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

Landlord being difficult- considering rtb adjudication

2

Comments

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


    Browney7 wrote: »
    If they can't get by generating a rent roll of 40k per month they only have themselves to blame

    i dont have a rent roll of 40k, sadly.
    maybe i'm lucky &/or perhaps i have very good tenants, but if managed properly it really is hassle-free.

    compared to a 9-5 office job there is no comparison. that said i treat my tenants well, but the first sniff of trouble and they're out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Browney7 wrote: »
    If they can't get by generating a rent roll of 40k per month they only have themselves to blame

    Tbh. You need to know the business before you can say that. If they own 50places unemcumbered generating let’s say 50k a month. You would still expect expenses of at least 10-20pc. Then including tax would leave you with say 20k. Nothing to scoff at but most wouldn’t be like this.

    Most however will also have a mortgage of let’s say ltv of 50pc. Realistically including payments, I would expect your expenses to go up to 40+pc and that’s not including principle payments. When you include the principle. Your net take home with what your left with wouldn’t be much for the amount of money involved. This is also with rents at their highest ever. Your mortgage payments are not linked with your rental payments and you will need to continue to pay them at the existing rate even when rent will go down at some point in the future. It’s not all happy and dandy in landlord land is what I’m trying to say.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    i dont have a rent roll of 40k, sadly.
    maybe i'm lucky &/or perhaps i have very good tenants, but if managed properly it really is hassle-free.

    compared to a 9-5 office job there is no comparison. that said i treat my tenants well, but the first sniff of trouble and they're out.


    You could be lucky. A lot of the time it’s fine however, the times when you need to get your solicitor involved for tenants or even for contractors, it eats up a lot of time and stress. Or if there’s a leak in the place or you need to do some odd jobs. Most of the time it’s fine however trying to schedule stuff can take up a surprising amount of time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 172 ✭✭skD13


    Sorry if going off original topic, but regarding the time consuming aspects of being a landlord. Why not use an agent to manage the property? For around 6% of the monthly rent they take all the calls, triage and arrange repairs. And their fee is tax deductable. We use an agent on our 1 rental property and they are excellent. I never have to deal with tenants.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,001 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    OP has their own property. Move back to it.


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


    Fol20 wrote: »
    You could be lucky. A lot of the time it’s fine however, the times when you need to get your solicitor involved for tenants or even for contractors, it eats up a lot of time and stress. Or if there’s a leak in the place or you need to do some odd jobs. Most of the time it’s fine however trying to schedule stuff can take up a surprising amount of time.

    i do honestly believe if you treat people with respect they will reciprocate (99% of the time). i try not to be greedy by increasing the rent at every opportunity. some LLs are greedy, and will inevitably get a tenant who feels he/she is being screwed. this can lead to problems where no problems should exist.

    much better to have tenants who are content, respect their neighbours and the property, and will stay in the property for say 5 years, than be greedy and be dealing with new tenants every 12 months IMO.


  • Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Brbiyer wrote: »
    Another time, both the showers stopped working- again she said that it was strange that had happened- I don't know what she thinks a family of 2 adults and 2 children do with the showers!- Never mind the fact that the water is really hard and they have no water softer here to protect their appliances.
    I'm guessing that the showers stopped working due to the hard water. It sounds like a hard water area. Have you looked at cleaning the brushes of the shower, or looking at cleaning out the heads of the showers? These are often the first to get blocked in a hard water area.
    Brbiyer wrote: »
    Now, I did insist that she organise to have external lights put in as we live in the country side and its pitch dark- I think that's basic and safety and that she is required to do that really- she was very cross with me that stage.
    You knew when renting the place that it had no outdoor lighting. Do you expect her to provide lighting all the way to the main road as well?
    Brbiyer wrote: »
    Now she has slapped me with a notice- it is not a valid notice as it's not a statutory declaration. I am going to dispute that. I was wondering do I have a leg to stand on ass she only wants the property or her son fora few weeks
    How do you know it's only for a few weeks?
    Brbiyer wrote: »
    Also, she is not giving us a proper reference.
    Brbiyer wrote: »
    she said that we paid the rent promptly
    So she has given you a reference. What did you expect?
    Brbiyer wrote: »
    while I have to move my whole family and the children are in in school in the area.
    Didn't you already do this when you moved to this area?
    OP has their own property. Move back to it.
    I wonder if they've rented it out, and can't get back in?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,776 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    I don't see the outside light as particularly terrible a thing to ask for.

    Legally you don't need it.

    That doesn't mean it's a feature a rural house shouldnt have though.

    I think the rental model of the future is going to have to take a more positive outlook on tenants requests for improvements - well small ones at least.

    I mean if the tenant wants a 5 bedroom house and this one is only 3 bed - that's unrealistic.

    But putting in an outside light isn't unreasonable given the rural location.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Old diesel wrote: »
    I don't see the outside light as particularly terrible a thing to ask for.

    Legally you don't need it.

    That doesn't mean it's a feature a rural house shouldnt have though.

    I think the rental model of the future is going to have to take a more positive outlook on tenants requests for improvements - well small ones at least.

    I mean if the tenant wants a 5 bedroom house and this one is only 3 bed - that's unrealistic.

    But putting in an outside light isn't unreasonable given the rural location.

    I beg to disagree, if anything it should go the other way, Why do ll need to provide a microwave sure? The food a microwave cooks with isnt healthy in any way. I would prefer if we used the american/eu model where the ll provides nothing and the tenant needs to get their own washing machine,couch,bed etc. The tenant can paint the walls whatever they want, put stuff on walls etc as long as they bring it back to the original state when they leave. This allows tenants feel more at home, have more control over their house yet at the same time, stops ll from being pestered for small stuff and they are no longer required to provide crap they would prefer not to buy. More often than not it would guarantee longer tenusre as tenants will move less due to extra costs of moving yet at the same time, turnover costs are less for ll. I think its a win win for both sides, but i doubt it will ever happen in my time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,776 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    Fol20 wrote: »
    I beg to disagree, if anything it should go the other way, Why do ll need to provide a microwave sure? The food a microwave cooks with isnt healthy in any way. I would prefer if we used the american/eu model where the ll provides nothing and the tenant needs to get their own washing machine,couch,bed etc. The tenant can paint the walls whatever they want, put stuff on walls etc as long as they bring it back to the original state when they leave. This allows tenants feel more at home, have more control over their house yet at the same time, stops ll from being pestered for small stuff and they are no longer required to provide crap they would prefer not to buy. More often than not it would guarantee longer tenusre as tenants will move less due to extra costs of moving yet at the same time, turnover costs are less for ll. I think its a win win for both sides, but i doubt it will ever happen in my time.

    You as a landlord may want unfurnished but where does what the tenant want fit into things.

    Do tenants want furnished or not????.

    The option should be there to decide whether a tenant wants furnished or not.

    Current rent rates should be enough imo for a furnished place. That doesn't make an unfurnished place wrong if the savings allow you to furnish it.

    To my mind an outside lIght is something that goes in once and only comes out if it's gone wrong.

    And does today's busy professional in Dublin working for Google etc even have the time to furnish a place and paint it knowing they will be painting it and ripping stuff out again at two months notice at some random point in the future.

    Aren't longer tenures exactly what the landlords don't want as it stops them selling as required with vacant procession.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,183 ✭✭✭✭Nekarsulm


    I get the impression it wasn't the actual fitting of outside light, nor their cost that led to ill feeling.
    The method of "insisting" they be provided for "health and safety" reasons would get my back up too......

    "You'll catch more flies with honey, than with vinegar"


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,776 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    Nekarsulm wrote: »
    I get the impression it wasn't the actual fitting of outside light, nor their cost that led to ill feeling.
    The method of "insisting" they be provided for "health and safety" reasons would get my back up too......

    "You'll catch more flies with honey, than with vinegar"

    The tenant probably feels it is a health and safety risk - the problem is with a lot of rural houses - it can be very dark outside with no light. Especially when walking away from the house (with your back to the windows).

    We'd have to see the location at night* to see the full extent of the issue or lack of one.

    You can of course use a torch - phones even have one built in these days which are better then nothing. But that can be awkward when trying to deal with a couple of kids and bit's and pieces that have to come out of the car at the same time.

    There's no need for a difference of opinion on the outside light to produce the reaction it has both from the landlord and on here.

    Bear in mind as well the tenant is also annoyed with been blamed for the septic tank issue and the perceived slowness of the repairs to shower etc

    *clearly this isn't going to happen


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Old diesel wrote: »
    You as a landlord may want unfurnished but where does what the tenant want fit into things.

    Do tenants want furnished or not????.

    The option should be there to decide whether a tenant wants furnished or not.

    Current rent rates should be enough imo for a furnished place. That doesn't make an unfurnished place wrong if the savings allow you to furnish it.

    To my mind an outside lIght is something that goes in once and only comes out if it's gone wrong.

    And does today's busy professional in Dublin working for Google etc even have the time to furnish a place and paint it knowing they will be painting it and ripping stuff out again at two months notice at some random point in the future.

    Aren't longer tenures exactly what the landlords don't want as it stops them selling as required with vacant procession.

    In the states they have both, however the norm is that the tenant provides everything. In ireland it’s reversed however. People would feel more at home if they had their own stuff. Who wants to sleep in a sweaty bed when you don’t know who was on it before.

    I would expect prices to be cheaper prices, so it can ease cash flow for tenants.

    Yes it goes on once and it might be nice to have but not necessary. I added lights to the side of my own home as it’s dark when I went out there. I had it rented in the past and it’s not necessary however I wanted it. When you get your own place. You could decide to get those however when it’s rented especially when it’s not mandatory and not a safety hazard, it’s completely up to the ll.

    I personally want longer tenancies being the norm. If I have tenants moving out every year. On average, it costs me about 50pc of a months rent to tidy it up again for the upcoming tenancy. Contracts for both tenants and ll should be legally binding and enforceable so if both sign a contract for 3-10years. Their locked in for that without any break clauses. It shouldn’t be mandatory to offer these however if they are, it would attract long term tenants that are looking for a ll that are not intending to sell or uproot them.

    This system is win win for both

    Tenants get security of tenure
    Better cash flow with cheaper rent
    They can use extra cash flow for buying tangibile assets such as a new bed etc

    Landlords have less work
    Less costs
    Most of the costs they avoid are capital in nature where they would need to pay usc on anyway so less in usc
    Less in tax as well


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Fol20 wrote: »
    Yes it goes on once and it might be nice to have but not necessary. I added lights to the side of my own home as it’s dark when I went out there. I had it rented in the past and it’s not necessary however I wanted it. When you get your own place. You could decide to get those however when it’s rented especially when it’s not mandatory and not a safety hazard, it’s completely up to the ll.

    Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

    Definitely in the country, outside lights are absolutely a safety feature. For the sake of 100 euros, you could get it installed by an electrician (never something you would let a tenant organize). You can see from the press personal injury cases get that failure to address foreseeable risks is generally the crux of the case.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    davindub wrote: »
    Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

    Definitely in the country, outside lights are absolutely a safety feature. For the sake of 100 euros, you could get it installed by an electrician (never something you would let a tenant organize). You can see from the press personal injury cases get that failure to address foreseeable risks is generally the crux of the case.

    If it was a safety hazard,yes I would address it ASAP. I do not think having a light out the front is a safety hazard though. If it was, it would have been required when the house was built however a porch light is optional. The whole point of a business is to minimize expenses. If he started giving tenants everything they want, there would be nothing left over for profit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Fol20 wrote: »
    davindub wrote: »
    Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

    Definitely in the country, outside lights are absolutely a safety feature. For the sake of 100 euros, you could get it installed by an electrician (never something you would let a tenant organize). You can see from the press personal injury cases get that failure to address foreseeable risks is generally the crux of the case.

    If it was a safety hazard,yes I would address it ASAP. I do not think having a light out the front is a safety hazard though. If it was, it would have been required when the house was built however a porch light is optional. The whole point of a business is to minimize expenses. If he started giving tenants everything they want, there would be nothing left over for profit.

    Honestly the absence of something doesnt mean its not required. I think once you have tried to navigate in pitch black a few times, you might see it from the ops point of view.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    davindub wrote: »
    Honestly the absence of something doesnt mean its not required. I think once you have tried to navigate in pitch black a few times, you might see it from the ops point of view.

    I have and that’s why I don’t think it’s required. If it was, they would make it mandatory when building rural properties.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    mikemac2 wrote: »
    I think the outside light is a perfectly reasonable request for a rural house but you didn’t get it due to the bad relationship and the landlady wants you gone.

    You weren’t wrong for asking but by launching straight into insisting can put people out.

    People have been living in that area for centuries without a light. Why should the landlady fork out for one now?


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


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    People have been living in that area for centuries without a light. Why should the landlady fork out for one now?

    to request an outside light in this day & age is a totally reasonable request imo. but as mentioned earlier how it's phrased or requested will have an effect on how such a request is received


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Fol20 wrote: »
    davindub wrote: »
    Honestly the absence of something doesnt mean its not required. I think once you have tried to navigate in pitch black a few times, you might see it from the ops point of view.

    I have and that’s why I don’t think it’s required. If it was, they would make it mandatory when building rural properties.

    Mandatory? No, it falls under common sense, if you do not address a foreseeable risk that is not difficult or expensive to complete, that is a breach of the duty of care you have to persons on your property. No legislation addresses this, the potential for compensation is the reason you do it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 643 ✭✭✭Corca Baiscinn


    @Syco or anyone: "I'm guessing that the showers stopped working due to the hard water. It sounds like a hard water area. Have you looked at cleaning the brushes of the shower, or looking at cleaning out the heads of the showers? These are often the first to get blocked in a hard water area."

    I know about cleaning the shower head but what are shower brushes?


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


    davindub wrote: »
    Mandatory? No, it falls under common sense, if you do not address a foreseeable risk that is not difficult or expensive to complete, that is a breach of the duty of care you have to persons on your property. No legislation addresses this, the potential for compensation is the reason you do it.

    Where do you draw the line?

    Tenants must have a responsibility to mitigate such foreseeable risks before landlords are expected to post warning signs on kettles and life preservers on the side of the bath.

    I guess this is all rather academic for the OP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,183 ✭✭✭✭Nekarsulm


    @Syco or anyone: "I'm guessing that the showers stopped working due to the hard water. It sounds like a hard water area. Have you looked at cleaning the brushes of the shower, or looking at cleaning out the heads of the showers? These are often the first to get blocked in a hard water area."

    I know about cleaning the shower head but what are shower brushes?

    Unscrewing the shower head and filling it with vinegar or limescale remover will solve that part of the problem, and also the inline filter fitted to Triton showers can partially block.
    This will cause low flow, causing the water to get scalding hot and then trip out a safety switch (which causes the shower to pump cold water on you instead)!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    davindub wrote: »
    Mandatory? No, it falls under common sense, if you do not address a foreseeable risk that is not difficult or expensive to complete, that is a breach of the duty of care you have to persons on your property. No legislation addresses this, the potential for compensation is the reason you do it.

    Tbh when the cost would be born my me, I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s very easy to request certain things when your not paying for it however when the money comes out of your pocket, I would always question is it necessary. If you brought a dispute(I know you wouldn’t) to the RTB, I highly doubt they would side with the tenant.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Graham wrote: »
    Where do you draw the line?

    Tenants must have a responsibility to mitigate such foreseeable risks before landlords are expected to post warning signs on kettles and life preservers on the side of the bath.

    I guess this is all rather academic for the OP.

    Really I don't see the struggle with comprehending that the main entrance way in darkness is a bad idea, providing a light is a good idea, personally it doesn't seem as onerous as placing life preservers around the bathroom area in a dwelling. It can probably be discussed better elsewhere, but if you google poor outdoor lighting you find quite a few injury lawyers advertising their services....

    Guide:
    https://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/conditions-leading-to-outdoor-slip-and-fall-accidents.html


    Just out of interest: Extract from kettle instructions...:pac:

    "While the water is boiling or just after the water has boiled, avoid any contact with the steam. "



    Anyway I agree 100% with the OP, the request was reasonable, certainly not a reason to be kicked out if that is the case.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Fol20 wrote: »
    Tbh when the cost would be born my me, I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s very easy to request certain things when your not paying for it however when the money comes out of your pocket, I would always question is it necessary. If you brought a dispute(I know you wouldn’t) to the RTB, I highly doubt they would side with the tenant.

    I'm a landlord rather than tenant, so I understand the logic but just not where you are applying it. €100-200 cost with tax deduction is small enough to just get it done. If they want fancy uplighters they can F**c off.


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


    davindub wrote: »
    Not to be funny, but as a property owner, if you were made aware of a safety risk, would you not want to address it?

    Looking at the OP
    I did insist that she organise to have external lights put in as we live in the country side and its pitch dark- I think that's basic and safety and that she is required to do that really

    I must admit, were I in the landlords shoes my first thought wouldn't be "I must rush out and organise lights".


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Graham wrote: »
    Looking at the OP



    I must admit, were I in the landlords shoes my first thought wouldn't be "I must rush out and organise lights".

    I know, but when you calmed down and had a think about it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 176 ✭✭Silane


    When I go to look at a place to rent I'm looking for what the house/apartment has and what it doesn't have and deciding if the price is appropriate based on that.
    I wouldn't accept to pay a certain amount for the place and then look for upgrades when I moved it. The only thing I've ever asked for was anew couch and I only asked because the landlord said he was putting up the rent.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Brbiyer


    Just to clear a few assumptions people have made

    1. I have always requested nicely, you know...please, thank-you , I have 2 young children...you can understand...etc
    It has only resulted in my requests being ignored for 2or more weeks
    2. Texts are the landlords preferred method of communication- not an easy person to reach by phone or set up a meeting with
    3. At the start, she also indicated that any repairs and maintenance will need to be notified to her and not taken upon ourselves
    4. I know that the external lights are debatable- in my mind they were essential. Having never lived in a rural area before I hadn't factored the external light situation.
    5. Yes it is the hard water affecting the showers- I have gone through many bottles of vinegar since we moved here

    I amazed by this whole attitude towards tenants- shut up and put tup!!! This house was not given to us freely on good will. I pay rent-more than the market price mind you. I suppose we had been living in our own house for over 10 years andI really had forgotten the experience of living in a rental.
    On the other side of the coin- we have rented our our house. I would be very aware of another family having to struggle to find suitable accommodation before i serve them a notice. Having a safe and warm place to live is a basic need. If you cant see that why be a ll? Clearly repairing and maintaining a house on a regular basis is much more economical than waiting to see the place fall apart- basic common sense really
    Someone so easily - you moved once and you can move again. Ours was a long thought out and considered move- on the basis that we are staying long term (when we were looking at this house to rent, the ll clearly said she is looking for long term tenants). Moving children on a regular basis is not a great idea. The last few weeks they have been anxious about this whole thing and its showing indifferent ways.


Advertisement