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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Landlord wants parents to pay section of rent

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    10pennymixup
    Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭10pennymixup


    jenneyk19 wrote: »
    landlord can sign lease with you only
    also your boyfriend can get help with rent payments from goverment

    If a LL doesn't want to sign a lease with the OP on their wages plus the BF's meagre wage, then why in earth would they want to sign it with just the OP solely liable for the rent.

    The more people signed up to the lease and available to later chase (or threaten to) for arrears/ damages the better from the LL's POV IMO.

    And if the BF is not on the lease, can he claim "rent payments from goverment (sic)"?

    OP basically the LL is telling you that in their opinion you can't afford the rent (and run the house eg heating lighting broadband tv etc) and the only way you'll get the property is if you have the BF's parents as co signers. If not, then move on.

    Why they want half the rent to come from an account in the bf's parents names I can't understand and can only assume (which I hate doing) is a misunderstanding.


  • Options
    #33
    JJayoo
    Registered Users Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    <SNIP>


  • Options
    #34
    BnB
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭BnB


    Triangle wrote: »
    Absolute joke, if I go to a shop and buy something, the shop has no right to ask where the money comes from. Its a business transaction and the nature of my relationship or personal life does not come into it.
    It's the same for a lease, the ll says the amount, date and business details, but doesn't have the right to interfere in their personal lives.
    Ttbh, I'd be like the previous poster and staying away from such an unprofessional landlord.

    If you go to a shop and hand over your cash for goods then of course the shop doesn't give a hoot where your money came from. They have all the money in their hands and they don't have any further exposure to you.

    A better comparison would be that you go to a car dealers and take out a lease on a 100k car. Will they just let you pay the first month's lease and bugger off home with the car and just take your word for it that you can afford to pay for it monthly? They will in their holes...!!!!! They're giving you control of something worth 100k.... They need to protect themselves.

    A landlord is giving you control of an asset worth a lot more than the car and once you are in the door, they can do sweet FA to get you out.

    It does sound like a fairly unorthodox approach from the LL and fairly unprofessional. But, in the current climate for landlords, I can understand what has driven him to it.


  • Options
    #35
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    BnB wrote: »
    If you go to a shop and hand over your cash for goods then of course the shop doesn't give a hoot where your money came from. They have all the money in their hands and they don't have any further exposure to you.

    A better comparison would be that you go to a car dealers and take out a lease on a 100k car. Will they just let you pay the first month's lease and bugger off home with the car and just take your word for it that you can afford to pay for it monthly? They will in their holes...!!!!! They're giving you control of something worth 100k.... They need to protect themselves.

    A landlord is giving you control of an asset worth a lot more than the car and once you are in the door, they can do sweet FA to get you out.

    It does sound like a fairly unorthodox approach from the LL and fairly unprofessional. But, in the current climate for landlords, I can understand what has driven him to it.

    Wondering re the actual legality as per RTB? Totally OTT. No way would most of us allow this to happen. He is taking advantage here. Sounds neurotic.


  • Options
    #36
    bcklschaps
    Registered Users Posts: 1,059 ✭✭✭bcklschaps


    Sorry, if already suggested....but if you knew the LL only wanted working tennants. Why did you even tell him about your boyfriend? Just sign the lease yourself. (As you are going to be paying all the rent anyway).

    I assume the rent is pretty high and the LL didn't feel you have a good enough Salary? Soo you blabbed about having a boyfriend who will be moving in also and be paying some of the bills.

    Queue: next question. "What does your boyfriend do?"

    A government artist....

    Ahhh..... Here!!!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    walkingpsycho
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭walkingpsycho


    Thank you all for your responses and advice. I just wanted to see where I stand in relation to the legality of the landlords request.

    Just to clarify some questions posed by people:

    We have known each other for a number of years and have rented an apartment together before for a couple of years (our previous landlord was happy with us and we provided a reference to the new landlord).
    I am not misunderstanding what the landlord has asked of my bf parents. They wish for them to pay half of the rent, not just sign as guarantor (the landlord has stated this on multiple occasions to us and in writing) because they deem it to be unfair to me to pay the full rent.

    I graduated top of my class in a science degree in college and have experience in the job that I will be working at. I will be getting paid more than enough to cover rent, utilities, groceries, etc on my own. The landlord has been shown proof of this, as they requested it and I complied as I understood the concern regarding renting to a recent graduate. My bf moving in with me until he finds a job seemed logical as he agreed to cook, clean, etc, while I was at work, and there would be an extra bedroom available anyways. Then if he finds a job we will split everything, thus elevating my cost of living.

    I never stated he was a “goverment artist” and I do not “blab”.


  • Options
    #38
    Sarn
    Registered Users Posts: 3,059 ✭✭✭Sarn


    I understand that the LL needs to minimise the risk of non-payment of rent, however,
    walkingpsycho wrote: »
    ...because they deem it to be unfair to me to pay the full rent.

    This is none of the LL’s business. They are not your parents. This should be a business transaction.


  • Options
    #39
    poker--addict
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭poker--addict


    Given the additional info and your financial strength alone, I am going with the landlord being a bit unusual. Maybe they aren’t thinking straight!

    😎



  • Options
    #40
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,403 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Have you moved in yet OP? If you have just ignore the LL on this one IMO. If not and they're waiting to see the deposit paid from two separate accounts just humour them until you're in the door as someone else suggested. It doesn't even have to be from the parents' account, they have no way of knowing. It's an entirely unreasonable request. Just try and avoid signing anything to this effect or lying about it, not that they'd have any legal comeback but to maintain good relations.


  • Options
    #41
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    10pennymixup wrote: »
    Swings and roundabouts, supply and demand.

    10 years ago in the height of the last recession, LL's were often too glad to take nearly anyone as long as their property was bringing in some rent. It was a buyers market. Checks on affordability were mainly only done for the most prestigious rentals.

    Now it's a sellers market. It's not taking advantage, it's business.

    Don't like it get out of market and buy. Alternatively live with Mammy until the next big market change to the tenants favour, when as you put it, the tenant can "take advantage" of the seller/ LL.

    Not condoning this, not praising it, just stating the reality.

    Not in terms of tenancy rights .

    Also they need to remind him of his very limited legal access to their home in future .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    10pennymixup
    Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭10pennymixup


    Graces7 wrote: »
    Not in terms of tenancy rights .

    Also they need to remind him of his very limited legal access to their home in future .

    Graces7, I've come across some of your unorthodox opinions before and smiled,

    But to suggest that a LL assessing a prospective tenants ability to pay is somehow contrary to tenants rights is taking the proverbial.

    Please back up your assertion that this is so or stop talking out of your proverbial.

    And very poor advice on denying the LL's access to be used as a threat. That will get them the property alright. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #43
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    BnB wrote: »
    If you go to a shop and hand over your cash for goods then of course the shop doesn't give a hoot where your money came from. They have all the money in their hands and they don't have any further exposure to you.

    A better comparison would be that you go to a car dealers and take out a lease on a 100k car. Will they just let you pay the first month's lease and bugger off home with the car and just take your word for it that you can afford to pay for it monthly? They will in their holes...!!!!! They're giving you control of something worth 100k.... They need to protect themselves.

    A landlord is giving you control of an asset worth a lot more than the car and once you are in the door, they can do sweet FA to get you out.

    It does sound like a fairly unorthodox approach from the LL and fairly unprofessional. But, in the current climate for landlords, I can understand what has driven him to it.

    No company let's you rent a car and then demands that the passengers take their share of the cost though do they?


  • Options
    #44
    JustAThought
    Registered Users Posts: 5,323 ✭✭✭JustAThought


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    No company let's you rent a car and then demands that the passengers take their share of the cost though do they?

    No. They wouldn’t hand over the keys if they saw from your financial paperwork applying for the lease/loan that you could not afford to live and pay for it. You would remain keyless and on foot.

    And they wouldn’t accept a promise from your mammy to pay the balance into your account so you could then decide whether to pay it to the car lease firm - it would be going directly into their bank account to pay the ongoing lease debt. Or you’d be told to move on to the next shop.


  • Options
    #45
    Yellow_Fern
    Registered Users Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    Triangle wrote: »
    Absolute joke, if I go to a shop and buy something, the shop has no right to ask where the money comes from. Its a business transaction and the nature of my relationship or personal life does not come into it.
    It's the same for a lease, the ll says the amount, date and business details, but doesn't have the right to interfere in their personal lives.
    Ttbh, I'd be like the previous poster and staying away from such an unprofessional landlord.

    I believe they have that right. They can always refuse service if they please.


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    JustAThought wrote: »
    No. They wouldn’t hand over the keys if they saw from your financial paperwork applying for the lease/loan that you could not afford to live and pay for it. You would remain keyless and on foot.

    And they wouldn’t accept a promise from your mammy to pay the balance into your account so you could then decide whether to pay it to the car lease firm - it would be going directly into their bank account to pay the ongoing lease debt. Or you’d be told to move on to the next shop.

    Correct. As it should be in this case too


  • Options
    #47
    BnB
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭BnB


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    No company let's you rent a car and then demands that the passengers take their share of the cost though do they?

    You've missed the point entirely.

    My point is not that what I think the LL is doing is right.

    It sounds like incredibly bad business from the LL and if I was the OP, I would walk away. Also - to say, the OP sounds perfectly reasonable and I think the LL is making a mistake by not taking them on, on their own.

    I am arguing against the tone of some posters here (not the OP) that seem to think the LL has no right to put whatever controls they want in place before they lease it out.

    My point is that it is an extremely valuable asset and the LL has the right to put any controls in place that he feels are necessary to protect it. Especially considering the fact that once they allow someone to get in the door, all the rights are on the tenants side so they are fairly powerless to do anything about it. So, as long as he's not asking for anything illegal like cash in hand to avoid tax or anything that could be classed as racist etc then that's his right. And if exercising that right lose's him what sounds like a perfectly good tenant in the OP, well then that's his loss.


  • Options
    #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    BnB wrote: »
    You've missed the point entirely.

    My point is not that what I think the LL is doing is right.

    It sounds like incredibly bad business from the LL and if I was the OP, I would walk away. Also - to say, the OP sounds perfectly reasonable and I think the LL is making a mistake by not taking them on, on their own.

    I am arguing against the tone of some posters here (not the OP) that seem to think the LL has no right to put whatever controls they want in place before they lease it out.

    My point is that it is an extremely valuable asset and the LL has the right to put any controls in place that he feels are necessary to protect it. Especially considering the fact that once they allow someone to get in the door, all the rights are on the tenants side so they are fairly powerless to do anything about it. So, as long as he's not asking for anything illegal like cash in hand to avoid tax or anything that could be classed as racist etc then that's his right. And if exercising that right lose's him what sounds like a perfectly good tenant in the OP, well then that's his loss.

    Except you are wrong because theres restrictions in contract conditions and any that contained such clauses would almost certainly be dismissed if he attempted to enforce it.


  • Options
    #49
    poker--addict
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭poker--addict


    LL has the right to ask I would suggest. Enforceable is a secondardy debate "niner leprauchan". You can both be right without shouting others down.

    😎



  • Options
    #50
    BnB
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭BnB


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    Except you are wrong because theres restrictions in contract conditions and any that contained such clauses would almost certainly be dismissed if he attempted to enforce it.

    Again, you've completely missed the point...

    Does he have the right to put the clause in an agreement... YES
    Does he have the right to not allow someone to move in because they don't sign that agreement... YES
    Would he be able to kick someone out in a few months time if they subsequently break that clause in the agreement.... Different argument completely... But for what it's worth, highly unlikely I'd say


  • Options
    #51
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    BnB wrote: »
    Again, you've completely missed the point...

    Does he have the right to put the clause in an agreement... YES
    Does he have the right to not allow someone to move in because they don't sign that agreement... YES
    Would he be able to kick someone out in a few months time if they subsequently break that clause in the agreement.... Different argument completely... But for what it's worth, highly unlikely I'd say

    Let's follow this logic:

    The contract states that the landlord can enter at will. it gives the landlord the right to demand sex instead of payment. The landlord can remove the tenants underwear. The landlord can install cameras in the bedrooms.

    Try it, see if the courts agree with your position


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    Niner, knock it off.

    Do not reply to this post.


  • Options
    #53
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    listermint wrote: »
    No, it's weird. Simple as that.


    It's very weird.


    It's none of his business where the money comes from, he either gets it or he doesn't - that should really be his only concern!


  • Options
    #54
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    its weird to ask for his parents, but if I were the landlord I wouldn't be allowing the unemployed lad be named on the lease. All monies from the employed person and if the boyfriend can't pay, its on her.


Advertisement