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
Is it possible to terminate a fixed term lease?
Options
Comments
-
@ graces7 - I think its best we don't communicate anymore on this subject as you clearly have a very different viewpoint from mine which you are entitled too but it doesn't mean you are right either. I didn't try and personalise anything with you other than stating I felt your comments were rude and unnecessary all I was doing was looking for advice.
@ calhoun - the appointment to fix the TV's was actually requested by the tenants and not by me, the company who were coming out only call out between 9am and 5pm and the tenants were told this. The tenants told the agent they could not be there between those hours due to work commitments and requested that the agent be there to let them in and supervise. As I was around I told the agent I would go there and let the contractor in and wait until he had finished as the agent was looking for a fee to do this as it was not part of their job, I did this as a favour to the tenants as I was at a loose end so I was happy enough to oblige and it was actually the tenants duty to be there not mine. The tenants were informed that it would be me letting the contractor in so it was 100% above board.
Anyway in my contract with the tenants I have a clause that allows myself or an agent to inspect the property once a month with 24 hours notice, which I have never invoked by the way. So contrary to what you may think there was no sneaking around on my part as the contractor had to go in to the two bedrooms and the sitting room so I could basically see the whole place anyway, just in case you enquire the whole place is open plan baring the bedrooms hence I could see everywhere without sneaking around as you put it.
I don’t see your problem with my point in bold I have explained how the tenants went about getting the additional person in and what was agreed so I am well within my rights to request him to move out as are the tenants well within their rights to stay there if they so choose but if they want to do so they can stay there as a couple as per what was agreed on the contract.
I don't like the way you cast aspersions without knowing me or having ever dealt with me, you are entitled to your opinion but I will respectively disagree with you and I think my tenants would too as I have been nothing but helpful to them and have delivered upon all requested they made even though some of them as I mentioned previously were IMO beyond what was necessary but that doesn't bother me once I have the right people in the place
@ Victor (moderator) - I am not in anyway trying to cause any hassle at all as you will see from my posts if you read them. I was just looking for some insightful advice which I did get from several generous posters but as usual some people felt the need to butt in and tar me with a certain brush and in my opinion it has been unfounded, unnecessary and plainly rude and I make no apologies in saying this. If they have nothing useful to contribute why contribute at all?0 -
Jamie, my apoligies read to much into what you were saying, i retract what i was saying.0
-
@ Calhoun - no problem at all I accept and appreciate your apology, no harm done.0
-
Jamie, look at www.threshold.ie you are entitled to terminate the lease if you require the property for occupation by yourself or any member of yourself.
Do not be misled by the PRTB they are tenant focussed and really they are a quango without a direction. I understand there are some major changes happening there. But take it from me, I am an experienced landlord, you are completely within your rights to write to them and state they are to surrender vacant possession of the property. The length of the notice you are required under the Tenancies Act 2004 is dictated by how long they have had occupation and you will find all of these details on www.threshold.ie0 -
The tenants are in breach of a condition of the lease. A notice should be said giving them a reasonable time such as 10 days to remedy the breach. Warn the tenants that failure to remedy the breach will result in a Notice of Termination. If the breach is not remedied in time issue the Notice of Termination.
The right to terminate on grounds that the landlord requires the property for his own use only applies where there is no fixed term agreement in place. The PRTB do not provide advice so the comment about the PRTB is irrelevant.0 -
Advertisement
-
From the Threshold Website
Part 4 Tenancy
One of the major changes introduced on the 1st of September 2004 is the concept of the tenant gaining the right to remain in occupation after a six-month probationary period. After the initial six months, the tenant may remain in occupation for a period up to 3 and a half years. The tenancy becomes known as a Part 4 Tenancy. The landlord may terminate the tenancy during this period on specified grounds only and these are outlined below.
Terminating a Tenancy
Terminating within the first six months.
If a tenancy is terminated within the first six months, not due to any fault on the tenant and there is no fixed-term lease, the landlord must serve notice to quit of at least 28 days. The landlord does not have to provide a reason for terminating the tenancy.
Landlord terminating a Part 4 tenancy
The notice period required to terminate a Part 4 tenancy is regulated by the length of the tenancy. The period required can be found in the following table:
Notice Period
Duration of Tenancy
28 days
Less than 6 months
35 days
6 months or more but less than 1 year
42 days
1 year or more but less than 2 years
56 days
2 years or more but less than 3 years
84 days
3 years or more but less than 4 years
112 days
4 or more years
The landlord must provide a reason for terminating the tenancy.
Grounds for terminating a Part 4 tenancy
A landlord may terminate a Part 4 tenancy but only on the grounds specified below:
Where the tenant has not complied with their obligations, the tenant has been notified of the breach and has not righted the breach.
Where the dwelling is no longer suitable to the needs of the tenant.
Where the landlord is selling the property.
Where the landlord requires the dwelling for his own occupation or for a member of his family to occupy.
Where the landlord intends to substantially refurbish or renovate the dwelling and planning permission has been obtained, if necessary.
Where the landlord intends to change the use of the dwelling and planning permission has been obtained, if necessary.
The landlord may terminate a Part 4 tenancy with 7 days notice on the grounds of the tenants’ anti-social behaviour. The landlord may terminate with 28 days notice where the tenant is in default. If the default is non-payment of rent, the landlord must notify the tenant in writing that the rent is owing and give them 14 days to pay the rent prior to serving 28 days notice to quit.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 30620
Thankyou toexpress
The OP is not dealing with a Part 4 tenancy- as has been pointed out, he is dealing with a Fixed Term Lease- which is an entirely different thing.0 -
smccarrick wrote: »Thankyou toexpress
The OP is not dealing with a Part 4 tenancy- as has been pointed out, he is dealing with a Fixed Term Lease- which is an entirely different thing.
Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.0 -
Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.
The tenancy may be part 4 but the tenant enjoys greater security under the lease than under Part 4 therefore the provisions allowing a landlord to terminate the tenancy to use the dwelling himself do not apply. You should read the whole act and not just extracts.
From Part 4 RTA
Greater security of tenure not affected.
26.—Nothing in this Part operates to derogate from any rights the tenant enjoys for the time being (by reason of the tenancy concerned) that are more beneficial for the tenant than those created by this Part.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 30620
Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.
A tenant is 'entitled' to a Part 4 tenancy- however a landlord is not entitled to convert a fixed term lease into a Part 4 tenancy in order to access the provisions of a Part 4 tenancy and effect an eviction.
A fixed term lease grants far greater security of tenure to a tenant than does a Part 4 lease.
The OP needs to dig out a copy of the lease and familiarise themselves exactly with the terms and articles as outlined in the lease.
The lease as it stands- is a Fixed Term Lease- I don't understand why you and others are trying to insinuate that the terms governing a Part 4 tenancy somehow trump this- they don't.0 -
Advertisement
-
Under the Tenancies act of 2004 a 1 year lease entitles a tenant to a Part 4 tenant after the period of the first 6 month probationary period. Therefore I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months.
toexpress, you are correct in that a tenant of six months or more acquires the rights of a Part 4 tenancy, however, not to the point where it overrides the Fixed Term Agreement.
Part 4 tenancies were introduced to give a tenant more security of tenure than previously existed (prior to 2004). A fixed term agreement is nore secure than a Part 4; hence Fixed term tenancies exist and are the most common type of agreement. This is especially so for a first agreement.
After 6 months of a fixed term agreement, the tenant is entitled to remain in the property for a further four years (at the end of the fixed term). However, at the end of a fixed term, the landlord has the obligation to renew the tenancy if the tenant wishes - either with another fixed term (probably for another year) agreement and the tenant can thus feel very secure for another 12 months.
If on the other hand, the tenant opts for a Part 4 lease (which under the RTA 2004 the landlord cannot refuse if he is continuing with the same tenant), the tenant is much less secure in his tenancy because there are 6 grounds under which the landlord can terminate a Part 4 lease. Under a fixed term lease the landlord has really no options to terminate a lease (save for a tenant's breach of obligations and even then he must give the tenant time to remedy that breach, which, if he does, the landlord cannot terminate the lease).
If, as I correctly understand what you say, that
then why would the RTA 2004 have section 195 dealing with overholding of a fixed term tenancy which can only occur after the end of the fixed term - usually one year.I think you will find that he is indeed dealing with a Part 4 tenancy if the occupants have been there more than 6 months
In further notes on Part 4 tenancies (RTA 2002) it states:
I think this is self explanatory.The first cycle of these tenancies is called a ‘‘Part 4 tenancy’’ and
each subsequent one is called a ‘‘further Part 4 tenancy’’ in the Act. The tenant will be free to terminate at any time, subject to any fixed
term agreement.
Furthermore,
Thus, a fixed term lease followed by a fixed term lease does not really become a Part 4 tenancy as the tenant must adhere to the terms and conditions of the fiuxed term lease and not the conditions as laid down in the RTA 2004 for a Part 4 lease.Section 31 construes a series of continuous separate fixed term tenancies as continuous occupation for the purposes of qualifying for
a Part 4 tenancy.
There are plenty more example if you care to read the RTA itself. and not refer to either Threshold nor Citizens Information who give a brief overview of certain parts of the Act but often fail to distinguish when it applies to a Fixed Term lease or a Part 4 lease.0 -
Fair enough. I hesitated to post my message as I fully appreciated you have not actually acted incorrectly at any point in this matter - there are far worse cases littered through this forum. Having seen the more strident views expressed in follow up to my own post, I regret having raised the matter here but your phrases which I highlighted did allow me to make a general point about a bug bear of mine, namely the frequency with which landlords in Ireland demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the basic legalities and responsibilities of the business they are involved in. ...@ xper - I think you may be reading a bit too much in to the language I used at the end of the day I am now aware that tenants are entitled to stay there so if that is what they choose then I have every intention of honouring the agreement.
Exhibit A:...But take it from me, I am an experienced landlord, you are completely within your rights to write to them and state they are to surrender vacant possession of the property. ...
It depends what the lease actual says about who may or may not occupy the property. The OP has only mentioned an 'understanding' which, if its not in writing, is all too easy to dispute (at least sufficiently long that the fixed term will be up anyway before any adjudication was arrived at).Milk & Honey wrote: »The tenants are in breach of a condition of the lease. A notice should be said giving them a reasonable time such as 10 days to remedy the breach. .
On the other hand, for all we know, the house guest may well be overstaying the welcome extended to him by the tenants and they might only be too glad to get shot of him of foot of a notification of breach of the lease terms. Which wouldn't get the property back for the OP though!0 -
@ graces7 - I think its best we don't communicate anymore on this subject as you clearly have a very different viewpoint from mine which you are entitled too but it doesn't mean you are right either. I didn't try and personalise anything with you other than stating I felt your comments were rude and unnecessary all I was doing was looking for advice.
@ calhoun - the appointment to fix the TV's was actually requested by the tenants and not by me, the company who were coming out only call out between 9am and 5pm and the tenants were told this. The tenants told the agent they could not be there between those hours due to work commitments and requested that the agent be there to let them in and supervise. As I was around I told the agent I would go there and let the contractor in and wait until he had finished as the agent was looking for a fee to do this as it was not part of their job, I did this as a favour to the tenants as I was at a loose end so I was happy enough to oblige and it was actually the tenants duty to be there not mine. The tenants were informed that it would be me letting the contractor in so it was 100% above board.
Anyway in my contract with the tenants I have a clause that allows myself or an agent to inspect the property once a month with 24 hours notice, which I have never invoked by the way. So contrary to what you may think there was no sneaking around on my part as the contractor had to go in to the two bedrooms and the sitting room so I could basically see the whole place anyway, just in case you enquire the whole place is open plan baring the bedrooms hence I could see everywhere without sneaking around as you put it.
I don’t see your problem with my point in bold I have explained how the tenants went about getting the additional person in and what was agreed so I am well within my rights to request him to move out as are the tenants well within their rights to stay there if they so choose but if they want to do so they can stay there as a couple as per what was agreed on the contract.
I don't like the way you cast aspersions without knowing me or having ever dealt with me, you are entitled to your opinion but I will respectively disagree with you and I think my tenants would too as I have been nothing but helpful to them and have delivered upon all requested they made even though some of them as I mentioned previously were IMO beyond what was necessary but that doesn't bother me once I have the right people in the place
@ Victor (moderator) - I am not in anyway trying to cause any hassle at all as you will see from my posts if you read them. I was just looking for some insightful advice which I did get from several generous posters but as usual some people felt the need to butt in and tar me with a certain brush and in my opinion it has been unfounded, unnecessary and plainly rude and I make no apologies in saying this. If they have nothing useful to contribute why contribute at all?
nb This is an open forum, not a private list! With a wide variety of people and experience. Many of us are tenants with varying experiences of diffcult landlords such as yourself.
So you cannot realistically order someone not to participate in any given thread.
So your definition of what is "useful" is really not appropriate or "useful" here. Maybe you need a forum for landlords not this more general one?
As you say you have an agent, one wonders why the post here as they must have told you the same as we have done?
We do not make the laws and we cannot change them or manipulate them as you seem to be trying to do.
Stating an opinion different to yours is not being confrontational. Period. The only person being rude here is your good self.. Even when the law has clearly been told to you you have continued to pursue a course which will more than inconvenience your paying tenants.
Having had this done to us we are of course deeply concerned. For your tenants. Maybe you cannot envisage their situation?
Many of us can. And have suffered at the hands of landlords too often to watch this happening without protesting.
Even to approach the tenants about this is unprofessional and dubious in terms of honouring the lease, as if they are decent people they will be concerned. But of course you know that! The word dishonourble is an old fashioned one but then I am very ,very old now and can use it.0 -
OP. my sister in Canada is intrigued reading this; small wonder she says that you came back,,, If you tried this there where they have serious tenancy laws, the tenants would sue you very successfully for even mentioning it to them. No delay. no problem.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 30620
OP. my sister in Canada is intrigued reading this; small wonder she says that you came back,,, If you tried this there where they have serious tenancy laws, the tenants would sue you very successfully for even mentioning it to them. No delay. no problem.
Graces- please stick to topic being discussed. The guy came on seeking advice- before undertaking any action- which is a damn sight better than we hear of all the time (even in this forum). Its fair enough to point out the rules and Irish law as it pertains- it is not on to be personally abusive towards him, and/or use your own limited contacts with the Gardai and or other organisations to make all manner of derogatory comments about them. We all have bad experiences from time to time- I could write volumes, but I don't, its not pertinent, and its also not fair to use my own experiences in an attempt to tarnish the reputation of others.
I seriously suggest that you read the forum charter if you wish to continue posting in this forum.
Regards,
SMcCarrick0 -
@ toexpress, milk&honey, odds_on, xper and smccarrick
Thanks for all your further input as mentioned I have spoken to the tenants so they are due to come back to me today with their thoughts on the matter.
@ graces7 - I really don't know how you are allowed to post here, I am aware your opinion differs to mine and I actually have no problem with that but the manner and tone of your posts are IMO exceptionally rude and crass showing a distinct lack of class.
The reason I said it would be better off you not posting in the thread is that you were adding nothing useful unless you think rude comments are useful. I am aware you are free to post where you like but if everybody did what you have done in this forum the forum would be a disaster and just revert to one big slagging match between posters.
So in future for the benefit of all I would kindly suggest like other posters have if you have nothing useful to post please refrain from posting rude comments unless you are here purely to try and wind people up. I just came looking for advice / information not abuse from people and in fairness pretty much all the posters bar you have been extremely helpful and forth coming with information.
I wouldn't consider myself a landlord like some people on here who have multiple properties I am just a guy who had to rent out his principle residence due to work commitments abroad and unfortunately due to family tragedy I have had to return home a lot sooner than I had anticipated but yet I am a bad landlord for asking my tenants would there be any possibility I could move back in to my apartment as it would be a lot more cost effective than using the rent money to rent a far inferior property. I personally don't see the harm in asking as they can always say no and if that makes me a bad landlord then so be it.
Anyway please don't feel the need to retort to this passage however if you feel the need to have the last word then by all means post away but rest assured this will be the last time I read or respond to your posts in this thread. I only wrote it to try and shed a small bit more light on why I am doing what I am doing and may be then you may be a little bit more understanding of my situation.0 -
Please stick to the facts as stated.Sneaking in in these circumstances also!
Why not simply rent somewhere else yourself?
Amateur landlords...
"The lady doth protest too much." comes to mind. If you have a problem with a post, please report it.WHy does that not surprise me or upset me... Your posts are the most discourteous and inconsiderate mailings seen here in a long while. REALLY!
Please stick to the facts as stated. This is not a Part 4 (only) lease.Jamie, look at www.threshold.ie you are entitled to terminate the lease if you require the property for occupation by yourself or any member of yourself.
However, I can both order it and enforce it if necessary. Please desist from both the tone and content of your posts.nb This is an open forum, not a private list! With a wide variety of people and experience. Many of us are tenants with varying experiences of diffcult landlords such as yourself.
So you cannot realistically order someone not to participate in any given thread.0 -
It may be difficult to rely on this as a breach, especially given that you initially agreed to it. You will need to give them time to remedy the situation.Ultimately the tenants are actually in breach of the lease with the number of occupants so when I point this out to them they may have no choice but to move out as they may not be able to afford the place with the agreed number of tenants allowed in the place0 -
Do not be misled by the PRTB they are tenant focussed and really they are a quango without a direction. I understand there are some major changes happening there. But take it from me, I am an experienced landlord, you are completely within your rights to write to them and state they are to surrender vacant possession of the property. The length of the notice you are required under the Tenancies Act 2004 is dictated by how long they have had occupation and you will find all of these details on www.threshold.ie
It annoys me so much that everything is so much tenant focused - yes I appreciate that there are bad landlords out there but there are bad tenants out there abusing good landlords! I'm sick of everyone automatically assuming that landlords are bad! There are alot of good unfortunate people out there that have had to let their homes out when they didn't want to!0 -
IMHO, much of the fault for not winning a dispute resolution is lack of evidence on the part of the landlord. In many instances they know they are right and hence don't prepare themselves properly with evidence.
Again, IMO, many landlords do not do a detailed entry inventory and therefore any claim for damages above normal wear and tear are disallowed because there is no proof of the condition of the property, its furnishings, fixtures and fittings, walls, floors, windows etc at the start of the tenancy.0 -
Advertisement
-
Hi there,
Long time reader first time poster.
I have a tenant in situ in my apartment for the past 5 months.
I agreed in good faith a 1 year fixed term tenancy with them as I was moving to Canada for the foreseeable future.
Unfortunately due to circumstances beyond my control I have had to move back to Ireland and I am ideally looking to move back in to my apartment.
I was wondering would anybody on here know if I have any legal rights to terminate the lease with the tenants, I would be more than happy to give the tenants 28 or 42 days notice to give them ample time to find a suitable place.
I would be interested to see if anybody knows of any legal grounds I have as I have a funny feeling if I just ask the tenants to move out the answer will be no as they seem to really like it there.
From speaking to the PRTB they are leading me to believe that I am at the mercy of what the tenants decide which seems a little bit strange given the circumstances.
Any help or advice you can shed on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Jamie
Hi Jamie,
Having delved into the ins and outs of your situation and Fixed Term and Part 4 lease agreements, please read the following vey carefully.
Your tenants have a 12 month Fixed term agreement. If they have been in occupation for more than 6 months, they automatically acquire the rights of a Part 4 tenancy.
My understanding of the law was that at the end of the fixed term lease, you, as landlord, could gain repossession of your property. WRONG!
If the tenants want to stay in the property, you are at their mercy as you cannot evict/get them to leave them due to their Part 4 rights.
Your only course of action is to issue a Notice of Termination (NOT) citing that you require the property for your own use, in the required format (sample and instructions available on the PRTB site).
What I am not sure of at the moment is whether you can issue a NOT during the course of a fixed term agreement which will expire after the Fixed Term expires. Or whether you have to wait until the Fixed Term expires before you can issue a NOT.
Be very careful here as tenants "in the know" may make a claim with the PRTB for illegal eviction (even if they seem happy to co-operate now) - which could ultimately cost you between €5,000 and €10,000.
The only way to avoid a tenant from gaining the rights of a Part 4 tenancy is to have a fixed term lease for less than 6 months. The next lease, should not be with the same tenant as a tenant staying on will accumulate the required time of at least 6 months the day after the second agreement is made.0 -
out of interest are these tenants paying the rent or is the HSE?0
-
-
Advertisement