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

New build house rules - no pets

Options
  • 29-05-2023 9:55pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2 aoifec250


    Hi, I’m looking at buying a new build house and in the contracts we got there’s a rule for no animals of any kind. Has anyone seen that included for houses before? Now there are some apartments being built in the estate but it looks like the rule is for all.

    Post edited by Spear on


«134

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 21,211 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Do they define what an animal is? Goldfish or snake acceptable. Really daft, is this for the management company.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭Glaceon


    No pets in a house I’d own? Screw that, so glad there’s no OMC here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭Count Dracula


    waffle



  • Registered Users Posts: 2 aoifec250


    23. NOT TO KEEP ANIMALS

    Not to keep any bird, dog, or other animal which in the opinion of the Developer may cause annoyance to the owners or occupiers of any other Houses or Apartments.

    that’s the wording



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,028 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    Ah sure what are they gonna do about it if home owners get animals?

    I wouldn't care, buy the house, get the dog/cat/donkey whatevs



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭dontmindme


    Think your in the wrong forum tbh...



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,588 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    I'd interpret that as not allowing your animals to annoy neighbours, not the way you interpreted it as not being allowed to keep animals at all. If it's a house I can't see any grounds for no animals.

    Apartments have common areas so that's different





  • That is the exact wording used on my estate of houses and apartments, but read it again and you will see that the which may cause a nuisance is where it’s at. It means effectively that you might keep a budgie in a cage in your apartment but not a pigeon lift on the balcony. It is standard wording. A well-behaved dog under control is fine, but not an abandoned one which would bark the block down. In my apartment block lots of dogs are in residence, in fact the dog below is now squeaking his toy on the patio. During the pandemic tons of dogs were added, mostly very well behaved, but there have been complaints of fouling on the parkland in the centre of the estate. The Property Management Company sent out a circular to get people pick up after their dogs or else they will have to pay a fine. It’s not that pets are forbidden altogether, but that the ones present should not present a nuisance.







  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Help & Feedback Category Moderators Posts: 25,151 CMod ✭✭✭✭Spear


    This has nothing to do with boards.ie. Moved to a forum that's related to the topic instead.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Most OMCs wont have an issue with a pet in your own home as long as it doesn't cause an annoyance. The contract allows them to deal with any problem pets should an issue arise.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,755 ✭✭✭thomas 123


    Having lived in an estate - I see why this is there. One guy left his dog out on a balcony first thing in the morning, like 4am/5am and it would bark and whine for the entire morning till they got up or returned around 10 or 11am. Kept us all up.

    I guess they have it in there since there is always some ass with zero consideration.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭em_cat


    It’s a fairly standard clause that enables the OMC, which will eventually take the estate in charge, to have court order removal of nuisances caused by animals but it is also there to allow any landlords to prohibit the keeping of pets and what not for renters.

    When we bought our apartment our head lease has the same and our Shi Tzu didn’t give a toss nor did we, she wasn’t a nuisance and our OMC didn’t realise just how formidable I can be.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,244 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    If the OMC was motivated to act, say on foot of complaints about your dog, then it would be a test of contract law versus your formidability. My money would be on whether the terms of the contract were legal, and the indisputable fact that you agreed to them when signing the contract.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,368 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    It can only really apply if the entire estate is managed and how long it will remain so. I don't see how it would be enforceable after the management company goes. The problem is it may never go. I get it for apartments and maisonettes but a house seems crazy



  • Posts: 1,539 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    But kids are okay? (And not the goat kind).

    I'd walk away. One of the pleasures of owning your own house is having a pet if you want one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,244 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Why would the management company go? There is a statutory requirement to have an OMC in multi unit developments built since 2011.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭em_cat


    No one complained about our dog; The point re my post is that it a standard clause, not really anything to be worried about and if you are then make sure said pet is well trained and is kept well ie not being left on balcony to whine, whimper, bark which most of our undesirable neighbours do, let them roam common areas and foul, all which have led to numerous poor dogs being rehoused or worse in our estate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,244 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    My point was that no matter how formidable you think you are, if the clause in the contract is legally binding and you agreed to it, then Fido would have to go.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,804 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    OP, I really do not think that the estate you are looking at will suit you: best look for somewhere else that has rules more to your liking.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,198 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    I think this sort of stuff has a habit of spreading out to other estates. Its a bit like the no hanging clothes outside to dry BS.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,673 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    IANAL, but it's strange that the wording refers to the developer rather than the management company. If/when ownership transfers from the to a management company owned by the property owners, I suspect that this rule would fade away with the developer, unless the MC agrees to institute a new rule.

    It's a crap rule tbh, very intrusive on personal freedoms. There's legislation around noise nuisance and litter nuisance and animal welfare, so I'm not sure why these lads would feel the need to go beyond this.

    Your solicitor should be able to advise you more about the potential future impacts on you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭DubCount


    If your pet is causing annoyance to your neighbours, you shouldn't need a contract term to tell you what the right thing to do is. If you want an annoying pet, dont live in a housing estate, find somewhere where you are far enough away from other people so that you dont bother them. Your right to a pet in your property does not over-ride your neighbours right to peacefully enjoy their property.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,368 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    I don’t see how a house is a multi unit development. Don’t think it can apply to a house because it was built at the same time as an apartment block.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,244 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    You might not see it, but the legislation does.


    ”residential unit” means a unit in a multi-unit development which is— 

    (a) designed for— 

    (i) use and occupation as a house, apartment, flat or other dwelling, and 

    (ii) has self-contained facilities;


    https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2011/act/2/section/1/enacted/en/index.html



  • Posts: 1,539 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Define "causing an annoyance".

    Some people are annoyed simply by the sight of a dog or a cat.

    Lots of cranks, when it comes to animals .



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,594 ✭✭✭newmember2


    Define "causing an annoyance".

    It's literally been spelled out already above in the contract wording, the developer will 'define' it "...which in the opinion of the Developer may cause annoyance". It's a ban on annoying/problem animals but OP has a problem with that.



  • Posts: 1,539 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No it hasn't been spelled out.

    What constitutes an annoyance? Is it barking? meowing? existing?

    Whatever Karen in number 3 who hates dogs feels like complaining about?

    What may cause you an annoyance may not cause me one, so it needs to be specific, and fair.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,368 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    That isn’t a permanent feature as these entities are meant to be there until they are handed to the council. Yes you are technically correct there needs to be a management company but not for ever. After that the agreement with the management company will not apply as the company will no longer exist. It is a mess long term as council are refusing to take charge. Nobody really wants to end up with HOA situation like the US.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,594 ✭✭✭newmember2


    eh yeh it has, unless you have reading difficulties - what defines the annoyance will be the opinion of the Developer.



Advertisement