Landlord Trouble!! :(

DESQ

A friend is experiencing problems with an ex landlord. My friend moved out after 3 months of a 1 year lease without giving notice. The landlord isn’t registered with the PRTB but keeps sending her emails threatening legal action and is looking for the balance of a years rent. He has her deposit which she is not expecting back. Does anyone have any ideas how to deal with this? He’s not registered with the PRTB but a one year lease was signed. Will this stand in court? Or will he be in trouble for avoiding tax? this is quiet worring and we're not sure what to deal with this landlord, i can understand him being mad but demanding 9months rent is just stupid, he could at least try to come to some agreement,
Thanks

LostinBlanch

Sounds like there are two different issues here.

1. Your friend breaking the lease
2. Registration with the PRTB

I don't agree that it's stupid for him to look for the balance of the lease. It's a legal agreement and I think any legal advice you get will tell you that he's legally entitled to pursue your friend for the balance. Unless there are any extenuating circumstances which you haven't outlined. If so you'd probably have to take your chances in court (providing it goes down the legal route). Reading in the papers etc that there are more places for rent than tenants at the moment so if the landlord can't get another tenant then it's more likely he'll go after your friend for the balance.

Regarding the non registration with PRTB of course he should have registered with them and is in breach of the law by not doing so. Am I right in thinking that you want to use this as a bargaining tactic to come to some arrangement with him rather than being more concerned about him being registered? It may work but then again it may not.

BTW I'm not a landlord but as someone who has rented in the past I think that there has to be fairness on both sides. How would you or your friend feel if you were renting out a place to someone who left 3 months into a year long lease?

toodelies

the landlord is entitled to seek the balance of the rent. your friend signed a 12 month contract and broke the terms of that contract. was there a reason that she left early i.e. something wrong with the house? however as you said he is not registered with the PRTB so he cannot use their dispute resolution service. he is entiteld to pursue her through the small claims court. you can report him for not registering hte tenancy or at least theaten to do this to stop him coming after her. at the end of hte day though it is open to him to pursue her in small claims court.

you say that he is not paying tax, how do you know this? not registering with the PRTB and not paying tax are not the same thing.

shellyboo

When you move out without notice, the landlord is entitled to retain your security deposit... that's what the deposit is for. As far as I'm aware, he is not entitled to demand the rest of the money.

You can go to the PRTB and ask them what your rights are, but a better idea would be to tell the landlord that you're going to the PRTB with it. The punishment for non-registration is a €3000 fine or a 6-month jail sentence. The landlord's reaction when you say you're going to the PRTB will tell you whether or not he's serious about legal action... if he backs down, you're in the clear. If he doesn't, go the PRTB and see what your rights are.


Basically, whatever way it works out... report him to the PRTB!

eightyfish

Give Threshold a call. Its a free service and they will give you advice on what to do. The PRTB are tied legally and can solve disputes but not actually dispense advice.

If he's not PRTB registered it shouldn't be a problem though - this probably means he's not tax registered either. This you can use.

D3PO

shellyboo wrote: »

When you move out without notice, the landlord is entitled to retain your security deposit... that's what the deposit is for. As far as I'm aware, he is not entitled to demand the rest of the money.

!

well your not aware of what a fixed term lease is then. Legally he can sue the OP's friend for the outstanding rent registration with the PRTB or not . and anyway a deposit is for ensureing a tennant doesnt leave with unpaid bills or after damaging something nothing more nothing less.

he could be fined up to €3,000 for not registering the tennancy but if its a first time offense hes unlikely to be fined at all much less the maximum amount so hes going to pursue this id imagine.

i have no sympathy for the OP's friend he/she shouldnt have signed a legal document without realising there would be consequences in breaking it.

D3PO

eightyfish wrote: »

.

If he's not PRTB registered it shouldn't be a problem though - this probably means he's not tax registered either. This you can use.

why is that assumed they are completly different things.

markpb

shellyboo wrote: »

When you move out without notice, the landlord is entitled to retain your security deposit... that's what the deposit is for. As far as I'm aware, he is not entitled to demand the rest of the money.

That's a common misconception. The deposit is there to cover any unpaid bills and repairs (other than from wear & tear) after you leave. It's not for moving out early or not paying the last months rent.

Amalgam

eightyfish wrote: »

Give Threshold a call. Its a free service and they will give you advice on what to do. The PRTB are tied legally and can solve disputes but not actually dispense advice.

If he's not PRTB registered it shouldn't be a problem though - this probably means he's not tax registered either. This you can use.

Threshold tell you what you want to hear, at least with the PRTB it'll be neutral, if a bit cold, but they won't be mollycoddling you with false hopes..

eightyfish

D3PO wrote: »

why is that assumed they are completly different things.

Based only on anecdotal evidence. :rolleyes:

Sleipnir

toodelies wrote: »

at the end of hte day though it is open to him to pursue her in small claims court.

At the end of the day, you can't use the small claims court to pursue debts.
Also, any claim cannot exceed €2000 euro and I would imagine a year's rent would be substantially more than that.

bobbiw

DESQ wrote: »

A friend is experiencing problems with an ex landlord. My friend moved out after 3 months of a 1 year lease without giving notice. The landlord isn’t registered with the PRTB but keeps sending her emails threatening legal action and is looking for the balance of a years rent. He has her deposit which she is not expecting back. Does anyone have any ideas how to deal with this? He’s not registered with the PRTB but a one year lease was signed. Will this stand in court? Or will he be in trouble for avoiding tax? this is quiet worring and we're not sure what to deal with this landlord, i can understand him being mad but demanding 9months rent is just stupid, he could at least try to come to some agreement,
Thanks

Your friend broke the lease, she has to pay for the 9 months rent.
Doesnt matter about the registration thats a seperate matter.

Too many people are doing this and the courts are eventually going to hammer them all.

LostinBlanch

And any court order against your friend could affect their credit rating which causes a whole load of crap that isn't worth it in the long run.

D3PO

eightyfish wrote: »

Based only on anecdotal evidence. :rolleyes:

show me the link to this "evidence" :rolleyes:

Heckler

Pretty sure the only reason a landlord wouldn't register a tenancy is to get tax free rent. If this is the case reach an agreement with him. He forgets about the remaining rent and you don't report him. Good chance that he's being renting out the place tax free for years and if he's caught for a tax bill for that it'll be a lot more than 9 months rent. Call his bluff. John Doe has the upper hand !!

stepbar

Ask the landlord did he offset the interest on his mortgage against rental income for the year? If he did he would be in trouble with the Revenue as you can't do this without being registered with the PTRB.

He might not have a mortgage on the property but call his bluff.

Kipperhell

Heckler wrote: »

Pretty sure the only reason a landlord wouldn't register a tenancy is to get tax free rent. If this is the case reach an agreement with him. He forgets about the remaining rent and you don't report him. Good chance that he's being renting out the place tax free for years and if he's caught for a tax bill for that it'll be a lot more than 9 months rent. Call his bluff. John Doe has the upper hand !!

That is simply a big assumption and based on incorrect information. The PRTB cannot share information with revenue or the other way around. The PRTB do not keep their website up to date so it is pretty pointless to use that to find out if they are registered or not. The most likely reason for anybody not being registered is laziness with paper work. The revenue would have to investigate every reported person and they don't I can assure you.
Living in the real world means the landlord is unlikely to actually chase the person other than e-mails/phone. If it goes to court he would likely win as it is a simple case of breach of contract. The PRTB or tax have nothing to do with that court so what the person thinks they know have no bearing on that. I wouldn't do anything until you get an actual legal document and ignore the e-mails.

markpb

Kipperhell wrote: »

That is simply a big assumption and based on incorrect information. The PRTB cannot share information with revenue or the other way around.

Do you know that for a fact? Since Revenue base their tax calculations on PRTB registrations, I'd be surprised if the PRTB wasn't set up with legislation allowing it to share information with revenue.

eightyfish

Kipperhell wrote: »

If it goes to court he would likely win as it is a simple case of breach of contract.

I agree with this. Especially as the person just moved out without notice, they don't really have a legal leg to stand on. In reality if you provide sufficient notice things work out more amicably, and you'll probably get your deposit back too, as the landlord will have time to find new tenants and will not suffer a break in income. Even better if you can recommend new tenants yourself.

As for the PTRB, if the landlord was registered with them, you should have received a letter as tenants informing you of such as well as providing a tenancy number. I've received this in only one of the three properties I rented, but the PRTB came in very useful at the end of the tenancy when we moved out and the letting agents 1) promised us on the phone that as long as the property was in good condition, we would receive our full deposit back 2) backed this up with a letter 3) wouldn't actually pay the deposit when we moved out and then 4) only paid us 2/3 of it.

We appealed to the PRTB with photographic evidence of the condition of the property and we got our full deposit back.

D3PO

markpb wrote: »

Do you know that for a fact? Since Revenue base their tax calculations on PRTB registrations, I'd be surprised if the PRTB wasn't set up with legislation allowing it to share information with revenue.

this is a fact. hes right the PRTB do not share or have a way of sharing their information with the revenue.

Bit of a joke really

The_Conductor

Kipperhell wrote: »

The PRTB cannot share information with revenue or the other way around.

Incorrect.
They have not shared their databases with the Revenue Commissioners or the DSFA todate- simply because it is currently too onerous to do so. The original proposal was to centralise all government and agency databases with common markers (a person's RSI number for example) and providing sufficient clearance was in place- an officer from any Department or body- could access and amalgamate the information from another- for among other purposes, investigative reasons. This plan has not been abondoned- the infrastructure to implement it is already largely in place.

D3PO

smccarrick wrote: »

Incorrect.
They have not shared their databases with the Revenue Commissioners or the DSFA todate- simply because it is currently too onerous to do so.

ok so rather than the quote being that they cant share. if somebody raises a complaint about an unregistered tennancy there is no default that flags this to the revenue.

The_Conductor

D3PO wrote: »

ok so rather than the quote being that they cant share. if somebody raises a complaint about an unregistered tennancy there is no default that flags this to the revenue.

The request for information is more likely to come from the opposite direction- from the Revenue Commissioners to the PRTB, and it has happened in a number of low profile cases todate. There is no default that flags it to the Revenue thus far- the flag, such as there is a flag- is internal in the Revenue Commissioners- and its waved when someone claims a tax credit for rent relief.......

D3PO

smccarrick wrote: »

The request for information is more likely to come from the opposite direction- from the Revenue Commissioners to the PRTB, and it has happened in a number of low profile cases todate. There is no default that flags it to the Revenue thus far- the flag, such as there is a flag- is internal in the Revenue Commissioners- and its waved when someone claims a tax credit for rent relief.......

yep that would be my thoughts aswell

Kipperhell

smccarrick wrote: »

Incorrect.
They have not shared their databases with the Revenue Commissioners or the DSFA todate- simply because it is currently too onerous to do so. The original proposal was to centralise all government and agency databases with common markers (a person's RSI number for example) and providing sufficient clearance was in place- an officer from any Department or body- could access and amalgamate the information from another- for among other purposes, investigative reasons. This plan has not been abondoned- the infrastructure to implement it is already largely in place.

I worked on the project and I can tell you they cannot share databases for the foreseeable future as a matter of course. I should have pointed out that records can be exchanged on individual records with a court order or formal application in some cases but not all. The most important thing is it doesn't happen automatically and the revenue do not pursue every one. I watched a system that verified an official stamp be implemented the system can't distinguish a scribble from the stamp and one in 1000 was manually checked in theory but never done in practice.

I was told by the legal department that a combination of the Irish Constitution and EU law that the databases cannot be shared and that it will likely take a decade or longer before they could ever really have it working legally. By that time the systems will most likely need a complete overhaul. The project is not abandoned in theory but a complete waste of time and money close to the voting machines design problem. Certain information can be shared currently but PRTB and revenue is unlikely as is eastern health board payments for rent and revenue.

There is not a team of people waiting for a complaint that then rushes off to investigate I would think of them as slower than any service that you have actually interacted with like the police.

20goto10

The contract is legally binding. The landlord will be entitled to compensation, most likely to be an out of court agreement but only after a few rounds with his solicitor. You can report him to the PRTB but seeing as your friend is still officially a tenant, simply not paying rent, then he can still register the tenancy for a simple late fee of €140 (if I remember the figure correctly). Try to bribe him and he is likely to step up his pursuit aggressively and at the end of the day your friend is in the worng, no matter what his tax status is.

In otherwords your friend is up sh!t creek without a paddle I'm afraid.

Xiney

Well, the landlord can't take her to small claims court because the PRTB are the body in charge of tenancy disputes.

Since he's not registered, he's liable for a 3000 euro fine, but if the year's (or, well, 8 months) rent is more than 3000 euro he might suck it up and go through with it anyway and pocket the difference.

In short, your friend might be made to pay it, she did sign a contract... although actually I'd wager it's unlikely he'll go through the PRTB and is probably trying to scare her.

D3PO

Xiney wrote: »

Well, the landlord can't take her to small claims court because the PRTB are the body in charge of tenancy disputes.

Since he's not registered, he's liable for a 3000 euro fine, .

point 1 is not true. PRTB mediate in disputes but have no ability to legally enforce a decision. Going to court is the way the judgement will be made.

point 2. Landlord can circumvent by paying a late registratin fee of circa 150 euro or not register and for a first offense he is vdery unlikely to be fined anywhere close to 3 grand. The legal possibility versus the probability make it favourable for the landlord to pursue this to the end

antoinolachtnai

Kipperhell wrote: »

I worked on the project and I can tell you they cannot share databases for the foreseeable future as a matter of course. I should have pointed out that records can be exchanged on individual records with a court order or formal application in some cases but not all.

I refer my learned friends to

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0027/print.html#partvii-chapiv-sec148

It says:

(2) On the request of—


(a) a landlord of a dwelling, on his or her furnishing—


(i) his or her identification number, or


(ii) his or her name and the identification number of his or her authorised agent,


or


(b) the Revenue Commissioners, on their furnishing—


(i) the identification number of a landlord of a dwelling, or


(ii) the name of a landlord of a dwelling and the identification number of his or her authorised agent,


the Board shall, at such time or times as are reasonably specified in the request, furnish to the Revenue Commissioners—


(I) confirmation as to whether the landlord has registered a tenancy in respect of a dwelling, and


(II) in the event of there being one or more than one tenancy so registered, such of the particulars registered in respect of it or them as the Revenue Commissioners may require.

Arathorn

Renters have more power now, they should ensure a break clause in the lease or agree a shorter lease. Personally I think its unfair to be liable for a so much rent when a persons circumstances can change. There should be a cap on what landlords can claim back. Landlords especially in Dublin screwed people over for years including myself, so I'm seeing the difficult times for landlords as a bit of Karma

D3PO

Arathorn wrote: »

Personally I think its unfair to be liable for a so much rent when a persons circumstances can change.

well if you dont negotiate a break clause then you get what your deserve quite frankly