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

Eviction Ban extended

2456720

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭DubCount


    The issue here is not serving a 1 month notice before the 6 months lease is up
    Nor serving a 3 months notice after 6 months and a Day,

    Both these risks were taken into account because these were written in the low so we are all aware of these

    However the 4 months eviction ban and probably more has put me in a very unpleasant situation. If the eviction ban is extended until next year . What will happen to those who only rented short term and need their house back - have nowhere else to live. ?

    what happens to rent arrears? sure if a tenant can live for free for a long time with no risk of being evicted why would't they?

    The situation you have been put in is not fair.

    The Government wants to prioritise the right of tenants to stay in their current accommodation over the rights of the landlord to earn rent, regain possession to live in their own property, or regain possession to sell their own asset. They don't care if you become homeless because of this. They don't care if you suffer financial hardship. They only care about your tenant.

    You need to accept this. Its sickening, but its not going to change. In theory, you can chase the tenant through the courts for rent arears. In practice, its to expensive to go to the trouble of securing a judgement which you would be a lifetime collecting (or trying to collect). Talk to your local TD - I doubt you will make any more progress than I did.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    This has made me homeless....where is the social awareness in that?
    I have worked my entire life to get this house ....

    Firstly, you're not back in Ireland, so you're not homeless yet.

    Secondly, and I appreciate this will sound harsh; you have to take some personal responsibility here. There was always the possibility that the ban would be extended because no one knew what the economic effects of COVID would be. This was raised when the roadmap was announced last month, and I'm sure there was some talk of it even before that.

    So to give up your primary residence thinking everything would be back to normal when you returned was, let's be honest, foolish. Being a landlord isn't a hobby you can dabble in; it's a business. And in business there's always the chance you can lose what you've invested.

    Thirdly; to be a bit helpful - you have two things in your favour. Firstly, the length of the lease means Part 4 protections won't kick in. Secondly, even if they did, the landlord wanting to live in the property is a valid grounds for ending a tenancy. I suggest you get proper, professional advice about how to handle this. There is some guidance on the RTB website here - https://www.rtb.ie/ending-a-tenancy/how-a-landlord-can-end-a-tenancy/landlords-grounds-for-ending-a-tenancy.

    Lastly, you've presumably registered the tenancy with the RTB, but if you haven't I suggest you do so quickly.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Would the OP have been able to predict Coronavirus 6 months ago?

    Can you register tenancies of less than 6 months with the RTB?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,913 ✭✭✭Pintman Paddy Losty


    OP,

    If I was you I would inform the tenant that their lease is up at the end of the 6 months and that they will vacate your property. They are not getting a choice in this. Tell them they need to start looking for a new place.

    There are people you can hire that will assist them in moving out on time on the eviction day. They'll even help move some of their possessions out of the property. I've heard that they can be rough sometimes and possessions get broken or lost. Your tenant should bear that in mind.

    That's my advice.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Firstly, you're not back in Ireland, so you're not homeless yet.

    Secondly, and I appreciate this will sound harsh; you have to take some personal responsibility here. There was always the possibility that the ban would be extended because no one knew what the economic effects of COVID would be. This was raised when the roadmap was announced last month, and I'm sure there was some talk of it even before that.

    So to give up your primary residence thinking everything would be back to normal when you returned was, let's be honest, foolish. Being a landlord isn't a hobby you can dabble in; it's a business. And in business there's always the chance you can lose what you've invested.

    Thirdly; to be a bit helpful - you have two things in your favour. Firstly, the length of the lease means Part 4 protections won't kick in. Secondly, even if they did, the landlord wanting to live in the property is a valid grounds for ending a tenancy. I suggest you get proper, professional advice about how to handle this. There is some guidance on the RTB website here - https://www.rtb.ie/ending-a-tenancy/how-a-landlord-can-end-a-tenancy/landlords-grounds-for-ending-a-tenancy.

    Lastly, you've presumably registered the tenancy with the RTB, but if you haven't I suggest you do so quickly.


    Victim blaming is ok. As long as the victim is a landlord. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    JimmyVik wrote: »
    Victim blaming is ok. As long as the victim is a landlord. :)

    Saying that becoming a landlord should be treated like starting any other business isn't victim blaming.

    I sincerely hope things work out for the OP, and the tenant. I don't want to see anyone homeless. But these measures were brought in to stop just that, and overall they are having an effect. I appreciate that's cold comfort to the OP, but what was the alternative?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Graham wrote: »
    Would the OP have been able to predict Coronavirus 6 months ago?

    Can you register tenancies of less than 6 months with the RTB?

    The OP couldn't have predicted the coronavirus, but they could have accounted for the possibility of difficulties in moving back into their own home at the end of the tenancy for other reasons, eg overstaying and difficult tenants.

    I know that sounds harsh, but this is the OP's own home we're talking about; if it were me I'd have considered every potential scenario before deciding to give it a complete stranger.

    As for tenancy registrations, tenancies of less than 6 months aren't one of the exemptions on the RTB site. But happy to be corrected if I'm missing anything.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    The OP did nothing wrong here.
    They made an agreement between themselves and another adult that suited them both.
    One party is not holding up their end of the agreement.

    They have been screwed by the heavily weighted and unfair system.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,098 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    OP,

    If I was you I would inform the tenant that their lease is up at the end of the 6 months and that they will vacate your property. They are not getting a choice in this. Tell them they need to start looking for a new place.

    There are people you can hire that will assist them in moving out on time on the eviction day. They'll even help move some of their possessions out of the property. I've heard that they can be rough sometimes and possessions get broken or lost. Your tenant should bear that in mind.

    That's my advice.

    Do not give "advice" which breaches the law (in multiple ways, at that) again


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    There's a very simple solution for the OP here - go and rent.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,315 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Saying that becoming a landlord should be treated like starting any other business isn't victim blaming.

    I sincerely hope things work out for the OP, and the tenant. I don't want to see anyone homeless. But these measures were brought in to stop just that, and overall they are having an effect. I appreciate that's cold comfort to the OP, but what was the alternative?

    Name any other business in the world that if the provider stops providing a service when the customer stops paying , the provider will be fined.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Pkiernan wrote: »
    Name any other business in the world that if the provider stops providing a service when the customer stops paying , the provider will be fined.
    Electricity supply.

    The ESB cannot cut off an occupied property for non-payment, and the regulator will crucify them if they did.

    This is what happens when you're in the special category of sevice providers providing essental human needs. You have to accept the fact that the needs of the individual are more important than the profits of the business.


  • Registered Users Posts: 842 ✭✭✭timetogo1


    seamus wrote: »
    Electricity supply.

    The ESB cannot cut off an occupied property for non-payment, and the regulator will crucify them if they did.

    This is what happens when you're in the special category of sevice providers providing essental human needs. You have to accept the fact that the needs of the individual are more important than the profits of the business.

    I know it's off topic but it seems that doesn't seem correct.

    From the regulators site.
    "A customer cannot be disconnected if they have agreed a payment plan and are meeting all payments."
    https://www.cru.ie/home/customer-care/energy/customer-protection/#supplier-codes-of-practice

    and
    "Occasionally disconnections take place when a customer has built up significant arrears and is not engaging with their supplier to make arrangements to address the situation."
    https://www.cru.ie/home/customer-care/energy/connecting-disconnecting/


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Pkiernan wrote: »
    Name any other business in the world that if the provider stops providing a service when the customer stops paying , the provider will be fined.

    The law allows for the eviction of non-paying tenants, so I'd be surprised if there were fines for doing that. Maybe you're confusing this with fines where the LL didn't follow the rules and laws around evictions? Because that's a different matter.

    Then again, if I'm wrong, feel free to cite some examples. I'd be interested in seeing precisely what part of the Acts allow this.


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


    seamus wrote: »
    Electricity supply.

    The ESB cannot cut off an occupied property for non-payment, and the regulator will crucify them if they did.

    This is what happens when you're in the special category of sevice providers providing essental human needs. You have to accept the fact that the needs of the individual are more important than the profits of the business.

    ESB can disconnect you in certain circumstances. Though this has been suspended for the lockdown. There's a good few threads on boards with people who have been cut off.

    They won't reconnect unless the debt is paid. Even if the person trying to reconnect isn't the person who owns the debt.

    Regulators are pretty useless in Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,913 ✭✭✭Pintman Paddy Losty


    seamus wrote: »
    There's a very simple solution for the OP here - go and rent.

    How is he supposed to do that if he can't afford it? Particularly as his tenants sounds like a nightmare and probably isn't paying him rent?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭Uncle Pierre


    seamus wrote: »
    Electricity supply.

    The ESB cannot cut off an occupied property for non-payment, and the regulator will crucify them if they did.

    Wrong.

    Or at best, only partially (very partially) correct.

    An electricity supply company can't cut off supply from elderly or vulnerable people during the winter months (think it's November to March), and can't cut the supply anytime from people who depend on electricity to run vital medical equipment.

    But it's definitely not the case that they can't cut off supply from any occupied property for non-payment. If that were true, there'd be no need for any of us to ever pay our electricity bills.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 443 ✭✭Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!


    frw5 wrote: »
    Finally, long overdue!

    When it comes to your situation, you made an investment/bet, it didnt pay off. Why where you betting in the first place?

    So you're promoting and advocating overholding a property (might be legal but morally wrong) and withholding of rent (illegal)?


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


    seamus wrote: »
    ...
    This is what happens when you're in the special category of sevice providers providing essental human needs. You have to accept the fact that the needs of the individual are more important than the profits of the business....

    So if someone is renting out a million euro penthouses they are hardly an essential human need.

    The issue is it's the govt who is responsible for supplying basic housing needs. Not the private sector. It's not right that the govt has forced the private sector into carrying the cost of social and low cost housing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    How is he supposed to do that if he can't afford it? Particularly as his tenants sounds like a nightmare and probably isn't paying him rent?
    So you're promoting and advocating overholding a property (might be legal but morally wrong) and withholding of rent (illegal)?

    The OP hasn't said that the tenant stopped paying their rent (yet anyway)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,133 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    LeineGlas wrote: »
    In fairness, it's very difficult to increase supply when it is so easy to object to development.

    Objections aren't always upheld. In any case there doesn't need to be development to increase supply. There are many unoccupied and under occupied properties around. Little is being done about using under or unoccupied properties.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,133 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    The issue here is not serving a 1 month notice before the 6 months lease is up
    Nor serving a 3 months notice after 6 months and a Day,

    Both these risks were taken into account because these were written in the low so we are all aware of these

    However the 4 months eviction ban and probably more has put me in a very unpleasant situation. If the eviction ban is extended until next year . What will happen to those who only rented short term and need their house back - have nowhere else to live. ?

    what happens to rent arrears? sure if a tenant can live for free for a long time with no risk of being evicted why would't they?

    I don't know what you mean by "written in the ow" but the reality is that you handed over your property to someone without a proper plan to recover it when you needed it. There was always a risk the tenant wouldn't vacate at the end of the lease.
    If you are getting into letting and handing over control of property you need to anticipate all eventualities and have worked out how to deal with them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,315 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    seamus wrote: »
    Electricity supply.

    The ESB cannot cut off an occupied property for non-payment, and the regulator will crucify them if they did.

    This is what happens when you're in the special category of sevice providers providing essental human needs. You have to accept the fact that the needs of the individual are more important than the profits of the business.

    You're incorrect.

    If you refuse to pay your bill, you will be cut offm


  • Registered Users Posts: 106 ✭✭perfectkama


    The left have always supported a blanket ban on evictions the corona virus was there wet dream to have it,
    higher risk will continue reduce supply and 2/3 years down the line government will end up buying off the reits who paid no tax on the rents they took in will walk away with a healthy profit we will probably still be blaming "de banks"
    Op you will get ur place back it will cost and take time but many threads here before advised against but the cv19 will complicate thing best you can hope they keep paying.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    seamus wrote: »
    Electricity supply.

    The ESB cannot cut off an occupied property for non-payment, and the regulator will crucify them if they did.

    This is what happens when you're in the special category of sevice providers providing essental human needs. You have to accept the fact that the needs of the individual are more important than the profits of the business.

    Was thinking that cannot be right.
    If that was indeed the case, then why would anyone bother to pay their electricity bill?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭kowloonkev


    I'm surprised to learn that it counts as an eviction when the contract expires and you're asked to leave. They really have thought of everything.


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


    I don't know what you mean by "written in the ow" but the reality is that you handed over your property to someone without a proper plan to recover it when you needed it. There was always a risk the tenant wouldn't vacate at the end of the lease.
    If you are getting into letting and handing over control of property you need to anticipate all eventualities and have worked out how to deal with them.


    Whats a proper plan?

    There is only one plan, the legal framework, which ties the LL hands behind their back.


  • Registered Users Posts: 127 ✭✭phantasmagoria


    Past behaviour is the most accurate predictor of future behaviour. I think that in Ireland there seems to be an issue with recognizing who a good tenant is (or even who is a decent person - the type who isn't going to screw you over). I have seen first hand that you can have references from various different sources (long term, short term, agency, landlord, employment) aswell as statement of savings and employment confirmation and history and a landlord or an agent acting on their behalf will pass on you for a property letting. It makes no sense. The end result is that they end up with a bad tenant and it costs multiples of the rent. Landlords in most cases don't seem to realise that they are providing a service that a tenant is paying for and if they charge over the top rents, they are not treating their customer fairly. I have very little sympathy for somebody who rents out a 1 bed shoebox for €1800 and then wonders why they get taken advantage of when they cannot do their due diligence and recognise a bogey. I hope it works out for the OP but how did they end up with a nightmare tenant. There's enough demand out there for rental property and enough good tenants that if you end up with a bad tenant it's invariably your vetting that is the problem.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    beauf wrote: »
    Whats a proper plan?

    There is only one plan, the legal framework, which ties the LL hands behind their back.

    That proves Claw's point. If you're going to become a landlord, and the laws make things difficult for landlords, then this should have been considered by the OP when deciding whether to be a landlord.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,717 ✭✭✭cronos


    How is this being applied in the rent a room owner occupier space?


Advertisement