Tenants breaking lease, or are they?

Like a Boss

Bit of a difficult one. Our tenants moved in in September and we told them we were looking for them to sign a 12 month lease, which they were happy to do. We reg'd them with PRTB and included on the form that the lease was for 12 months.

Last month they told us they were moving out after only 5 months. I assumed we were within our rights to keep their deposit (is this correct?).

I checked the lease just to make sure, and it says the lease is a "month-to-month tenancy, 4-year cycle". I left the lease side of things to my then GF, so never noticed that it wasn't fixed term. Here's a link to the actual lease we used: http://www.irishlandlord.com/documents/l/Lease%20irishlandlord.pdf

Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't mind giving them back their deposit as they were pretty good tenants, and we've found new tenants since then. The only issue is that when the outgoing tenants first moved in, the carpet in the master bedroom could have done with a cleaning, and one or two parts of the apartment needed a lick of paint etc. Nothing major, just minor cosmetic details.

We'd planned on getting this done over the course of the 12 months but due to having to get the boiler fixed and xmas etc. we weren't in a position to get it done, and they were happy about that. Since then, it has gotten sufficiently worse, to the point where it is not up to the standard that we want it to be. We've arranged a new carpet and for the whole apt. to be repainted (cheaper in the long run than just getting part of it done).

So anyway, couple of questions,

1) Does "month-to-month tenancy" mean that they can move out anytime over the (verbally) agreed 12 months provided they give us ample notice, which they have?

2) Would the registration with the PRTB and the fact that it says the tenancy is for 12 months have any say in the matter?

3) Ultimately, do we have to return their deposit, or are we entitled to keep it?

I realise i might seem like a greedy baxtard to some people, but if I'm entitled to keep their deposit then I'm gonna keep it.

Kimia

If they haven't signed a lease for 12 months, and there is no damage to the property, and there is no rent outstanding, you do not have the right to keep the deposit.

Boggles my mind how so many landlords believe that the deposit is somehow their entitlement - the deposit is the tenant's money so if you keep it it's STEALING (unless they have done one of the above).

ps. cleaning carpets and licks of paint are normal wear and tear. You can't charge a tenant for these, unless they have destroyed them in 2 months or something.

D3PO

OP you have answered your own question. If the lese says month to montha nd they have given adequate notice both acknowledged by you then you cannot withold the deposit unless there is damage to the property or its contents

Like a Boss

Like a Boss wrote: »

Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't mind giving them back their deposit as they were pretty good tenants, and we've found new tenants since then. The only issue is that when the outgoing tenants first moved in, the carpet in the master bedroom could have done with a cleaning, and one or two parts of the apartment needed a lick of paint etc. Nothing major, just minor cosmetic details.

We'd planned on getting this done over the course of the 12 months but due to having to get the boiler fixed and xmas etc. we weren't in a position to get it done, and they were happy about that. Since then, it has gotten sufficiently worse, to the point where it is not up to the standard that we want it to be. We've arranged a new carpet and for the whole apt. to be repainted (cheaper in the long run than just getting part of it done).

Read back over your post and see how incredibly selfish that sounds. You didn't want to splash out for repairs because you needed the money for other stuff, but you expect your tenants to pay for them now? For repairs that you admit should have been done before the tenants moved in, they were happy to let slide, and now you want them to pay for something that should be coming out of your pocket? 'Under normal circumstances'? This is normal circumstances. The tenants haven't damaged the place. You found new tenants. You basically want to rob their deposit just to save yourself a bit of money.

Like a Boss

Kimia wrote: »

Boggles my mind how so many landlords believe that the deposit is somehow their entitlement - the deposit is the tenant's money so if you keep it it's STEALING (unless they have done one of the above).

Never said it was my entitlement, in fact, i sepcifically asked here to find out what we should and shouldn't be doing.

Kimia wrote: »

cleaning carpets and licks of paint are normal wear and tear. You can't charge a tenant for these, unless they have destroyed them in 2 months or something.

I know this. We're not charging the tenant for these. My orignal point was that it was okay when they moved in, but in the 5 mths since then it has deteriorated to a point where, I feel it has to be done before allowing anyone else move in, as if its newer and cleaner people will take better care of it. The outgoing tenants never mentioned the carpets or paint once.

D3PO wrote: »

OP you have answered your own question. If the lease says month to montha nd they have given adequate notice both acknowledged by you then you cannot withold the deposit unless there is damage to the property or its contents

This is the crux of my reason to post here. It was verbally agreed they'd move in for 12 months. According to our registration with the PRTB, the lease is for 12 months. Due to an oversight on my ex's behalf, we got them to sign the wrong lease.

[quote=[Deleted User];64278884]Read back over your post and see how incredibly selfish that sounds. You didn't want to splash out for repairs because you needed the money for other stuff, but you expect your tenants to pay for them now? For repairs that you admit should have been done before the tenants moved in, they were happy to let slide, and now you want them to pay for something that should be coming out of your pocket? [/QUOTE]

Okay, I admit it looks bad when put like that, mainly because of the way i orginally explained it. I wouldn't really call them "repairs", as its not that bad. It is purely from the point of view that if its maintained to a higher standard, new tenants will be more likely to keep it cleaner, imo.

You found new tenants. You basically want to rob their deposit just to save yourself a bit of money.

No, I don't. I am asking if we would be entitled to keep it based on the answer to this question...

2) Would the registration with the PRTB and the fact that it says the tenancy is for 12 months have any say in the matter?

.....big difference, imo.

The fact that we found new tenants has SFA to do with it. Up until I checked our copy of the lease 2 weeks ago, both us and the outgoing tenants were under the impression that they were breaking the lease. I could have said nothing and just pretended that it was a 12 month lease, but am not a dishonest person.

Anyway, thanks for the input. Going by what you're all saying, it seems that the terms of the lease over-rules all else

Quick question, If we had given them the correct fixed-term lease in the first place, would any of you have a different opinion on my post?

January

Yes of course you'd be entitled to keep their deposit and potentially bring them to court for the rest of the years rent if you had got them to sign the proper lease.

D3PO

Like a Boss wrote: »

This is the crux of my reason to post here. It was verbally agreed they'd move in for 12 months. According to our registration with the PRTB, the lease is for 12 months. Due to an oversight on my ex's behalf, we got them to sign the wrong lease.

written contract trumps any verbal contract thats how the law works.