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

LL fined for refusing HAPs tenant.

  • 15-03-2019 9:04pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    Looks like this lady discriminated against a HAPs recipient and rightly paid the price.
    Judge Groarke said he was not satisfied the intention of the Prendergasts was to discriminate against Mr Keogh or anybody else receiving HAP.He observed it was the first time they had rented the property and there was “a quagmire of legislation”, which they were not familiar with.
    “But unfortunately the law says that people are presumed to know the law and must act within the law whether they know what it is or not,” the judge said.
    “I think that this was probably a human error, a human mistake on the part of the Prendergasts and they had no particular intention to treat anybody in a discriminatory fashion,” he said.
    “I don’t think there was any mala fides on their part. I don’t think they are that kind of people. However, there was discrimination,” the judge added.



    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/landlord-must-pay-1000-compensation-for-rejecting-tenant-on-hap-37917940.html


«13456

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭gar32


    This is happening to most people on the HAP I am sure. She sent an email stating "no HAP". I am sure most LL just don't answer or say sorry place it taken.

    The governments polices need to change so housing is not in the mess and with the crazy prices they are today.

    LL only want a tenant that looks after they place while they live there. It's more like a job interview then a right these days. More housing needed get on to your TD to complain please !!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,719 ✭✭✭Grumpypants


    She prob thought she was doing the right thing sending a polite response, lesson learnt she will just pick one person and ignore the others from now on.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    as a LL i think it's only right and proper that you decide who you wish to let your property. although i can see certain lefty politicans in this country trying to take that right from LLs if they had their way.
    certainly she was foolish to state "No HAPs"


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,202 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    I dont mind HAP per say but what I dont like is that the inspection happens after agreeing to HAP. If the inspection fails (and I've heard some horror stories) the LL doen't get paid.

    The whole system is a mess.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    personally i dislike smokers.
    would i be breaking the law by advertising "Non Smokers only"?

    likewise dog/cat/snake/rabbit owners
    is it illegal to exclude these categories of tenant?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,499 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    Did anyone actually read the article? She wasn't trying to discriminate, the daughter thought that they were unable to accept hap tenants as they were not registered. The judge accepted that but indicated ignornance of the law is not an excuse.


  • Registered Users Posts: 445 ✭✭Garibaldi?


    If the daughter had stated that they were not accepting HAP because they were as yet unsure of the rules and regulations regarding the system, Id say the judgement might have been different. Her statement was polite but gave no valid reason, thereby making it look like a flat refusal.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    I am so glad my tenant has found somewhere else, the relief of getting the property back.

    Every home owner should have the right to let their house to whoever they want, they are the ones at a financial loss if the tenant turns out to be a filthy dead beat and the Government wont fund your legal costs in getting them out. Lazy layabout tenant will be on free legal aid and he wont care if costs are awarded against him, he doesnt pay any bills, never has and never will.

    Can you imagine any judge letting their property to someone on HAP, give me a break. If someone has a good record and is on HAP that is very different to letting your property to someone who has no employment record and no reputation to care about.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,979 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    Garibaldi? wrote: »
    If the daughter had stated that they were not accepting HAP because they were as yet unsure of the rules and regulations regarding the system, Id say the judgement might have been different. Her statement was polite but gave no valid reason, thereby making it look like a flat refusal.

    The judgement would have been the same. You either discriminate or not.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    I’ve said it till I’m blue in the face. If you’re going to be a landlord you have to be wearing your business hat from the very start. Don’t try to fool yourself or anyone else that you're entering this business to be philanthropic. You’re doing it to make money. Totally familiarise yourself with all your rights and obligations before you start and those of your tenants.
    If you don’t like it then don’t start to go down that road. If you want to plough ahead then do but don’t try to say afterwards that you didn’t know what you were getting into.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    The judgement would have been the same. You either discriminate or not.

    ignorance of the law is .....


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    I was refused a rental on these grounds. all was grand until I mentioned HAP. which they called rent allowance. her face fell..they then emailed me " rent allowance does not suit my husband and I." They clearly had no idea it was discrimination.

    flac offered help, but the house was not great and i did have others to see.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Garibaldi? wrote: »
    If the daughter had stated that they were not accepting HAP because they were as yet unsure of the rules and regulations regarding the system, Id say the judgement might have been different. Her statement was polite but gave no valid reason, thereby making it look like a flat refusal.
    The judgement would have been the same. You either discriminate or not.
    ignorance of the law is .....

    The Judge reduced the WRC fine precisely because he thought this was done due to ignorance and without intent no?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    The Judge reduced the WRC fine precisely because he thought this was done due to ignorance and without intent no?

    yes that would appear to be the case.
    but that doesn't absolve her.
    she STILL acted ILLEGALLY.

    personally i think there should be an allowable defence of Gross Stupidity


  • Registered Users Posts: 445 ✭✭Garibaldi?


    When you let out property you take a chance whether the tenants are HAP or not. A good HAP tenancy has many advantages. The money goes into the account every month regularly. Tenants don't leave at the drop of a hat leaving you to organize a new tenancy with everything entailed in that. People in the upper income bracket can wreck houses also. It's down to a person's character. Still. I feel sorry for this lady, a widow. She didn't mean any harm


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,821 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    gar32 wrote:
    This is happening to most people on the HAP I am sure. She sent an email stating "no HAP". I am sure most LL just don't answer or say sorry place it taken.


    Most, if not all of the LLs getting caught for this are that stupid as to state no HAP. Plenty get away with it by not selecting the HAP Tennant.

    I don't believe that there are too many people in Ireland , first time LL or not, that don't know that you can't refuse HAP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭alan partridge aha


    Went with a reputable letting agent, he filtered out the potential scumbags and left me with excellent tenants.


  • Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    The Judge reduced the WRC fine precisely because he thought this was done due to ignorance and without intent no?
    In my opinion the landlord appealing to the Circuit Court was the wrong decision from an business point of view. Fine the WRC loves to slap big penalties on landlords (WRC "arbitrators" break the proportionality principle many times like the RTB adjudicators, because they know that unless the money is above 8-9ks it is not worth appealing for a landlord or an employer). A Circuit Court case will cost the landlord at least 2-3ks in legal fees (between solicitor and barrister) + the possible legal fees of the tenant solicitors (I am not sure if FLAC solicitors/barristers request legal fees if they win a case). Even if the landlord had won, the unemployed had nothing to loose and would not have paid the legal fees. So it is a short term win-win for the unemployed and a loose-loose for the landlord.
    Long term the unemployed and HAP recipients will loose big with this behaviour, the guy in question with all the publicity he raised around himself will probably never find again a private rented accommodation in Ireland. These news will just give more publicity to the risks of dealing with HAP recipients and more landlords will just keep the hell away from HAP recipients by keeping their mouth shut and not answering any question from candidate tenants that are not suitable.


    Then you see these desperate HAP recipients coming to this forum and complaining that they are totally ignored when applying: this is the rational behaviour imposed by current rules, unless the landlord really wants to accept HAP. The politicians and the socialists have to understand that people do not like to enter into a unsound contract by coercion! If politicians and the sold out Irish press try to masquerade the word coercion with discrimination it does not change the fact that it is still a coercion. Coercion is the only thing the Irish politicians have applied to landlords since 2009, the result is lack of supply!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    Garibaldi? wrote: »
    When you let out property you take a chance whether the tenants are HAP or not. A good HAP tenancy has many advantages. The money goes into the account every month regularly. Tenants don't leave at the drop of a hat leaving you to organize a new tenancy with everything entailed in that. People in the upper income bracket can wreck houses also. It's down to a person's character. Still. I feel sorry for this lady, a widow. She didn't mean any harm

    no you do NOT.
    you interview prospective tenants and decide who does and does not suit you as a LL.

    if you don't like the cut of their jib, then you say "sorry, next please!"
    personally i hate smokers and people with tattoos.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,128 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Pkiernan wrote: »

    The lefty bleeding hearts on here

    Politics Cafe, if you want to continue with that. Your post has been deleted as nothing in the linked article supports it.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    Went with a reputable letting agent, he filtered out the potential scumbags and left me with excellent tenants.

    i dont see why a registrar of bothersome tenants cannot be compiled.
    would that be illegal i wonder?


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,128 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    i dont see why a registrar of bothersome tenants cannot be compiled.
    would that be illegal i wonder?

    Data protection and potential libel nightmare.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,814 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    i dont see why a registrar of bothersome tenants cannot be compiled.
    would that be illegal i wonder?

    You can search the RTB database for judgements against tenants, but that's only going to be the ones who's landlord could be bothered to file a case against them as most landlords won't bother as there's no consequences for a tenant.


  • Registered Users Posts: 445 ✭✭Garibaldi?


    no you do NOT.
    you interview prospective tenants and decide who does and does not suit you as a LL.

    if you don't like the cut of their jib, then you say "sorry, next please!"
    personally i hate smokers and people with tattoos.
    Absolutely agree about the interview! what I mean is that surface respectability is not a guarantee that someone will not turn out to a total pain in the neck.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,865 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Del2005 wrote: »
    You can search the RTB database for judgements against tenants, but that's only going to be the ones who's landlord could be bothered to file a case against them as most landlords won't bother as there's no consequences for a tenant.

    Why limit it to the tenants who have judgements against them? If their name is on the site at all, why take the risk?

    One of the benefits of going with a local EA is that they know what is going on in the area, a physical “list” of dodgy tenants will not exist, but the EA will know who not to rent to.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Why limit it to the tenants who have judgements against them? If their name is on the site at all, why take the risk?

    One of the benefits of going with a local EA is that they know what is going on in the area, a physical “list” of dodgy tenants will not exist, but the EA will know who not to rent to.

    i disagree. many agents are useless. it's not their property so why should they care? also as they are paid commission, it's no skin off their nose if tenants turnover every few months.

    i had dealings with an agency years ago, and the moron walked away and left the front door wide open. luckily my neighbour contacted me.

    i have NEVER used an agency since, and never will.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    Garibaldi? wrote: »
    Absolutely agree about the interview! what I mean is that surface respectability is not a guarantee that someone will not turn out to a total pain in the neck.

    agreed you never really can tell 100% but by interviewing them, you will get a much better feel for a person.

    i remember 1 instance where a family was viewing house of mine. their little boy was quite lively. i said something like "i bet he keeps you on your toes" to which mummy replied "oh he'll have great fun smashing this place" :eek:

    they didn't get the house.:D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    i dont see why a registrar of bothersome tenants cannot be compiled.
    would that be illegal i wonder?

    Need a bond/deposit system. Someone abuses the system they lose the bond. Make it legal to refuse someone with no bond.

    The govt will never agree to it as they'd couldn't out source problem tenants then.

    The current system allows the govt to shift all negativity to Landlords.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    Do we not have a bond /deposit system.

    My tenant paid a deposit when he moved in and I will give it back to him now.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,821 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    tretorn wrote:
    My tenant paid a deposit when he moved in and I will give it back to him now.


    There are many threads where the tenant deliberately recks the property. One LL was out of pocket 14k and this includes the deposit.


Advertisement