place but your actions might sway the landlord to sell up resulting in you having to search again for a home.



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    cheers for the reply. So I've ended up moving into this place now and have paid the advertised rent and deposit of one month of that too. I've had a read of exemption list above and I don't think they've done enough to qualify the increase in rent.


    In the case of me approaching this after securing part 4 rights, what would happen then, would I be entitled to a refund on the rent paid based off what the rent should be? Say if I didn't approach it and then after 2 years I was given notice of eviction and decided to approach it then, would I then be entitled to the overpaid amount back for those 2 years I've been overpaying?

    Is there any way to check the BER rating history of the house?


    Also, is there any way RTB or HAP would ever investigate something like this without a tip off from the tenant? Like do they have any systems where suspicious rent increases would be flagged on their system for investigation if for example the last registered tenant for an address was 14 months ago and paying €1,000 and then 14 months later, the newly registered tenant is paying €2,000, that it would flag that landlord for investigation? I'm just thinking is there a way to get this looked into, without it being obvious that it's the tenant behind it, as not to cause any friction and resentment.


    LL is nice, but at the current rental price and having looked at what the house sold for, it would cover the cost of the purchase price in less than 6 years and they've already been rneting it out for years since they bought it, along with other properties they own, so I'd much rather that money in my pocket than contributing to their fortune, as well as inflating the price for other rentals and contributing to the housing crises.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Op. Have you spoken to the previous tenant and asked what they were paying? Without that information, you have no case to bring to the RTB.

    You are paying for a service, not paying their mortgage. To suggest you are is akin to saying your employer is paying your rent just because you use your wage to pay for the roof over your head.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,103 ✭✭✭manonboard


    OP, im pretty against your mentality of how you seem to want to go about all this, and im a fellow a tenant. You sound like you will be a difficult tenant.

    Regardless of my personal feelings about it, I think with either of your strategies of causing difficulty down the line when you have more power/rights, I think your strategy will fail. At the end of the day, the landlord made 'extensive renovations' to the place. It will come down to a decision on what definition extensive is. The floor space was not increased, but a increase in BER OR a combination of 3 smaller improvements is so easy for them to claim. New boiler? new rewiring? Newly redecorated? Carpet, painting, some furniture etc. It sounds to me like there was an upgrade and i think there in lies your problem. It was not just a lick of paint if new wiring, new boiler and several decorative changes were put in. I think you would have a very hard time proving otherwise because the LL can claim all sorts of upgrades and you have next to no evidence to claim other wise.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,488 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Anecdotal, but anyone I've asked who has moved out of rental accommodation in the last couple of years had told me it was put back on the market far in excess of that they were paying. My own apartment went from €850 to €1300 overnight as the new tenant told me when I picked up some post, well in excess of what was allowed. Plenty people on this forum encourage this practice. It's not an unreasonable suspicion that this has happened.

    If the government was serious about RPZs they should enable and direct the RTB to compare rents year to year.



  • Registered Users Posts: 275 ✭✭squigglestrebor


    Dont call them people ,Landlords on this forum encourage it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    Don't wast your time... its a sneaky way of doing business and no-one will listen to that rubbish...



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    I don't need to speak to the previous tenant. The LL is required to furnish this information if requested as quoted from the RTB website in a post above. So I'm asking in the case of an investigation proving the rent is higher than it should be, would I receive a refund on the amount overpaid for what it legally should have been restricted to, along with the other queries in my post above.

    I didn't say I was paying their mortgage. I said I'd rather I have that money than contributing to their fortune. I'm not looking to enter a discussion on how the "service" is a basic need and not one that should have been allowed to be exploited for profit the way it has been, I'm just looking for information relating to my questions above, cheers.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Difference between suspicion and 99% certainty is evidence of wrongdoing.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    A home may be a need, so is food, but you have no entitlement to either being affordable to you. Maximising profit on an investment is not exploitation.

    So the LL has to fill in what the previous rent was?



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    I'd agree with you on that, but the link above specifically states the areas that must be improved upon to qualify for an exemption. Rewiring, redecorating, new furniture etc wouldn't make a difference, neither would a new boiler unless it increases the BER rating the required number of points.

    Did you tell them and did they do anything about it? I think the lack of action from tenants on these issues is part of the reason why so many are getting away with it. If it was common for these cases to be brought to light, then there'd be far less exploitation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    If you don't see issue with people's homes and security of tenancy being at the mercy of investment funds and profit maximisation and how this has contributed to the mess of housing, I'm guessing you may be on the side who are benefiting from the situation. Profit and exploitation are almost interchangeable by definition, but maximising profit is undeniably exploiting a situation for gain.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,372 ✭✭✭Deeec


    Are you happy to be looking for another place in 6 months time - because that is what is going to happen if you pursue this issue.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,058 ✭✭✭rightmove


    Hi OP,

    You seem to be the litigious kind so if you think you can take a case and win, go for it. You want to anyhow as the laws are ridiculous and rtb favoous tenants and you just want to exploit them for your benefit, RIGHT?. You dont make the rules and all that.

    However I suspect that the LL will probably try to sell the property shortly after dealing with you and there will be one less property to rent and you are hammering in another tiny tiny dornail in coffin of the rental market.

    Good luck to ya



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 275 ✭✭squigglestrebor


    But illegally putting the rent up on your property is not a sneaky way of doing business?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    So you planned a case against the landlord with the RTB before you even moved in!? Wow



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    You said place refurbished so i expect its covered... get somewhere else as you will not be happy there...



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,559 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    OP if you find the proof that you are accusing the landlord of it is your right to ask the rtb to investigate. Whether things are found in your favour is another matter.

    I have to say you are coming across as a problem tenant who took on a property you cannot afford. You might think the clever thing to do is wait until you move out but remember it's a small world and landlords talk.

    As I said it's your right to bring a case but just be sure you are correct.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭kirving


    For your own peace of mind OP, you have got to separate your personal rental situation, and your views on the state of the rental economy generally. These are two different problems.

    For what it's worth, I agree with you generally on the LL's likely tactics, but you're trying to have you cake and eat it.

    You're entering an agreement that you're deeply unhappy about, with an intention to have it amended and refunded later. You're going to be left with a very very sour taste in your mouth when the landlord drags out the case as long as possible while you pay rent in the meantime, and eventually produces receipts which the RTB reluctantly concede meet the absolute bare minimum of "Substantial Change". You'll get notice of intention to sell the following day in the post - guaranteed.

    The best thing you could have done was walk away, while telling the LL that you would inform the RTB of their actions to hopefully worry them a bit. The second best thing you can do now is let it go, and report it just before you move out, and see how you get on.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    Cheers for the helpful replies.

    Whether it'll be a wise move to act on it due to the unfortunate situation of the rental market is going to be the question. It's certainly the sign of a broken system when a tenant would be afraid to act on what they suspect to be their LL breaking the law to the tenants detriment, in fear of again being in a difficult situation trying to find somewhere to live after doing so because the market is so ridiculous.

    Also, I wouldn't have moved in if I couldn't afford it. There's a difference between not being able to afford something, and not finding justification for the price of something you need, regardless of being able to afford it. I'd also advise those making remarks about what kind of a tenant I am, not to judge so quickly. If a LL is acting within the law and doesn't try and do wrong for their benefit, they have nothing to be concerned of.

    So putting the accusations and judgements aside, would anyone know if a case was to be brought say in 2 years, would I be entitled to the overpaid rent for those 2 years, to be refunded?

    Also, is there a way that this could come to light, without the tenant being the one who has highlighted it, such as RTB seeing the price difference between current and previous tenant and it being well over the legal allowable increase?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,372 ✭✭✭Deeec


    Neptunesmoon How much do you think the LL has illegally upped the rent - what is the amount we are talking about?



  • Registered Users Posts: 167 ✭✭porker36


    After reading these threads im so happy my rented apartment is on the market to be sold!! and im done with been a landlord



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,488 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    They asked so I told them what I had been paying. Didn't follow up, it's between them and the landlord.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,488 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    People say 99% certain all the time for stuff they think is any way likely, it's semantics. "Literally" doesn't mean literally any more either. Not really the point of the thread.



  • Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Best day of my life was when I was handed the keys back by my (ex) “the world and it’s uncle should pay for me and my problems” tenant and I watched the back of him walk away.

    Better than my wedding day and birth of my two daughters 😂



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Considering the op is discussing a claim in the RTB, it would seem odd to most that you would be referring to semantics/literal meaning when I pointed out that the op appears to have no evidence to support either his/her suspicion, nor an RTB claim. Surely knowing precisely what the previous tenant was paying is necessary to be “certain” and would be required for a claim to succeed?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,488 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    I'm just saying that the phrase "99% certain" is pretty much meaningless, it's a turn of phrase.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    What is your problem? If the op claims that the rent is above what is allowed and wants to enter a dispute with the RTB, it would seem particularly important to have the previous rent paid. I fail to see how either the literal, or turn of phrase applies without that vital piece of information.

    Put simply for you, if you want to compare two prices, you need both prices for comparison.



  • Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭NeptunesMoon


    If I'm actually going to pursue this, it would be on the basis of obtaining sufficient evidence. The purpose of the thread is to get details about the situation, not to bicker about the semantics or how I can be 100% certain etc.

    So I'm wondering, if it's a case where I'd be entitled to the difference in rent paid back, even if I was to bring the case about 2 years from now, would I get the overpaid rent back for those two years?

    Also, is there any possibility of this coming to light without me being the one to instigate any investigation, so RTB assessment or similar that will flag the rent being higher than the legal amount it should be based on the last rent amount and time in between etc.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement