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

Remedial notice of termination

Options
  • 15-07-2019 10:04am
    #1
    3DataModem
    Registered Users Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭


    Anyone had any experience of using (or receiving) one of these?

    From RTB site:

    " Remedial notice of termination - Landlords and tenants do not have to start over again when issuing a new notice under certain conditions. If the notice is invalid due to a defect, an Adjudicator / Tribunal can allow the original notice to be remedied by serving a remedial notice within 28 days of issuing a determination order. "


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    If I remember correctly it's something that was introduced with the most recent changes to the RTA


  • Options
    #3
    subrosa
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭subrosa


    The Remedial Notice has only been an option for a couple of weeks, it was introduced by the new legislation.



    It means an adjudicator or tribunal can allow a landlord to issue a 'corrective' type of notice in certain circumstances.



    If a notice has been issued, and brought to the RTB via a dispute, and the notice is found to invalid due to a defect contained in, or during the service of, the notice but the defect does not "prejudice in a material respect" the notice then a "remedial notice" can be issued. The notice period for the remedial notice is 28 days plus the proper notice period.



    The intention is, presumably, to prevent the situation where a tenant is served with blatantly invalid notice and decides to wait out the notice period. Before this change where a notice was obviously invalid, and the notice period was long, it was sensible advice for a tenant to simply wait until the last few days and then inform the landlord that the notice was invalid. A new notice would then have to be issued giving the same period of notice all over again. It the tenant was particularly keen to stay they could wait until the landlord lodged a dispute for over-holding and let the RTB tell the landlord that the notice was invalid, buying a little more time.



    The problem I see with the new section is that the old 'slip rule' is still in the act. The 'slip rule' says that if there is slip or omission in the notice, but the slip or omission concerned does not prejudice, in a material respect, the notice then the notice can be declared valid.



    The only real difference between the two sections is between a "slip or omission" and a "defect" in the notice. Clearly a slip or omission is a type of defect and it's not immediately obvious what sort of defect could not also be caught under the umbrella of "slip or omission"


    So if an adjudicator is presented with a notice that is invalid but she feels that the error does not prejudice, in a material respect, the notice she will have two sections to choose from and little guidance as to which to use. This seems to be a recipe for an appeal on a point of law to the High Court.


Advertisement