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.

Great amount of legislation proposed in 2018 to change the Residential Tenancies Act

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    tvjunki
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭tvjunki


    mrslancaster wrote: »
    Just heard the director of the rtb on radio, more regulation appears to be on the way.

    She said the new annual registration will give more accurate data and there's also a new scheme where landlords can be certified. RTB will have more powers to investigate a complaint made by a tenant or previous tenant by calling to the property.

    Over 8000 landlords have left the sector in the past few years. If the anti-eviction bill discussed on another thread is passed, there might be more.
    .

    She just wants more money.
    Landlords are supposed to inform of changes in rent increases or decreases also when tenants leave. Rtb do not charge for updating the tenancy. Bring in yearly fees will mean more money for rtb and no change to the landlord apart from higher fees.
    When you see the rtb analysis of rent levels they are only for new leases. They do not take into account sitting tenants within the 4 or 6 year cycle. The percentage increase would be a lot less. Not showing true reflection of the market.


  • Options
    #93
    therightangle
    Registered Users Posts: 85 ✭✭therightangle


    tvjunki wrote: »
    When you see the rtb analysis of rent levels they are only for new leases.

    Interesting, do you think RTB rents are higher than market? I had assumed the rent levels Im seeing on RTB are 10-15% below market, but hard to know with so few ads. Anyone any thoughts on whether RTB rent levels are above or below market?


  • Options
    #94
    tvjunki
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭tvjunki


    therightangle wrote: »
    Interesting, do you think RTB rents are higher than market? I had assumed the rent levels Im seeing on RTB are 10-15% below market, but hard to know with so few ads. Anyone any thoughts on whether RTB rent levels are above or below market?

    I read something there that only new tenancies are registered with rtb in their analysis of the market rents and not existing tenancies. I think I also heard the director of rtb saying this.
    New tenancies are increasing and any new builds are higher than others because they can set the rent. If the market has less supply in the area then a landlord can charge more.

    I have seen on daft a 2 bed apartment in our area for €1050 and next door it is €1600 what does that say? The second was sold refurbished and back on the market. Also the first the landlord did not increase the rent before the rpz came in and had a sitting tenant.
    It is down to demand and supply.

    RTB rent levels are based on only those that have be registered with rtb. Many are still under the radar.


  • Options
    #95
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    looks like a few changes from minister Murphy are on the way, rtb to have new powers to investigate, criminal proceedings, annual rtb fees and substantial renovation changes.

    i find it a bit confusing to read but others with more experience or legal knowledge will understand it

    https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/bill/2018/140/eng/initiated/b14018d.pdf


  • Options
    #96
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,623 ✭✭✭Fol20


    mrslancaster wrote: »
    looks like a few changes from minister Murphy are on the way, rtb to have new powers to investigate, criminal proceedings, annual rtb fees and substantial renovation changes.

    i find it a bit confusing to read but others with more experience or legal knowledge will understand it

    https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/bill/2018/140/eng/initiated/b14018d.pdf

    Yay. So yet more fees coming the ll way. Depending on how many properties you have. This anual fee could be anywhere from an extra 100 to 1000’s per year. The quangos in the RTB do nothing for ll yet we have to pay for their lack luster service. its already a pain to register on their crappy website and now i need to do it multiple times a year


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    mrslancaster wrote: »
    looks like a few changes from minister Murphy are on the way, rtb to have new powers to investigate, criminal proceedings, annual rtb fees and substantial renovation changes.

    i find it a bit confusing to read but others with more experience or legal knowledge will understand it

    https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/bill/2018/140/eng/initiated/b14018d.pdf
    This is it! This is the govvie proposal that will be approved in January or February and become law very quickly. Thank you very much! I shall do a full check this weekend.


  • Options
    #98
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    As I was expecting this bill is a big FU to landlords. There are lots of changes [all increasing costs and duties to landlords as usual] and an enourmous amount of bureaucracy introduced that will hit small landlords pretty badly. I shall start to resume the main points in various posts to the best of my understanding (so it should not be taken as the correct interpretation) and other people in the forum please feel free to add/change/comment as you see fit (this is in my opinion the main purpose of this public forum):

    First important change the increase of rent due to renovations gets a statutory footing and a massively increased bureaucracy after this bill is approved:
    Definition of renovation:
    (a) has to affect at least 50 per cent of the floor area of the dwelling
    (b) in ADDITION it has to satisfy at least one of the following four conditions
    (I) the internal layout of the dwelling is permanently altered [would a new wall do?]
    (II) the dwelling is adapted to provide for access and use by a person with a disability, within the meaning of the Disability Act 2005
    (III) the number of rooms within the dwelling is increased,
    (IV) a permanent extension is added to the dwelling, or
    (V) where the European Union (Energy Performance of Buildings) Regulations 2012 (S.I. No. 243 of 2012) apply to
    the dwelling the BER, within the meaning of those Regulations, of that dwelling is improved,

    The real big change is that in order to set the new rent due to renovation in an RPZ the landlord will have to serve a notice in the prescribed form [probably will be decided at the discretion of the RTB] together with all relevant supporting information [probably lots of plans of the works, invoices, planning permissions, ... like if you had to take an adjudication case] on the RTB setting out the reasons why, in the landlord’s opinion, subsection (4) [ie the 4% limit pro rata annual limit] does not apply to the dwelling.

    In this way the RTB itself will be receiving all the information and probably their penpushers will be striking out most of the rent increases due to renovations by communicating directly with landlord and tenant a few months (or more likely a few years!) later.

    Now given the fact that initial RPZ should be expiring in just one year time, why was this massive bureaucracy introduced? I am almost sure that RPZ will be renewed indefinitely close to expiry in late 2019: once rent controls are introduced they are like a virus, only a judicial decision (like in Ireland in 81) or a referendum (like it happened in some US states in the early 90s) or a massive political shift due to other causes (like winter of discontent in UK putting Tatcher in power in the late seventies) manage to remove rent control.

    [to be continued]


  • Options
    #99
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    As other posters have pointed out, there is a lot of legislation with various amendments to the residential tendencies act before the dail.

    They are at different stages - I don't fully understand how that all works but if or when they are passed it looks like they will put more restrictions on landlords.

    I'm trying to keep up to date about it for a relative who emigrated for work and rented out their house.

    They want to live in their own house when they return in the next year or two but so much has changed in the past few years and they are getting very nervous.

    Could anyone familiar with passing bills in the Dail add some info? This is the list.

    https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/find-bills-and-acts/?billType=all&keyword=Residential%20tenancies&year=2018&sortBy=billNumber


  • Options
    #100
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    All part 4 tenancies notice of termination periods are increased to very high length (similar to what a long term tenant gets today), further incentivizing overholding since when a tenant receives a notice of 4 months he/she will have no incentive to look for a place right away:

    Less than 6 months: 28 days (nothing changed)
    6 or more months but less than 1 year: 90 days
    1 year or more but less than 2 years: 120 days
    2 years or more but less than 3 years: 120 days
    3 years or more but less than 4 years: 120 days
    4 years or more but less than 5 years: 120 days
    The other periods higher than 120 days (for tenancies longer than 5 years) remain the same.

    Maybe (just maybe, because it depends on how it is implemented at the adjudications) there is one good thing for landlords and bad for player tenants who overhold hoping the termination notice is invalid:
    (i) if the original notice is invalid due to a defect contained in, or occurring during the service of, the original notice,
    (ii) the defect concerned does not prejudice, in a material respect [this is a problematic subjective interpretation often abused by pro-tenant adjudicators], the original notice, and
    (iii) the original notice is otherwise in compliance with the provisions of this Act, [again: Is not writing the BS that the tenant has the full 24 hours to vacate considered material? Is not providing a full list of the works to perform or the cost estimate from builders considered material? ...]

    If it goes to adjudication and the notice is found invalid the adjudicator shall permit the landlord to issue just a new 28 days notice to terminate instead of restarting from 0 and waiting 120 days. I believe it is just a fig leaf in order to excuse such huge notice periods for very short tenancies. The adjudicator will have so much discretion that a new 120 (or more) days notice will have to be issued making this whole "improvement" moot. Even the 28 days does not make sense, the adjudicator could simply request the landlord to provide the information missing and tell the tenant to vacate within 28 days starting from the date the landlord provides the missing information, in this way no further adjudication would be requested and the landlord could go straight to court to enforce the eviction of the player. The govvie is tinkering as usual.

    [to be continued]


  • Options
    #101
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    mrslancaster wrote: »
    As other posters have pointed out, there is a lot of legislation with various amendments to the residential tendencies act before the dail.

    They are at different stages - I don't fully understand how that all works but if or when they are passed it looks like they will put more restrictions on landlords.

    I'm trying to keep up to date about it for a relative who emigrated for work and rented out their house.

    They want to live in their own house when they return in the next year or two but so much has changed in the past few years and they are getting very nervous.

    Could anyone familiar with passing bills in the Dail add some info? This is the list.

    https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/find-bills-and-acts/?billType=all&keyword=Residential%20tenancies&year=2018&sortBy=billNumber


    I am adding, but it is (as usual) a massive bill so it takes time. The one you posted in your previous post is the only bill which will be approved within a short time frame (likely January or February 2019), since it is a government proposal and it will have high priority, so it should be the one to be concerned about. All the private members bills (including the nefarious anti-eviction bill) will take years to go through the Oireachtas and will very likely not go through since they are opposed by the government which has many ways to obstruct the progress (not less than 18 months of obstruction:D)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    GGtrek, thanks for explaining that - much appreciated.


  • Options
    #103
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    Further substantial changes:
    - all determination orders will have to be published from now on (no more discretion to RTB) [I have not understood if even in the case of agreement reached among the parties, the agreement will be published]
    - registration of the tenancy (section 134) will now become annual [other additional bureaucracy for landlords] and the registration will have to happen "within 1 month from each anniversary of the date of the commencement of the tenancy." In addition they are very explicit that it will also apply to tenancies that started before the new bill is approved: "A landlord shall comply with the registration in respect of a tenancy that commenced before, on or after the commencement of section 12 of the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2018." [it is the usual changing of the rules of the game]. There are some exception granted (i.e. 4 months to register and pay the fee instead of 1 month) if the anniversary falls within the first three months since the approval of the bill.
    - the registration fee will now be paid annually however from the best of my understanding it has been reduced to €40 per year (or €80 if the registration is delayed by not more than 12 months or €170 otherwise). I am sorry but the changes to section 137 are so complicated to make them almost unreadable! In any case this means almost a threefold increase of fees compared with current situation of €90 every 6 years.
    - fee for adjudications changes to €20
    - fee for appeals changes to €85

    [to be continued]


  • Options
    #104
    DubCount
    Registered Users Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭DubCount


    GGTrek wrote: »
    registration of the tenancy (section 134) will now become annual

    Although this brings additional costs (which will eventually find their way into higher rents) and additional unwanted paperwork to landlords, I see some benefit to this. I have always wondered if the true level of the decline in landlords and tenancies is being masked by landlords not bothering to de-register from the RTB when they sell up or otherwise take their properties off the long term rental market. Annual registration should provide more accurate stats on the actual level of live tenancies, as RTB figures will have more accurate data.


  • Options
    #105
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    Now Part 7A introduced by the Bill is the most substantial change to the Act, which will "try to" criminalize landlords that do not respect RPZ rules (even if the difficult renovation rules are not fully respected), but will not criminalize tenants who do not pay rent (the skewed view of big government).

    I believe many parts of this section to be uncostitutional since only proper courts (not the RTB) can determine criminal offences and only with beyond reasonable doubt standard of evidence, not with the kangaroo standard setup by this bill. As an escape valve, they are trying to force the lanldord to accept culpability in order to avoid a criminal prosecution in proper courts and force landlords to provide evidence to incriminate themselves during the investigation and notice phase.

    They wish to nominate "authorised officers and decision makers" who can investigate breaches to RPZ regulations and if a lanldord does not accept results of investigations (and an oral hearing which would become different from normal RTB adjudications), they would start criminal proceedings! This is a joke, the nomination of such officeers does not follow any proper rules of independence that apply to normal Courts:
    164A. (1) For the purposes of Part 7A the Board shall appoint, as it thinks fit
    (a) a person to be an authorised officer, and
    (b) a person to be a decision maker.
    (2) A person appointed under subsection (1)(a) may be a member of staff of the Board. (a few on the staff of the Board were employees of Housing Charities!)

    They want to give these people the authority to force landlords to testify as witnesses (like in a proper Court) then forward the case to Courts since these "officers" could not constitutionally impose criminal penalties.

    Even worse, unlike a proper court process they would accept a "complaint" from any person to start the investigation (it does not need to be an interested party as instead required to start any court proceeding). It is a blackmail charter against landlords and there is nothing in the bill forcing the complainant name to be made available to the landlord and then requested to testify as the landlord would be forced to (in the uncostitutional wishes of this bill). AFAIK a crime can never be reported anonymously and the defendant has a right to cross examine the person making the accusations. In any case I looked at Article 38.3 of the Constitution and it weakens substantially defendant rights in Ireland to be tried by jury and follow due process of law.

    To ameliorate the uncostitutionality of the bill the govvie then added these subsections:
    "(11)Nothing in this section shall be taken to compel the production by any person of any records which he or she would be exempt from producing in proceedings in a court on the ground of legal professional privilege.
    (12)An authorised officer shall not, other than with the consent of the occupier, enter a private dwelling without a warrant issued under
    subsection (13) authorising the entry." I.e. asking a proper Court for a warrant.

    The way I see this part 7A:
    a) it will take a long time for the RTB to setup the whole system
    b) it will just take one single judicial review to make it fall

    They should have just kept the whole business within the adjudication framework (even breaches to RPZ legislation) without trying to show off that the govvie is "very serious" about it. The RTB should have been given the authority to take the initiative of the adjudication with the complainant named and as a witness and sorted it out within the current framework with administrative penalties. The govvie is overdoing it and (as usual) will cause another reduction of supply in rental properties.


  • Options
    #106
    tvjunki
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭tvjunki


    This is heart breaking. More money thrown at rtb. The director is getting her way. 50% goes in tax and property tax.
    I wonder will resits have to pay this fee? They will have it in the contract that the tenant will have to pay the service fee for rtb.

    Not all landlords break the laws.

    Did you notice nothing about non paying tenants or quick evictions. The costs will be passed onto the tenants.
    Paying a fee yearly will become monthly.
    They will find homes sitting empty with no tenants in them. Reap what you sew.


  • Options
    #107
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    tvjunki wrote: »
    This is heart breaking. More money thrown at rtb. The director is getting her way. 50% goes in tax and property tax.
    I wonder will resits have to pay this fee? They will have it in the contract that the tenant will have to pay the service fee for rtb.

    Not all landlords break the laws.

    Did you notice nothing about non paying tenants or quick evictions. The costs will be passed onto the tenants.
    Paying a fee yearly will become monthly.
    They will find homes sitting empty with no tenants in them. Reap what you sew.


    There is absolutely nothing (as expected) about overholding or non paying tenants and for sure it is a massive power grab for the RTB against landlords. I have already started the sale process of all my properties in Ireland and I hope I shall be done before the summer. The government does not want small/medium landlords and selling is the only rational thing to do for non institutional landlords.


    Rental supply will be further reduced in 2019 after such bill is approved no matter the limited build to rent properties the REITs are building (rents will not decrease for sure :D). In addition in 2020 when the agreement between FF and FG will terminate due to electoral reasons, measures like the anti-eviction bill have a chance of being enacted (again due to electoral reasons) and there is a strong possibility that they will put a tombstone over the Irish private rental market.


    I am not too worried about the fee, but about the time costs imposed on landlords with all the new bureaucracy and for sure I am worried by the blackmail charter for RPZ which reminds me about Fascists and Communist regimes (who always liked anonymous complaints). Any tenant that a landlord has evicted can now easily blackmail him/her by simply complaining at the RTB (who has no checks and balances at all) and a landlord will have to prove its innocence under the risk of a criminal prosecution with jail terms of up to 5 years (which is something you would get for manslaughter or drug trafficking!) if not cooperating with an RTB employee:
    "Subject to subsection (10), a person who
    —
    (a) withholds, destroys, conceals or refuses to provide any information or records required for the purposes of an investigation,
    (b) fails or refuses to comply with any requirement of an authorised officer under this section, or
    (c) otherwise obstructs or hinders an authorised officer in the performance of functions imposed under this Part,
    is guilty of an offence and liable
    —
    (i) on summary conviction, to a class A fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, or
    (ii) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or both"



    In many democratic countries the police or public prosecution cannot force you to testify or provide proof against yourself in criminal proceedings. In Ireland an RTB employee could do it!


  • Options
    #108
    tvjunki
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭tvjunki


    Did I read somewhere in that bill that anyone can send in a claim against a landlord and they have no direct connection to the house(not tenant or x tenant). So any jealous neighbour could cause trouble and there are no consequences to them if it is a lie. We are selling too. Government your getting your wishes.


  • Options
    #109
    LotharIngum
    Registered Users Posts: 210 ✭✭LotharIngum


    Jesus im glad im out and im staying out.
    Things are just getting worse by the day.
    Who in their right mind would be a landlord today.
    I used to think that if I just waited surely it would improve for a landlord but at the drop of a hat it just gets worse and worse and even worse.

    Lets see. What have we got now.
    Forcing landlords to rent to people they don't want to rent to.

    One sided leases. A lease means nothing to a tenant. They can leave it just by nominating an alchoholic cat with no references. Yet the landlord is stuck in a lease he didn't even agree with the tenant. If the tenant wanted to convince the landlord to let to them by making the lease attractive, they cant accept it.

    Not ever being able to make back the money that you spend doing the place up. Because you are stuck at 4% rent increases.

    Tenants can just not pay rent and do what they like and you will be so far in the hole you might as well just burn the place down by the time you get them out.

    Landlords who were not taking the piss before and charging low rent are punished for this, while the lls who were already taking the piss are rewarded for it.

    If you want out of the business so you can use the property to earn money in other ways the government are actively blocking this too.

    What kind of a joke is this? Really?
    Anyone who stays in the business is an idiot as far as I can see.
    Pure madness.


  • Options
    #110
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,483 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    GGTrek wrote: »
    In many democratic countries the police or public prosecution cannot force you to testify or provide proof against yourself in criminal proceedings. In Ireland an RTB employee could do it!

    It's in Ireland too, just the government don't care as they won't be called out.


  • Options
    #111
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    LotharIngum wrote: »
    Not ever being able to make back the money that you spend doing the place up. Because you are stuck at 4% rent increases.
    I wonder what law the government will introduce to "fix" this issue of houses not being updated, because the LL's won't be able to take back money from the rent for it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Scienceless
    Registered Users Posts: 196 ✭✭Scienceless


    mrslancaster wrote: »
    looks like a few changes from minister Murphy are on the way, rtb to have new powers to investigate, criminal proceedings, annual rtb fees and substantial renovation changes.

    i find it a bit confusing to read but others with more experience or legal knowledge will understand it

    https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/bill/2018/140/eng/initiated/b14018d.pdf

    Is this the full extent of what’s coming in this legislation early next year? Is there anything in there for ll’s on below market rents in RPZ’s?
    Didn’t see anything there on that but it is confusing?
    Or is it the case if it’s not in the legislation it’s not happening?


  • Options
    #113
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    Scienceless wrote: »
    Is this the full extent of what’s coming in this legislation early next year? Is there anything in there for ll’s on below market rents in RPZ’s?
    Didn’t see anything there on that but it is confusing?
    Or is it the case if it’s not in the legislation it’s not happening?


    Yes it is the full extent to what is coming for residential lettings ONLY. It can be changed by amendments however and I am sure there will be plenty to worsen it coming from the usual SF and their commie comrades. It has gone through the cabinet already and probably has been agreed by FF as well, it is a govvie proposal so it will not go to committee stage and will be quickly approved.


    There is absolutely NOTHING for LLs on below market rents in RPZs in this legislation. Actually the legislation worsens the situation for such LLs and for any type of LL: only bad news! It is the usual LLs bashing legislation that has been coming out of the Oireachtas since 2008 (10 years of bashing, no wonder the rental market is like this!)


    This does not mean that it is the only legislation that is going to come out in 2019. Other govvie legislation in the pipeline is the massive restriction of short term lettings and you can bet at the end of 2019 the RPZ zones will be renewed. The RPZ order of the minister for Dublin and Cork should expire at the end of 2019, but the rental market supply has worsened considerably thanks to the LLs continuous bashing and LLs exiting the market, so the govvie and FF are desperate to look good on the Irish socialist media especially considering that it is very likely that in 2020 there will be general elections if the confidence and supply agreement between FG and FF expires in 2020 (maybe they extend it until 2021 which is the natural expiry of this Oireachtas).


    In any case do not even hope that this govvie and these TDs clowns will stop legislating (even if the proposals are uncostitutional like many of the latest proposals including this one) and damaging the property letting market in general.


  • Options
    #114
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Scienceless wrote: »
    ...Is there anything in there for ll’s on below market rents in RPZ’s?...

    Nothing good I expect. They'll probably increase taxes for people with one rented property and low rents.


  • Options
    #115
    Scienceless
    Registered Users Posts: 196 ✭✭Scienceless


    beauf wrote: »
    Nothing good I expect. They'll probably increase taxes for people with one rented property and low rents.

    They can do what they like!
    It will not be an issue for me soon anyway.


  • Options
    #116
    LotharIngum
    Registered Users Posts: 210 ✭✭LotharIngum


    I should have posted this in here actually.

    Seems to fit better than where I originally posted it.

    I was talking to someone today who said that the number of properties for sale has risen.

    And that he thinks that the reason is that there has been a huge shift in the last few months of landlords getting out and realizing that things will never get better and they have finally decided to just sell up.

    Could these two things actually be related I wonder?

    If its true I guess it might have an effect on sale prices. Pretty sure it will have an effect on rentals anyway.


  • Options
    #117
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,500 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    LotharIngum wrote: »
    I should have posted this in here actually.

    Seems to fit better than where I originally posted it.

    I was talking to someone today who said that the number of properties for sale has risen.

    And that he thinks that the reason is that there has been a huge shift in the last few months of landlords getting out and realizing that things will never get better and they have finally decided to just sell up.

    Could these two things actually be related I wonder?

    If its true I guess it might have an effect on sale prices. Pretty sure it will have an effect on rentals anyway.

    Wouldn't be surprised in the slightest. My parents are recently retired and were thinking of buying a house to rent out for their pension, I objected very strongly. I honestly think it would be the end of my dad if he had a bad tenant, he doesnt understand how bad it could get and he would not cope with the bank situation.


Advertisement