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

Long term lease - tenants rights

Options
  • 24-10-2012 10:03am
    #1
    jackbetal
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭


    A buddy of mine is leasing his home now for nearly five years and is after putting in a lot of time looking after and fixing it up to make it his family home. He has set down roots in the community. He is now after finding out that the landlord may be having the property repossessed by the banks. Can somebody tell me whether my buddy has any rights in his home? If his home is repossessed will they have to take it with him in it and sell it with him in it?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    If he is not on a fixed term lease then he can be given notice under a part 4 tenancy to vacate if the owner intends to sell the property.

    All the information can be found here http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/types_of_tenancy.html

    The bank may not ask him to leave right away as he would be a steady stream of income for the property, but he would need to make sure that he is fully kept in the loop as to what is going on. Basically he doesnt have any extended rights beyond the normal part 4 tenancy rights; he can be asked to leave.


  • Options
    #3
    jackbetal
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭jackbetal


    He believes he is on a fixed term lease but does not know for certain. When he began his tenancy he signed a contract which had no time period on it and which more or less said that he can stay as long as he pays the agreed rent at the time. The landlord said to him that one of the main reasons he was renting to him is that he would be a very long term tenant and my buddy stressed that he wanted a place to settle down with his family for his life.


  • Options
    #4
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,239 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Would he consider meeting the landlord's mortgage holder with a view to buying the property?

    If the bank are prepared to sell at the right price it might be worth his while taking a mortgage from them to do so...


  • Options
    #5
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    jackbetal wrote: »
    He believes he is on a fixed term lease but does not know for certain. When he began his tenancy he signed a contract which had no time period on it and which more or less said that he can stay as long as he pays the agreed rent at the time. The landlord said to him that one of the main reasons he was renting to him is that he would be a very long term tenant and my buddy stressed that he wanted a place to settle down with his family for his life.

    A fixed term lease would need to have a definate time frame specified.

    He may need to get the lease checked out by someone who can give him legal advice, but I would be surprised if it states that he can stay indefinately provided that he continues to pay, and even if it does Im not entirely sure how watertight that would actually be. A long term lease would typically have a defined time frame, say 10/25 years or something like, which would then provide the security of the fixed term lease and a long term letting. Usually a signed lease that does not specify a fixed term just falls under the part 4 tenancy and does not offer the same security as a fixed term lease.


  • Options
    #6
    jackbetal
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭jackbetal


    Would the long term lease need to be dealt with through a solicitor to indemnify it against legal challenge or could it have been signed and witnessed like any other letting contract?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    To be honest I dont know the answer to that, but if it was left open ended (ie no defined fixed term) then I would suspect that it would have to be worded very carefully if it is to give more protection that a normal non-fixed term signed lease (if that is even possible). This is why I would advise that he seek legal advise so that they can review the lease and let him know where he stands.


  • Options
    #8
    jackbetal
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭jackbetal


    djimi wrote: »
    To be honest I dont know the answer to that, but if it was left open ended (ie no defined fixed term) then I would suspect that it would have to be worded very carefully if it is to give more protection that a normal non-fixed term signed lease (if that is even possible). This is why I would advise that he seek legal advise so that they can review the lease and let him know where he stands.

    Sure you have given me more than enough advice already and I am very grateful. Thank you.

    And thanks to Sleepy also for his clever little idea. If the long term lease gave a little leverage to my buddy I am thinking now that to purchase the property is what the leverage could be used for.


  • Options
    #9
    Elvis_Presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭Elvis_Presley


    Another option - if the house has not been repossessed the landlord can give him a new lease, say 5/10 years fixed term. The bank would have to honour this. Not sure how legal this is, but may be an option.


  • Options
    #10
    jackbetal
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭jackbetal


    Elvis_Presley wrote: »
    Another option - if the house has not been repossessed the landlord can give him a new lease, say 5/10 years fixed term. The bank would have to honour this. Not sure how legal this is, but may be an option.

    I think the lease would have to be in place for a certain length of time before it can safeguard the tenant but it is definitely something I am going to sus out.


  • Options
    #11
    Kosseegan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 987 ✭✭✭Kosseegan


    The only safeguard tenants now have is part 4 of the Residential Tenancies Act. There are very short notice periods. If the bank did not consent in writing to the lease the bank is not bound by it if they repossess. The bank will almost certainly not have done this.The tenant will have to go to court when the papers are served on him and tell his story. He will most likely be directed to pay his rent to the bank and be given 6 months to vacate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Elvis_Presley wrote: »
    Another option - if the house has not been repossessed the landlord can give him a new lease, say 5/10 years fixed term. The bank would have to honour this. Not sure how legal this is, but may be an option.

    Once the bank have advised procedures to repossess the property may be initiated, you are on seriously dodgy territory if you imagine you can get a legally binding 5-10 year lease from the current landlord. There are several cases, not dissimilar, up at the moment. How they're going to resolve them- I don't know.


  • Options
    #13
    Milk & Honey
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,950 ✭✭✭Milk & Honey


    smccarrick wrote: »
    Once the bank have advised procedures to repossess the property may be initiated, you are on seriously dodgy territory if you imagine you can get a legally binding 5-10 year lease from the current landlord. There are several cases, not dissimilar, up at the moment. How they're going to resolve them- I don't know.

    Very easy. The bank is not bound by the lease. They get an order for possession. That clears everyone off the land, owner and tenant.


  • Options
    #14
    jackbetal
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭jackbetal


    Just wondering would a "consent to lease" agreement have to be put in place by the lender and borrower in a "buy to let" mortgage. Surely the borrower has freedom to lease a property that he has bought to lease(let). Unless there are specific stipulations on the type of lease in the contract. It is not as cut and dry as it seems maybe.


  • Options
    #15
    Kosseegan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 987 ✭✭✭Kosseegan


    It is very clear cut. The mortgage document will specify that any lease must be consented to in writing. They are never asked for consent in writing by buy to let landlords. If there is no written consent which must be for an individual lease then the mortgagee is not bound by it. A general permission to engage in letting the premises is not sufficient. There have been court decision on this. If a bank moves to repossess the tenant is out.


Advertisement