Rent increase?

Agent J

djimi wrote: »

If he expected to be paid weekly then why did he not notice that he had only received 6 payments instead of the 26 he should have gotten in that time?

Because they agreed the OP could pay monthly. They both just screwed up on the amount. (Or Someone miscalculated & the other agreed - Still both screwed up)

I've read other posts of yours on this forum & normally you are pretty on the mark with tenants rights, however i think this time you are being a bit blinkered on it.

Look, I see where you are coming from & agree it all should've been written down. However i just can't agree that it is an increase when the OP knows otherwise(Legality not withstanding).

djimi

Youre probably right in that Im being a bit blinkered; I just feel that its the landlords responsibility to sort out the rent and how much they want to get paid, and I just feel that its a bit much to come back 6 months later and try to get the OP to back date rent for a mistake that should not have been made in the first place had the landlord gotten all of the ducks in a row from day one. Leaving things ambiguous at the start and not writing the rental amount and payment period into the lease is ultimately what has caused this issue. The 500 deposit just blurs things even further as it is the norm for the deposit to reflect one rent payment.

The OP seems to be a bit unsure of what was actually agreed in terms of how much was to be paid monthly (in the same post they say that they are unsure of the agreed amount and that they think that it was 500), so perhaps they are just being coy as they know that they were taking advantage of an error by the landlord. They too should have clarified the situation from the start. It doesnt really change things though.

As I said this is all just my opinion. Were it to go to a PRTB case they might take a very different view; Threshold would probably be able to give better advise in that regard.

the_syco

Agent J wrote: »

The OP has said they agreed to 125 euro a week verbally.

I wonder did the landlord agree to fix the damp issue verbally?

Agent J wrote: »

I think the OP is going to hurt themselves long run with this. By adopting a hard line approach they sour the relationship with the landlord meaning if they want to stay on longer , get a reference or anything else which falls under discretion of the Landlord they will run into a brick wall.

It looks like the tenant is not too worried about this, as the landlord has seemed to have lost respect for the OP by not fulfilling his landlord duties?

=-=

On a side note; OP, move out of the house as soon as you can, as the damp can effect your health badly - there are a good few houses in Limerick for €500 and below.

daisyscience

Agent J wrote: »

Look, I see where you are coming from & agree it all should've been written down. However i just can't agree that it is an increase when the OP knows otherwise(Legality not withstanding).

It is an increase as far as I'm concerned as we did agree on €500 a month which I have been paying for 6 months. I didn't have any doubts about the amount until he contacted me with his story about mixing up stuff and whatever other excuse he had for bringing this up now.

I have been going over and over this in my head and have contacted Threshold for advice. They agree that it should have all been written down and that the deposit is normally an indicator of the monthly rent. If the landlord genuinely did make a mistake then he should have noticed sooner than at the end of the lease (it's a 6 month contract). I have been talking to him a few times, it's not like I have had no contact with him and my next step will be putting all this in writing and sending him a letter. Its up to him then if he wants to take it further but the matter is resolved in my mind. I've had enough with landlords screwing me over (last landlord took my full deposit - owner occupied, different story.

I kept thinking that he is a nice guy, that I kind of understand where he is coming from and I don't want him to lose out if what he says is true, but in retrospect I don't know the guy and if he was that nice then he would have sorted out the issues with the damp and bins when requested instead of ignoring them. I know that his wife had a baby just before Christmas (awwww!!! how could anyone with a new baby be taking advantage of me???) and my dad is a landlord in another city so I hate hearing about the hassle that he gets from tenants sometimes. But I'm a quiet tenant who pays my bills on time and keeps the apartment in good repair, even my dad says it's the landlords problem and he is probably only 'chancing his arm'.

I'm not sure if I posted this before but he also owns the other two apartments in this building that are larger two bedroom apartments and I know that they pay €540 for each of those, if that helps to put things into perspective at all.

Moving isn't an issue right now as I will be moving anyway in about 2 months time and I have a dog so it would be difficult to find somewhere short term that is suitable and will accept pets.

Leroy42

You agreed to pay a monthly payment of €500, although you stated in your OP that you paid a week in advance of €125. you are well aware that the weekly rent is €125.

Now, whether you want to wiggle out of what you agreed to and take advantage of this loophole is entirely up to you. I don't have much sympathy for the landlord in this case. 1st off in the scheme of things its not a huge amount of money. Secondly, they should have realised the mistake earlier.

What they charge for the other apartments is totally irrelevant. You agreed a price with them, that you felt was reasonable. It seems now that you have the chance to save some money. Yes, you are effectively renaging on your agreement but who wouldn't I guess.

I get the feeling that you know you owe this money, you are aware the rent is €125 per week and can see that this is a way to save a bit of money. You have brought up spurious arguements about damp, other apartments to give your decision more credibility but in the end you make whatever decision you feel comfortable with.

What I don't understand is why bother with Threshold. There are people out there with genuine issues that can only be resolved with agencies like Threshold, yours is not one of them. You are simply wasting resources. You want them to backup your decision. If you think you are right, make your case to the landlord and if he doesn't agree you are leaving in two months anyway so what can he do?

daisyscience

Leroy42 wrote: »

You agreed to pay a monthly payment of €500, although you stated in your OP that you paid a week in advance of €125. you are well aware that the weekly rent is €125.

Now, whether you want to wiggle out of what you agreed to and take advantage of this loophole is entirely up to you. I don't have much sympathy for the landlord in this case. 1st off in the scheme of things its not a huge amount of money. Secondly, they should have realised the mistake earlier.

What they charge for the other apartments is totally irrelevant. You agreed a price with them, that you felt was reasonable. It seems now that you have the chance to save some money. Yes, you are effectively renaging on your agreement but who wouldn't I guess.

I get the feeling that you know you owe this money, you are aware the rent is €125 per week and can see that this is a way to save a bit of money. You have brought up spurious arguements about damp, other apartments to give your decision more credibility but in the end you make whatever decision you feel comfortable with.

What I don't understand is why bother with Threshold. There are people out there with genuine issues that can only be resolved with agencies like Threshold, yours is not one of them. You are simply wasting resources. You want them to backup your decision. If you think you are right, make your case to the landlord and if he doesn't agree you are leaving in two months anyway so what can he do?

Any place I have ever lived in before has charged monthly rent as four weeks and/or the deposit has always equaled 1 months rent in advance. This is not just my own experience or opinion, many others agree including Threshold. I have been renting for 10 years. I did not just make up the sum of €500 per month and hide the fact that I was underpaying for 6 months. If I was such a criminal mastermind I would probably come up with a better scam. This might not be a lot of money to you but it is to me.

Of course I don't want to pay more money for anything than what I believe I agreed to pay. I won't pretend otherwise. But I will pay what was agreed. This was, I have come to believe, the result of a miscommunication on what that agreed amount was and this miscommunication has lead to the landlord losing money. I don't like this situation but these things happen and if he wants to take this to the PRTB that is his choice. If they decide that I have to pay the money then of course I would.

I came here looking for advice (before contacting Threshold due to Christmas holidays) as I was confused about this issue, its not straightforward and as someone posted earlier, either way there's going to be bad feelings. Posting on here enabled me to see it in black and white and to take all sides of the situation into consideration. Nothing was posted on here that I hadn't already thought of, including your opinion. The best advice that I got was to contact threshold which I have done and have now resolved the issue. By contacting the professionals they could help me to take my emotions out of the decision. I gave them all the same information and they guided my decision to this end.


I don't know why you would say that mine is not a genuine issue, I hope that you don't give that 'advice' to others in similar situations. I can imagine why you feel the need to share such an opinion but I won't speculate. Threshold is there to assist with situations such as this and I would urge anyone else having rent issues to contact them and make sure to remember that whatever you read on here is only someones opinion. That someone could be an asshole landlord, a child, a mentally deranged individual or just a regular idiot.

cypressg

Op this isn't directed at you but the amount of apartments I've been in where there has been "damp" is ridiculous,and they are usually full of girls for some reason,and all have the windows closed and wet clothes and towels lying around the shop.
But now back to you,in your first post you said that you had to open the windows daily to dry out the place as if this was something irregular-living spaces have to be ventilated daily to allow the condensation from breathing,washing and drying out whether they are damp or not,you seem to think that you have to do this because it's damp?
My bet is that the apartment is good and airtight and that you don't air the place enough?Most kids these days have no clue about dealing with moisture in a gaff for some reason and leave all the windows closed and then start complaining about damp when mould etc starts to materialise.
At least this is my experience.

Leroy42

Daisyscience, you can slag me off as much as you want, but again you are letting your emotions enter the arguement. Just because you don't like what I have to say does not make me an idiot, or an asshole landlord. It is that type of language and response that confirms that really all you wanted was others to back up your stance that you didn't have to pay the money.

You paid €125 week in advance and then a agreement was made to make a monthly payment of €500. Evan a regular idiot like myself can work out that that doesn't tally. As I mentioned in an earlier post, would you accept only being paid for 48 weeks in a year if you worked 52?

I'm glad you got it sorted out, and as I said I have little sympathy for the landlord. He made a mistake and you have the advantage of it, that's life.

In terms of the case to Threshold, what I meant was that this isn't a case of a landlord claiming for something way out of left field. This isn't a case where the landlord is being unfair. He is being very fair and seems to have being honest about the mistake and asked that you rectify it on terms that would be suitable. You quite rightly have argued that he doesn't have the evidence to back up his claim so he losses out.

The size of the amount was in relation to him not you. As he rents out a few properties I doubt he will lose too much sleep over this (and if he did he only has himself to blame).

At the end of it, you saved some money and since the landlord didn't bother to clear up the damp etc I wouldn't be too worried about him losing out. But don't try to portray yourself as anything other than someone who has taken advantage of someone else. The fact that he may well be an asshole doesn't change that fact.

I ask again, would you accept only being paid for 48 weeks in a year if you worked 52? If your employer stated a lack of communication would you just accept it? If your answer if no, then I don't follow how you can argue why it shouldn't be the same in this case.

djimi

Threshold are there to advise tenants of their rights and give guidance in situations relating to renting. The OP was perfectly within their rights to contact them; I have no idea why you would think otherwise?

djimi

Leroy42 wrote: »

You paid €125 week in advance and then a agreement was made to make a monthly payment of €500. Evan a regular idiot like myself can work out that that doesn't tally. As I mentioned in an earlier post, would you accept only being paid for 48 weeks in a year if you worked 52?

The deposit was 500 as were the first 6 monthly rental payments. If the landlord wanted 52 weeks of 125 then they should have written that into the lease; as it stands it was their ambiguity and general haphazard approach to the agreement that caused the confusion. Its not the OPs problem that the landlord didnt consider the 48 weeks vs 52 weeks issue of paying monthly vs weekly; by the sounds of it no one thought of it, but in this case thats not the tenants problem to be quite blunt about it.

whiteandlight

Having read all of this I would be monumentally pissed if my landlord turned around after 6 months wanting an increase of 40e a month and back pay. I've been renting for 9 years and it is the landlords job to set the rent, the tenants agree to it before moving in and agree to pay on time. The OP has done this. The discrepancy between the two figures was the landlords fault.

I would never think to check the 4weeks vs a month thing and after 6 monthly payments of 500e I would feel it is entirely the landlords fault for not realising the difference.

As everyone has stated it would be a different situation if the amount was written in the lease but it isn't

Leroy42

Djimi, I never said the OP wasn't within their rights, but I expect that Threshold are not exactly over staffed so is this really a useful use of their time? That is what they are there for I guess, but I wouldn't consider this a big issue.

I have never argued that this isn't the landlords fault, or indeed their problem. They should have ben better prepared in writing the lease, paid closer attention to the amounts being paid etc. I have also never said that the OP isn't within their rights to not pay. That doesn't make it right though.

The Op has said that they agreed €125 per week. They then agreed to pay €500 monthly, which was the mistake by the landlord. Maybe it was a genuine mistake by the landlord, wanting to keep things simple rather than having to set up a weekly direct debit (we don't know why it was agreed). Are you really all argueing that nobody is entitled to make a mistake? and if they do it is fair game to take full advantage?The fact remains the OP knows the rent is €125 but thinks they should not now have to pay that amount.

Again, I simply ask the question what you you guys do if it was you on the receiving end in terms of wages etc. If for example the wages dept only gave you 4 weeks of tax credits instead of 5 would you just let it go?

djimi

Leroy42 wrote: »

Djimi, I never said the OP wasn't within their rights, but I expect that Threshold are not exactly over staffed so is this really a useful use of their time? That is what they are there for I guess, but I wouldn't consider this a big issue.

Of course its the best use of their time; its what they are there for. This is hardly a stupid question from the OP; its not like they rang Threshold asking how to change a lightbulb...

Leroy42 wrote: »

I have never argued that this isn't the landlords fault, or indeed their problem. They should have ben better prepared in writing the lease, paid closer attention to the amounts being paid etc. I have also never said that the OP isn't within their rights to not pay. That doesn't make it right though.

The Op has said that they agreed €125 per week. They then agreed to pay €500 monthly, which was the mistake by the landlord. Maybe it was a genuine mistake by the landlord, wanting to keep things simple rather than having to set up a weekly direct debit (we don't know why it was agreed). Are you really all argueing that nobody is entitled to make a mistake? and if they do it is fair game to take full advantage?The fact remains the OP knows the rent is €125 but thinks they should not now have to pay that amount.

Again, I simply ask the question what you you guys do if it was you on the receiving end in terms of wages etc. If for example the wages dept only gave you 4 weeks of tax credits instead of 5 would you just let it go?

If I was on the receiving end I wouldnt have let it go for 6 months before looking to sort it.

Of course the landlord is entitled to make a mistake. Buts thats exactly what this is; their mistake. Their biggest mistake is not putting whatever amount was agreed in writing. Their second mistake was being totally ambiguous about the rental amount, to the point where the OP doesnt seem sure what was agreed. Their third mistake was not checking their incomings and letting their mistake run for 6 months before looking to sort it.

Who cares if it the OP is wrong or right to take advantage (if indeed they did so intentionally)? Its a business arrangement; fair doesnt come into it, and one party ended up getting burned from their own negligence. The OP did nothing wrong in this case imo (legally I mean), and at the end of the day that is all that matters.

Im aware that comes across as harsh, but its business, and let this be a lesson to the landlord why he needs to run his business properly.

repsol

djimi wrote: »

Of course its the best use of their time; its what they are there for. This is hardly a stupid question from the OP; its not like they rang Threshold asking how to change a lightbulb...



If I was on the receiving end I wouldnt have let it go for 6 months before looking to sort it.

Of course the landlord is entitled to make a mistake. Buts thats exactly what this is; their mistake. Their biggest mistake is not putting whatever amount was agreed in writing. Their second mistake was being totally ambiguous about the rental amount, to the point where the OP doesnt seem sure what was agreed. Their third mistake was not checking their incomings and letting their mistake run for 6 months before looking to sort it.

Who cares if it the OP is wrong or right to take advantage (if indeed they did so intentionally)? Its a business arrangement; fair doesnt come into it, and one party ended up getting burned from their own negligence. The OP did nothing wrong in this case imo (legally I mean), and at the end of the day that is all that matters.

Im aware that comes across as harsh, but its business, and let this be a lesson to the landlord why he needs to run his business properly.

I agree. The landlord was obviously under the impression that there are 48 weeks in a year and not 52.Its his problem not the OP's.The fact that the deposit is 500e would suggest that it is a months rent.Landlord needs to learn difference between pm and pcm. He doesn't sound like a guy who should be given any slack due to his attitude towards damp.I would give him 500e pcm and start looking for a new place.

franktheplank

cypressg wrote: »

Op this isn't directed at you but the amount of apartments I've been in where there has been "damp" is ridiculous,and they are usually full of girls for some reason,and all have the windows closed and wet clothes and towels lying around the shop.
But now back to you,in your first post you said that you had to open the windows daily to dry out the place as if this was something irregular-living spaces have to be ventilated daily to allow the condensation from breathing,washing and drying out whether they are damp or not,you seem to think that you have to do this because it's damp?
My bet is that the apartment is good and airtight and that you don't air the place enough?Most kids these days have no clue about dealing with moisture in a gaff for some reason and leave all the windows closed and then start complaining about damp when mould etc starts to materialise.
At least this is my experience.

I live with OP and certainly am not a girl.

When we moved to the apartment the front room flooded after 2-3 days following exceptionally heavy rain. The landlord immediately replaced the carpet but his only solution to fix the problem was to fill some cracks in the concrete back yard.

It has only had limited success, the place hasn't flooded since (there hasn't been the same heavy rain either) but there is still clearly a huge amount of moisture entering the house. Based on the previous flooding and old water stains on the concrete floor when the carpet was removed, I'm assuming it's coming through the foundations.

No amount of 'airing' this place will make it habitable and we will be leaving as soon as it's possible for us.

As regards the rent, I wasn't there for all the negotiations but I suspect that while the place was originally quoted at 125 per week the landlord would have been quite happy to accept a 500/month deal given the going rates in the area and the condition of the apartment (he must have had some idea of the damp problem)

My further suspicion is that having bought the place at the peak of the property boom (I saw the price it was advertised for on a web search :eek:) and now facing financial problems of his own he has decided to squeeze it for every penny. (He might not have much of a choice)

franktheplank

Just to further clarify. When we moved in, we paid for a 'week' just to bring us up to the beginning of the next month and it was vague to a certain degree as to when exactly we moved in. It may have been 6 days, 8 days etc. It was just for that period, the rent was still negotiated at a monthly rate I believe after this.

Leroy42

I have at no point argued that this is not the landlords fault. I'm sure they will learn from it, make sure they pay closer attention to the job they have to do and make sure they do it right from now on. Having no amounts on the lease agreement is entirely their fault.

However, the OP came on here looking for advice on what to do. The options are very clear. Legally they have the room to get out of this, due to the lack of clarity on the agreement.

However, the OP asked for opinions and advice and whatever way you guys dress this up the OP understood that the rent was €125 but has paid less than that. It may well be business to screw the landlord but that doesn't make it right and you are all taking the OP's side against this 'horrible' landlord who according to Franktheplank "is trying to squeeze it for every penny."

Again, I ask the question whether people would just accept this if it was to do with their wages. If a company paid them 4 weeks instead of five since they normally get 4 weeks in a month would they simply accept it? Or what you if you overpaid the rent for a month, would the OP be so willing to let the landlord keep the overpayment.

Of course not, so why do you all think that it is right for the OP to act is such a way towards the landlord. Pay what you agreed, or don't, but don't get stroppy with me and call me names because I call you out on what you are doing.

djimi

Nothing in writing = nothing agreed. You can go on about morals or whatever all you want; that's the bottom line. There is no such thing as a verbal agreement in this kind of situation.

You're comparison to wages is a bit ridiculous. As I said, I, nor any sane person, would not allow a discrepancy in their wages go unnoticed or unsorted for 6 months. And even if it did, I would not turn around 6 months later if nothing is in writing in my contract or whatever and try and argue that something different from what I had been receiving for those 6 months was agreed initially. What would be the point?

Tigger

I have lived in a good few rented properties and I would always offer 4 times the weekly rent ( if they quote a weekly price) as a negotiation down. If a person dosent know there are 4.3333 weeks in a month on average then that's their issue IMHO. The last property I lived in I rented out in 2002 and the landlady agreed to 4 times the weekly rent as a monthly payment and then after 7 years she turned up saying that she wanted the extra third of a week added each month ( no back rent) I told her that I'd be out of her way ASAP and we agreed on three months notice that was 2009 and the property is still empty. A month before we left she offered my wife the property at 10% less than we had been paying but by that stage we had signed a lease on the next property.

If I was you op I'd tell the landlord that a deal was made at €500 a month and obviously that's less than €125 a week.

To those saying €125 was agreed I don't agree €125 was discussed and €500 was agreed.

Xeyn

I agree the comparison with being paid wages for 4 weeks is a bit nonsensical.
If you are paid weekly, you would in fact be paid weekly and your pay would be detailed in the contract. The same if you are paid monthly therefore a similar situation would not arise not to mention the employer wouldn't have a leg to stand on if they underpaid the employee. This is simply comparing apples with oranges.
There is simply no way the landlord was unaware of the amount he was receiving each month therefore there was simply no 'mistake'. He knew he was receiving €500 each month and was satisfied with it.
IMO there is no ambiguity in this situation. None.

franktheplank

Leroy42 wrote: »

you are all taking the OP's side against this 'horrible' landlord who according to Franktheplank "is trying to squeeze it for every penny."

Well the conditions we've described alone would make him a pretty 'horrible' landlord trying 'to squeeze it for every penny', without even mentioning the rent situation. If never seen somewhere with such a damp problem, we have to keep all our food in zip bags to stop it going mouldy.

Leroy42 wrote: »

Of course not, so why do you all think that it is right for the OP to act is such a way towards the landlord. Pay what you agreed, or don't, but don't get stroppy with me and call me names because I call you out on what you are doing.

Leroy42 wrote: »

It may well be business to screw the landlord

But you've accused her of behaving immorally, that's not stroppy or name calling?

And yet you've no basis for this moral high ground.

In my experience it's not uncommon for a property to be quoted at a weekly rate and for this to become the basis of a PCM agreement.

Landlord says: "This place is 80 per week"

Potential Tenant says: "We'll I'll give you 320 at the start of every month"

Landlord says: "Fine"

Whether or not you believe that happened in this situation is open for debate, but that it's a reasonable possibility shows you don't have a basis for a factual argument that the OP behaved immorally. And the fact (as we know it) that the landlord allowed the situation to develop for six months or so, strongly suggests he was in agreement initially.

Without a written agreement there is no proof that either side behaved immorally regarding the rent. We can suspect that the landlord (or the tenant) is pulling a fast one. Where there is evidence (as we know it) to suggest immoral behavior is in the conditions of the place, unless you think it's ok for a landlord to rent a place like this?

nxbyveromdwjpg

djimi wrote: »

Who cares if it the OP is wrong or right to take advantage (if indeed they did so intentionally)? Its a business arrangement; fair doesnt come into it, and one party ended up getting burned from their own negligence. The OP did nothing wrong in this case imo (legally I mean), and at the end of the day that is all that matters.

Im aware that comes across as harsh, but its business, and let this be a lesson to the landlord why he needs to run his business properly.

Imagine that post was the other way around, and someone said who cares if the LL is wrong or right to take advantage, they can - so they should - and the tenant should be burnt so that they learn the lesson.

:rolleyes:

Half of what was agreed seems fair enough surely, meet in the middle.

djimi

nm wrote: »

Imagine that post was the other way around, and someone said who cares if the LL is wrong or right to take advantage, they can - so they should - and the tenant should be burnt so that they learn the lesson.

:rolleyes:

Id feel exactly the same if it was the tenant. In any business transaction if a party doesnt take every necessary step to protect themselves then they cannot complain if it comes back to haunt them. There are plenty of similar situations where the tenant could have been the one to come out worse.

nm wrote: »

Half of what was agreed seems fair enough surely, meet in the middle.

What was agreed? Is it in writing? Can you prove it? 6 months is a long time to have to remember the finer points of a conversation...

franktheplank

nm wrote: »

Imagine that post was the other way around, and someone said who cares if the LL is wrong or right to take advantage, they can - so they should - and the tenant should be burnt so that they learn the lesson.

:rolleyes:

Half of what was agreed seems fair enough surely, meet in the middle.

Given that neither party can claim to be sure as to what was agreed. Probably the fairest thing to do is to go with the market value of the property?