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

House we're renting has been sold

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    maxer68
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭maxer68


    Unbelieveable amount of wrong infomation here - but not necessarily anyones fault. Unless anyone knows the terms of sale AND the terms of the speciafic lease n question, you cannot answer with any certainty.
    subway wrote: »
    Boston the new owners are now the landlord.
    The contract moves with the house.
    The new owner needs to fulfil the terms of the contract. Solicitors for sale should advise the responsibilities.
    100% correct if sold with tenant (not unusual and it was the way many properties were sold in recent allsop auction)
    BostonB wrote: »
    The contract moves with the house.

    Whats the legal background to that?
    as above - if the house is sold with buyer knowing tenant is there, then buyer must adhere to all details in the lease - hence you see many signs particularly in commercial sales saying "tenant not affected"
    Bens wrote: »
    Your contract is with the original owner.
    It doesnt exist anymore because they dont own the house after the house is sold.
    It cant be passed on to the new owner as they never agreed a contract with you.

    You dont have a contract with the house :)

    You could ask the new owner if they would enter a new contract with you.

    Anyway, dont rely on message boards for your info. Dont rely on the PTRB or threshold either.
    Ask a solicitor and they will tell you. Show them your lease.

    the contract is ALWAYS with the property AND the landlord. The landlord can sell at anytime, but the lease stays effective unlese both parties agree otherwise or via a out clause in the lease.
    Bens wrote: »
    The sale did go ahead. Nobody mentioned a tenant in the house.
    And the purchaser did not have to honor the lease.
    The tenants were squatters in the new owners house.

    So yes I have seen a house sold with a tenant in place where the buyer closed and knew nothing of the tenant.
    And also houses are often sold with tenants in place. As is commercial property often sold with tenants in place.

    Now get down off that high horse.
    Please stop the sh1te talking and just let the OP go talk to their solicitor.
    In this case, the tenant still has no probelm, but the new buyer does and his/her problem is with the seller.


    My guess is the new buyer has bought a tenanted property at a knockdown price and will be quite happy to have good tenants in situ.


  • Options
    #63
    subway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,131 ✭✭✭subway


    Bens wrote: »
    The sale did go ahead. Nobody mentioned a tenant in the house.
    And the purchaser did not have to honor the lease.
    The tenants were squatters in the new owners house.

    So yes I have seen a house sold with a tenant in place where the buyer closed and knew nothing of the tenant.
    And also houses are often sold with tenants in place. As is commercial property often sold with tenants in place.

    Now get down off that high horse.
    Please stop the sh1te talking and just let the OP go talk to their solicitor.

    I'm not on a high horse, your posting your opinion as fact based on some second hand story from a mate and telling others they are posting rubbish when all you have s your own hearsay opinion.
    Post a link to the judgement from the situation you mentioned perhaps or give some more detail. If they evicted the tenants it had to have to prtb and if they all suing each other there must be some info? Is it even a real situation ;)


  • Options
    #64
    Bens
    Closed Accounts Posts: 261 ✭✭Bens


    subway wrote: »
    I'm not on a high horse, your posting your opinion as fact based on some second hand story from a mate and telling others they are posting rubbish when all you have s your own hearsay opinion.
    Post a link to the judgement from the situation you mentioned perhaps or give some more detail. If they evicted the tenants it had to have to prtb and if they all suing each other there must be some info? Is it even a real situation ;)

    I am advising the OP go get info from a solicitor and not the internet.
    You are the one trying to convince them that you know all about this subject.


  • Options
    #65
    TouchingVirus
    Registered Users Posts: 8,584 ✭✭✭TouchingVirus


    Bens wrote: »
    I am advising the OP go get info from a solicitor and not the internet.
    You are the one trying to convince them that you know all about this subject.

    And yet you're still here, being argumentative and telling people they're wrong when all you say you wanted to do (advise the OP to go to a solicitor) you've already done...


  • Options
    #66
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Bens wrote: »
    The question still stands. Are you saying that the OP should take advice from random strangers on the internet over engaging a solicitor?....

    Read what you quoted. ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    maxer68 wrote: »
    U...as above - if the house is sold with buyer knowing tenant is there, then buyer must adhere to all details in the lease - hence you see many signs particularly in commercial sales saying "tenant not affected"...

    I take your point that if the deposit is in the lease then the obligation to return it also transfers. I wasn't taken it as given that it would be in the lease. I take it, that your point is that the deposit correctly should be covered by the lease. Which is fair enough.


  • Options
    #68
    Pkiernan
    Registered Users Posts: 4,310 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    OP:

    1. Ignore the last page and a half of childish arguments.
    2. Contact a solicitor.
    3. You and the other tenants will receive (eventually) a considerable payout (over €10,000) if you are evicted in the manner described by the EA you spoke with.
    4. Put the EA on notice (with a registered letter, or even better from a solicitor) that you intend on staying in the property until the end of the lease.

    Despite what one of the children posted above, your lease is valid. The sale of the house does not negate the terms of your lease.

    The seller of the property is subject to significant damages, but that is not your concern.


  • Options
    #69
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,400 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Bens wrote: »
    Now get down off that high horse.
    Please stop the sh1te talking and just let the OP go talk to their solicitor.
    Pkiernan wrote: »
    Despite what one of the children posted above
    Attack the post, not the poster.


  • Options
    #70
    Bens
    Closed Accounts Posts: 261 ✭✭Bens


    Victor wrote: »
    Attack the post, not the poster.

    Ahhh, the chief idiot has spoken.

    aye aye sir. OP take no advice from a message board. Contact your solicitor.


  • Options
    #71
    Ste.phen
    Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭Ste.phen


    OP, any update? very curious to see how this turns out


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,400 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Ste.phen wrote: »
    OP, any update? very curious to see how this turns out
    That may be a bit unfair on the OP.


  • Options
    #73
    Ste.phen
    Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭Ste.phen


    Victor wrote: »
    That may be a bit unfair on the OP.

    I'm not trying to be mean about it, i'm genuinely curious to see what happened. As far as I could see the OP was completely in the right, i'm hoping they didn't get screwed and everything worked out OK


  • Options
    #74
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    If you're genuinely interested in the outcome- fine. Anyone who decides to reignite this thread with bickering about Part 4 Tenancies and/or Residential Leaseholders, and how their rights differ- will get short shrift from the moderators.

    Regards,

    SMcCarrick


  • Options
    #75
    slowmoe
    Registered Users Posts: 561 ✭✭✭slowmoe


    Will be a bit short on some details as the case is being lodged with prtb.

    It kind of has dragged on the way it was before. The new owners came around and at first were like can you please get out of our house, then a bit of oh but poor poor us, we've bought a home for a family and you're stopping out family living our lives and causing us stress. They couldn't seem to grasp how we were in a tough situation as we were also caused a lot of stress and hassle. They asked us to leave and showed us pictures of their kids saying they're so upset they can't decorate their new rooms because of us and why would we do that to them. I politely but strongly informed them that that kind of manipulation was below the belt and if they want to open up a constructive dialogue then they need to inform themselves correctly of the situation and everyones rights and recognise that this is our home and we are allowed to live in it!!!

    At that point the man got very angry and dragged his wife (still sobbing over photos) out saying that we were nothing but criminal squatters and he'd see us in court. So we filled out a petition with the prtb and are waiting on it. We've had a few postcards from agent through the door saying that we had to be out by fri at 2...next one tues at 2....thurs at 2 etc, all finishing off with saying the gardai would be called and we would have our stuff thrown out. MY flatmate left a voicemail with the agent saying that they could not call the guards as no crime has been commited, unless they choose to illegally evict us.

    So now we're at a stalemate waiting on this to be addressed by the prtb, who have been extremely confused by the whole thing as well, we've had to re write and re tell whats happened so many times its insane.


  • Options
    #76
    maxer68
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭maxer68


    If its of any consolation, I had a similar experience about 25 years ago.

    Noticed house was for sale in local agents window. Then noticed "Sale Agreed" Arrived home one day to find locks changed and note saying that house is sold and I can collect belongings after 7pm.

    Now - despite being about 22 at the time, I had a slight advantage in the the old man was a legal expert for the government and sister was studying for the bar. Was told to go to garda station with facts and tell them that as leseholder of the house I will be forcing entry. (rent paid up to date and 6months left on lease) Garda station was around the corner, so garda came with me to witness re-entry.

    I got brick - smashed the back window and gained entry. Totally legal & above board.

    Basically whilst you have a valid lease on the premises, you are the "owner" of the house and cannot be moved out of it in any way shape or form unless your lease is up or you have agreed to vacate or if you are in breach of any of the conditions which allow for the lease to be recinded.

    As for the new owners - their issue is with the seller and not you.

    And tell them to please call the gardai, as the gardai will confrim to them that you are 100% correct.


  • Options
    #77
    Lemming
    Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    slowmoe wrote: »
    We've had a few postcards from agent through the door saying that we had to be out by fri at 2...next one tues at 2....thurs at 2 etc, all finishing off with saying the gardai would be called and we would have our stuff thrown out.

    Would that behaviour not be classed as harassement at this point given its frequency? Just wondering if there's any mileage in recording the dates & contents of said notices with the Gardai? And the PRTB too for their own investigation?

    As for the new owners, it would appear that they just are not willing to look at the matter from anything other than their own perspective and doesn't hold out much hope for an amicable resolution. Doubly so that they seemed perfectly willing to try and use their kids as emotional blackmail material.

    Best of luck OP.


  • Options
    #78
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    + good luck slowmoe. Hope it works out.


  • Options
    #79
    quaalude
    Registered Users Posts: 1,196 ✭✭✭quaalude


    Thanks for the update, slowmoe - best of luck with it.


  • Options
    #80
    useruser
    Registered Users Posts: 269 ✭✭useruser


    maxer68 wrote: »
    If its of any consolation, I had a similar experience about 25 years ago.


    Maxer68, what was the final outcome of your situation? Did it go to court? Did you settle with the new owners somehow?


  • Options
    #81
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,400 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    goat2 wrote: »
    this is true, lease can be broken on these grounds,
    You were told not to go there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    goat2
    Registered Users Posts: 4,939 ✭✭✭goat2


    Victor wrote: »
    You were told not to go there.
    i apologise,
    i have deleted, hope you clear it from thread,
    thank you


  • Options
    #83
    Mister Dread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 382 ✭✭Mister Dread


    I'm not sure what the prtb are so confused about. The law should be fairly clear on this case, whichever way it falls.


  • Options
    #84
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Mister Dread wrote: »
    I'm not sure what the prtb are so confused about. The law should be fairly clear on this case, whichever way it falls.

    The confusion lies in the fact that the contract is with a person who is no longer the owner of the property. In commercial property transactions its not unusual to sell property with sitting tenants (indeed very often there is a premium attached to having a sitting tenant), however its very difficult to apply commercial law to a residential property issue (particularly when the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act was supposed to trump all the anamolies that crept in, in previous years, as a result of commercial law being cited in residential cases.

    The PRTB need to get proper advice on this- its definitely not the black and white case that some people in this thread imagine it to be.


  • Options
    #85
    antoinolachtnai
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Well, even if the OP is completely wrong in law (which I doubt), he is still in possession it is still up to the new freeholder to go to PRTB to evict the leaseholder. There is no other way for the freeholder to get them to leave. The PRTB cannot really get 'advice'. They have to go through the process, accept submissions, come to a final conclusion and then see if that conclusion gets appealed to the Courts.

    You need to be very clear what you are complaining to the PRTB about.

    What did Threshold say?

    Who are you paying rent to now?

    You are in a stalemate now and I think that you would do well to instruct solicitors to agree a settlement with the solicitors of the other side. Threshold might be willing to negotiate on your behalf, although there could be pitfalls to this (Threshold's offer could be exhibited in a court case later, whereas a solicitor's might not (if it were part of privileged settlement discussions).


Advertisement