Landlord not sharing address and Tenancy Notice Period

29-10-2020 4:50pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It has nothing to do with the RTA.
property Services Regulation Act 2011
28.— (1) A person shall not—

(a) provide a property service,

(b) hold himself or herself out as available to provide a property service, or

(c) represent himself or herself by—

(i) advertisement, or

(ii) displaying any card or other object purporting to indicate that he or she is a licensee,

as available to provide a property service,

unless the person is the holder of a licence which is in force in respect of that property service.

There is nothing in the RTA that says the person authorised to act on behalf of the LL has to be a property service provider.

Interpretation:

“authorised agent” shall be construed in accordance with section 12 (1)(e);

e) notify the tenant of the name of the person, if any, (the “authorised agent”) who is authorised by the landlord to act on his or her behalf in relation to the tenancy for the time being,

Claw Hammer · 29-10-2020 4:59pm

Dav010 wrote: »

There is nothing in the RTA that says the person authorised to act on behalf of the LL has to be a property service provider.

Interpretation:

“authorised agent” shall be construed in accordance with section 12 (1)(e);

e) notify the tenant of the name of the person, if any, (the “authorised agent”) who is authorised by the landlord to act on his or her behalf in relation to the tenancy for the time being,

The relevant legislation is not the RTA. The 2011 act delimits who can act as a service provider. The RTA presumeS whoever provides the service is doing so in accordance with law. The wheel doesn't have to be re-invented to define an agent under every piece of legislation which refers to an agent.
A property service is defined in the 2011 Act by reference to the 2009 land and conveyancing act.

pandaa · 29-10-2020 5:01pm

If the lease makes it obligatory to serve to person in clause X, which is LL. How can then agent come into picture.

Lets leave this case of OP aside for now for a general understanding.

29-10-2020 5:07pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The relevant legislation is not the RTA. The 2011 act delimits who can act as a service provider. The RTA presumeS whoever provides the service is doing so in accordance with law. The wheel doesn't have to be re-invented to define an agent under every piece of legislation which refers to an agent.
A property service is defined in the 2011 Act by reference to the 2009 land and conveyancing act.

Again, could you please show me where the Act stipulates that a LL can only authorise a Property Service Provider to act on their behalf. Whomever is acting on behalf of the LL is bound by the RTA regulations irrespective of who they are.

I take your point that if an EA is authorised to act on the LLs behalf, the must comply with the Proerty Service Provider regs, but you have posted nothing which requires the authorised person to be an EA.

Claw Hammer · 29-10-2020 5:13pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Again, could you please show me where the Act stipulates that a LL can only authorise a Property Service Provider to act on their behalf. Whomever is acting on behalf of the LL is bound by the RTA regulations irrespective of who they are.

I take your point that if an EA is authorised to act on the LLs behalf, the must comply with the Proerty Service Provider regs, but you have posted nothing which requires the authorised person to be an EA.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2011/act/40/enacted/en/print

I have already posted the section which restricts the provision of services to persons holding a licence. The definition of property service is given in the definitions sections. Anybody acting as an agent must have a licence.

29-10-2020 5:20pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2011/act/40/enacted/en/print

I have already posted the section which restricts the provision of services to persons holding a licence. The definition of property service is given in the definitions sections. Anybody acting as an agent must have a licence.

But it is not a requirement of the RTA that says the LL has to nominate a Property Service Provider, in fact, it limits it to a “person” not a PSP.

Claw Hammer · 29-10-2020 5:27pm

Dav010 wrote: »

But it is not a requirement of the RTA that says the LL has to nominate a Property Service Provider, in fact, it limits it to a “person” not a PSP.

It is not a requirement for a landlord to nominate an agent. If a landlord does nominate an agent it would be illegal for a landlord to nominate a person who is not entitled to act as such. The RTA does not attempt to define who might or might not be an agent. That is for another statutory body to deal with.

29-10-2020 8:17pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It is not a requirement for a landlord to nominate an agent. If a landlord does nominate an agent it would be illegal for a landlord to nominate a person who is not entitled to act as such. The RTA does not attempt to define who might or might not be an agent. That is for another statutory body to deal with.

I really would like you to link to the legislation which makes it illegal for a LL to authorise anyone but a PSP to act on their behalf.

Oddly, the Property Services Act does not list the Residential Tenancies Act in its “Acts referred to” list, nor indeed does the Residential Tenancies Act list the Property Services Act. You would think if it was prohibited by the PSA for a LL to authorise anyone to Act on your behalf during a tenancy, it would be referred to in the RTA.

I do agree with you that if an EA is used to let the property, they must be licensed but that does not mean the LL cannot authorise any other person to be their authorised agent during the tenancy. If the LL let the property themselves, they do not have to authorise a PSP to act on their behalf.

Claw Hammer · 30-10-2020 1:49pm

Dav010 wrote: »

I really would like you to link to the legislation which makes it illegal for a LL to authorise anyone but a PSP to act on their behalf.

Oddly, the Property Services Act does not list the Residential Tenancies Act in its “Acts referred to” list, nor indeed does the Residential Tenancies Act list the Property Services Act. You would think if it was prohibited by the PSA for a LL to authorise anyone to Act on your behalf during a tenancy, it would be referred to in the RTA.

I do agree with you that if an EA is used to let the property, they must be licensed but that does not mean the LL cannot authorise any other person to be their authorised agent during the tenancy. If the LL let the property themselves, they do not have to authorise a PSP to act on their behalf.

Letting of property is a property service. A person who provides a property service must be licensed. If a landlord engages an unlicensed person the landlord is conspiring to commit a criminal offence. Conspiracy is a common law offence.
The property services act amended older legislation. There was no need for it to amend the RTA. When the RTA means duly appointed, it refers to an appointment to the law then in force.

The property services act would be meaningless if the RTA allowed a coach and four to be driven through it. You would have to construe the Property services act as meaning a property service is the letting of property other than property to which the RTA applies. That of course would be nonsense.

10pennymixup · 30-10-2020 2:30pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Letting of property is a property service. A person who provides a property service must be licensed. If a landlord engages an unlicensed person the landlord is conspiring to commit a criminal offence. Conspiracy is a common law offence.
The property services act amended older legislation. There was no need for it to amend the RTA. When the RTA means duly appointed, it refers to an appointment to the law then in force.

The property services act would be meaningless if the RTA allowed a coach and four to be driven through it. You would have to construe the Property services act as meaning a property service is the letting of property other than property to which the RTA applies. That of course would be nonsense.

So an old granny, who gets their son to act as an agent and lets out their house on their behalf when they move in to sheltered accommodation. Both they and their son are guilty of a criminal offence?

30-10-2020 3:11pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

So an old granny, who gets their son to act as an agent and lets out their house on their behalf when they move in to sheltered accommodation. Both they and their son are guilty of a criminal offence?

I can’t make head nor tail of CH’s opinion either, I can understand someone claiming to be a Letting Agent or who’s business is property letting having to be licensed, but nothing CH has posted shows that a LL has to authorise a Letting Agent to act on their behalf during the tenancy.

I’m still waiting on his link to show that a “person” referred to in the RTA who acts on behalf of the LL during the tenancy has to be licensed Property Service Provider, neither the RTA nor the PSR Act refer to it, so I suspect I’ll never see it.

10pennymixup · 30-10-2020 3:20pm

Dav010 wrote: »

I can’t make head nor tail of CH’s opinion either, I can understand someone claiming to be a Letting Agent or who’s business is property letting having to be licensed, but nothing CH has posted shows that a LL has to authorise a Letting Agent to act on their behalf during the tenancy.

I’m still waiting on his link to show that a “person” referred to in the RTA who acts on behalf of the LL during the tenancy has to be licensed Property Service Provider, neither the RTA nor the PSR Act refer to it, so I suspect I’ll never see it.

Yes. It just doesn't sound logical.

I once thought that anyone acting professionally, as in receiving money for their services might have to licensed, but I could be wrong.

30-10-2020 3:32pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

Yes. It just doesn't sound logical.

I once thought that anyone acting professionally, as in receiving money for their services might have to licensed, but I could be wrong.

He seems to be certain that when the LL authorises a person to act on their behalf during a tenancy, legally that person has to be a Property Service Provider, so say someone living abroad couldn’t authorise their brother/sister to communicate with the tenant or deal with any problems which arise. Never heard of it before myself, the Residential Tenancies Act doesn’t mention it, the RTB don’t mention it, the Property Services Regulation Act doesn’t mention it, so all we can hope for is that Claw Hammer links to the legislation which states the LL has to use a PSP during the tenancy.

Personally, I think he is confusing the regulations on EAs/Auctiioneers etc needing to be licensed to carry on the business of property service, but of course that does not mean a LL has to nominate one to act on their behalf during the tenancy.

Claw Hammer wrote: »

If a landlord does nominate an agent it would be illegal for a landlord to nominate a person who is not entitled to act as such

10pennymixup · 30-10-2020 3:33pm

Yeah, it's there in the PSRA's guide to becoming a service provider:

“property service” means the provision, for consideration (payment), in the
State, in respect of property located within or outside the State, of
any of the following—

So it looks like there's no problem with such a scenario. But CH seems so adamant I genuinely interested to hear what they have to say.

30-10-2020 3:35pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

Yeah, it's there in the PSRA's guide to becoming a service provider:

“property service” means the provision, for consideration (payment), in the
State, in respect of property located within or outside the State, of
any of the following—

You might have more luckðŸ˜

Claw Hammer · 30-10-2020 5:11pm

Dav010 wrote: »

You might have more luckðŸ˜

The issue is someone authorised to act. Someone who does it for free or a licensed agent. Someone doing it for free is unlikely to take on the full responsibilities and will only give thye landlord a hand rather than act as a fully empowered agent.

30-10-2020 5:21pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The issue is someone authorised to act. Someone who does it for free or a licensed agent. Someone doing it for free is unlikely to take on the full responsibilities and will only give thye landlord a hand rather than act as a fully empowered agent.

The LL is free to choose whether to employ a licensed EA, or authorise cousin John to act on his/her behalf, you have yet to show that it would be illegal to authorise John as the “person” referred to in the RTA. Cousin John could be fully empowered to give the Landlord a hand by being authorised to act on his/her behalf during the tenancy. Not every LL wants to employ an EA to take on “the full responsibilities” as their Agent, and it is not illegal to have someone else do it.

Again, I suspect you are confusing the illegality of someone claiming to be a professional property service provider or in the business of providing that service. You have yet to show why it would be illegal for a LL to authorise a “person” to act on their behalf, please put up the link.

Claw Hammer · 30-10-2020 7:28pm

Dav010 wrote: »

The LL is free to choose whether to employ a licensed EA, or authorise cousin John to act on his/her behalf, you have yet to show that it would be illegal to authorise John as the “person” referred to in the RTA. Cousin John could be fully empowered to give the Landlord a hand by being authorised to act on his/her behalf during the tenancy. Not every LL wants to employ an EA to take on “the full responsibilities” as their Agent, and it is not illegal to have someone else do it.

Again, I suspect you are confusing the illegality of someone claiming to be a professional property service provider or in the business of providing that service. You have yet to show why it would be illegal for a LL to authorise a “person” to act on their behalf, please put up the link.

Provided cousin John is not being paid he can give a hand. The question is whether is is then a duly appointed agent with responsibilites such as accepting notices or deducting witholding tax,
If the landlord pays someone other than a licensed agent to act on their behalf the landlord is party to an illegal contract and is an accessory to a criminal offence.
the RTA talks about a duly authorised agent, not a cousin obliging the LL in some way.

30-10-2020 7:42pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Provided cousin John is not being paid he can give a hand. The question is whether is is then a duly appointed agent with responsibilites such as accepting notices or deducting witholding tax,
If the landlord pays someone other than a licensed agent to act on their behalf the landlord is party to an illegal contract and is an accessory to a criminal offence.
the RTA talks about a duly authorised agent, not a cousin obliging the LL in some way.

What rubbish are you posting?

First you said there were restrictions on who a LL could authorise to act on their behalf, then it was illegal to authorise anyone who isn’t a licensed PSP, now the LL is an accessory to a criminal offence, all rubbish as the Residential Tenancies Act states a LL can authorise a “person” to act on their behalf. Here it is again:

(e) notify the tenant of the name of the person, if any, (the “authorised agent”) who is authorised by the landlord to act on his or her behalf in relation to the tenancy for the time being,

Could you please, for hopefully the last time, link to the legislation which says that the authorised person must be a paid Property Service Provider. Show me also where only a “paid” person whom the LL authorised to act on their behalf can accept notice.

If you show me that, I will apologise for the way I misinterpreted the RTA, but please, don’t keep posting rubbish because you won’t admit you got it wrong.

Claw Hammer · 30-10-2020 7:46pm

Dav010 wrote: »

What rubbish are you posting?

First you said there were restrictions on who a LL could authorise to act on their behalf, then it was illegal to authorise anyone who isn’t a licensed PSP, now the LL is an accessory to a criminal offence, all rubbish as the Residential Tenancies Act states a LL can authorise a “person” to act on their behalf. Here it is again:

(e) notify the tenant of the name of the person, if any, (the “authorised agent”) who is authorised by the landlord to act on his or her behalf in relation to the tenancy for the time being,

Could you please, for hopefully the last time, link to the legislation which says that the authorised person must be a paid Property Service Provider. Show me also where only a “paid” person whom the LL authorised to act on their behalf can accept notice.

You are obviously trolling. I have linked the legislation. Either a freebie or an authorised agent can be used. How can a freebie be duly authorised? Accepting notice on behalf of another is the provision of a property service. Such a service is regulated by law whether you like it or not.

30-10-2020 7:52pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

You are obviously trolling. I have linked the legislation. Either a freebie or an authorised agent can be used. How can a freebie be duly authorised? Accepting notice on behalf of another is the provision of a property service. Such a service is regulated by law whether you like it or not.

Finally, you accept both a freebie and a licensed agent can be used, and that is not a criminal offence as you claimed.

A LL can “duly authorise” a freebie by written consent.

Where does it say a person authorised by the LL to act on their behalf cannot accept a notice?

Claw Hammer · 30-10-2020 8:01pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Finally, you accept both a freebie and a licensed agent can be used, and that is not a criminal offence as you claimed.

A LL can “duly authorise” a freebie by written consent.

Where does it say a person authorised by the LL to act on their behalf cannot accept a notice?

It is an offence to pay or agree to pay someone who is not an authorised agent.

Someone has to be duly authorised, not authorised.

30-10-2020 8:07pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It is an offence to pay or agree to pay someone who is not an authorised agent.

Someone has to be duly authorised, not authorised.

Which does this say “authorised” or “duly authorised”?

e) notify the tenant of the name of the person, if any, (the “authorised agent”) who is authorised by the landlord to act on his or her behalf in relation to the tenancy for the time being,

I’m not a solicitor, but a duly authorized agent means a person who is authorized by written consent or by law to act on behalf of an owner or operator.

You have yet to show why a “person” authorised by the LL cannot accept notice.

10pennymixup · 30-10-2020 9:37pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Anybody acting as an agent must have a license.

Claw Hammer wrote: »

.............. If a landlord does nominate an agent it would be illegal for a landlord to nominate a person who is not entitled to act as such..............

Claw Hammer wrote: »

.......A person who provides a property service must be licensed. If a landlord engages an unlicensed person the landlord is conspiring to commit a criminal offence....... .

.

A Freebie, that's a term that has never been attributed to me before

I was one of those freebies that was appointed by the Landlord to provide such services as:

showing a house,
vetting prospective tenants
collecting security deposits and first months rents in cash
keeping an eye on rent payments
makes repairs or organises them with tradespeople
sending rent arrears notices
receiving and sending termination notices,
doing walk throughs at tenancy termination
returning deposits
oh and when registering the tenancy with the RTB filling in the section headed "agent" with my name.

So not a freebie then..........but an agent (until very recently when the properties were sold, in which I was also involved in).

And because I don't take a penny from my elderly mother and do it in conjunction with being a landlord with my own properties, I didn't need to have a license.

Or at least I didn't think I did until you starting saying otherwise.

Graham · 30-10-2020 10:47pm

Mod Note

Claw Hammer, if you have a link to an authoritative source stating an unpaid agent cannot accept notice on behalf of a landlord, post it. Otherwise, stop stating it as fact.

FYI, your personal interpretation of authoritative sources is not the same thing.

Do not reply to this post.

Landlord not sharing address and Tenancy Notice Period

Comments