When are Irish tenants ever going to get proper protection for their deposits?

gaius c

In other countries, security deposits are held in escrow and rogue landlords can't just treat it as a personal piggy bank. Here, tenants are pretty much completely at the mercy of the landlord and whether he feels like returning the deposit or how much of it.

The PRTB can make a judgement in your favour but you need to go to court to enforce it. Totally pointless as the PRTB was supposed to be keeping stuff out of court.

My younger brother has moved house recently. Deposit of €1200 paid and they got €500 back on the day they handed the keys back "with the rest to follow by bank transfer". Two weeks later, they are still waiting for the money despite a lot of phone calls and being told "I transferred it on Monday", the Monday being 5th August, bank holiday Monday.

I've been explaining the PRTB route to him and that he may need to go to the small claims court as well. These are young lads in the very early stages of their careers. They live month to month and can't afford to be waiting ages to get that €700 back! As an added bonus, landlord is not PRTB registered and wouldn't give PPS number so probably isn't tax compliant either.

How to do something about this?
Lobby TD's until their ears bleed?

snubbleste

If there was an escrow system, all tenants would demand the use of it forcing all landlords into a central database handy for Revenue..
So, no, ain't gonna happen

3DataModem

I think it would be fantastic, in that it would make tenants AND landlords much more fastidious about agreeing the state of the apartment before moving in.

Standards increase, everyone (except bad landlords) happy.

I would love to advertise with "deposit held in PRTB escrow" listed.

The problem is, who arbitrates disputes? Who examines properties? Verifies damage? And who pays for that service?

gaius c

3DataModem wrote: »

I think it would be fantastic, in that it would make tenants AND landlords much more fastidious about agreeing the state of the apartment before moving in.

Standards increase, everyone (except bad landlords) happy.

I would love to advertise with "deposit held in PRTB escrow" listed.

The problem is, who arbitrates disputes? Who examines properties? Verifies damage? And who pays for that service?

Now you're talking. If the deposit is kept out of reach of both parties and the PRTB arbitrates on any disputes, then their judgements automatically have "teeth".

snubbleste
Living in a pigsty is no excuse for continuing to live in one. There's nearly half a million renters in the state. That's a significant cachement of voters but nothing will get done until they let their elected representatives know that they want action.

StillWaters

gaius c wrote: »

How to do something about this?
Lobby TD's until their ears bleed?

This is in the Programme for Government. A lot of legislation was postponed to get the Protection of Life Bill through. Last I heard this was commencing in the Autumn.

Pawwed Rig

We discussed this issue before here. The main problem I can see is who will administer this?
The PRTB have not got the competence to do it so it would have to fall to one of the banks or a 'new govt agency'. No govt agency are quick to do anything so I would say there will be a couple of months waiting before anyone receives a deposit back. Also in the event of a dispute they would have to hold onto the money until a determination order was made which could take years.

murphaph

Indeed. I as a LL would have no real issue with it because I wouldn't be the one waiting weeks on end to get my deposit back from the PRTB (OP: have you ever actually had dealings with the PRTB?).

I keep my deposits in individual accounts and treat them like they're not my money, which they're not of course.

@gaius: Would you also like to see all the other responsibilities of continental tenants taken on by Irish tenants?

-Small repairs clause (usually up to €400 per annum covered by the tenant, so no calling the LL for a new house alarm battery (came into my head as I recently had to replace a faulty one @ €100).

-Paint and decorate your own property BUT must leave it in the condition you found it in (including hiring a carpet cleaner and getting all your dirt out of the carpets)

-Deposit usually 3 x month's rent!!!

-Bring your own kitchen...the LL is NOT obliged to provide ANYTHING inside the property, not so much as a light fitting! (so no ringing the LL when your microwave goes on the blink, cos it'll be yours)

etc. etc.

Irish tenants think it's all roses in "Europe" (especially Germany) but the facts are quite different: with tenants' rights comes a heap of tenants' responsibilities!

(For the record, I'd love if the German model was widespread in Ireland...no more worrying about kitchen appliances etc. breaking)

Pawwed Rig

Also I cannot see this being a free service. Are we willing to pay say €100 for this convenience?

A good discussion on the issues is here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=85280245

odds_on

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

We discussed this issue before here. The main problem I can see is who will administer this?
The PRTB have not got the competence to do it so it would have to fall to one of the banks or a 'new govt agency'. No govt agency are quick to do anything so I would say there will be a couple of months waiting before anyone receives a deposit back. Also in the event of a dispute they would have to hold onto the money until a determination order was made which could take years.

An inventory, signed by both parties, should be included with the deposit monies (application) thus, there should be no dispute about number and condition of everything in the property. then a signed exit inventory forwarded by the parties before the return of the deposit. If there is a dispute these two documents can be referred to. If there is a dispute between the parties before signing either entry or exit, then an independent assessor should be requested - the cost being shared equally between landlord and tenant.

The main problem with this may be where there is a house share and one tenant leaves. However, where a tenant just ups and goes, he wouldn't get his deposit back as he wouldn't have signed the exit inventory. There would have to be some type of limitation - for the duration of the tenancy - so that, where a tenant has left without signing the exit inventory, then a landlord may claim the deposit with only his signature, but must wait for a number of weeks after the tenancy expired.

The above would necessitate some kind of communication with the PRTB as to the duration of the tenancy, especially when a fixed term tenancy just rolls into a Part 4 tenancy.

whippet

At least all a tenant is on the hook for is there deposit from a dodgy landlord and have the PRTB route to go down. Landlords have almost zero real recourse for dodgy tenants who piss off before the term is up; use the deposit as the last months rent; trash the place and disappear etc .... at the moment in ireland the cards are all stacked in the tenants favour.

An escrow situation would be fantastic and along with it proper deposits for any furnished property (3 months rent or so) ... I have had tenants who put a request in for a new kettle and toaster as the red set didn't match the blue tiles in the kitchen (I sh1t you not).

Ray Palmer

Who would pay for the service is the key. LL paying tax on income, property tax, PRTB registration and repairs (often a result of a tenant)

Wouldn't be happy paying extra for a service I don't actually benefit from. Tenants can pretty much stop paying rent and stay for a year without any problem. If you want added security everybody has to benefit. People have been left ruined by tenants not paying rent and causing damage.

whatnext

I am an evil landlord in the UK.

Over there deposits now have to be lodged with an approved intermediary. The one I use is http://www.depositprotection.com/

Its really quite simple to use once you figure out how to use it the first time.
The reasoning behind it are here: http://www.depositprotection.com/legislation

To one issue I have with it is that tenants can become a bit agitated because it can take a couple of weeks to actually receive their deposit back as cleared funds, but there is a facility to transfer the deposit on to a new landlord.

To me is seems a bit of a no-brainer to set up something similar here. I thought that was what the PRTB was going to be. If it was state owned / held they could retain at least a 100 of million on deposit which could be levered against the national debt.

Snakeblood

murphaph wrote: »

-Small repairs clause (usually up to €400 per annum covered by the tenant, so no calling the LL for a new house alarm battery (came into my head as I recently had to replace a faulty one @ €100).

-Paint and decorate your own property BUT must leave it in the condition you found it in (including hiring a carpet cleaner and getting all your dirt out of the carpets)

-Deposit usually 3 x month's rent!!!

-Bring your own kitchen...the LL is NOT obliged to provide ANYTHING inside the property, not so much as a light fitting! (so no ringing the LL when your microwave goes on the blink, cos it'll be yours)

etc. etc.

Irish tenants think it's all roses in "Europe" (especially Germany) but the facts are quite different: with tenants' rights comes a heap of tenants' responsibilities!

(For the record, I'd love if the German model was widespread in Ireland...no more worrying about kitchen appliances etc. breaking)

That'd be way better. No more landlords using a house they are renting as an appliance and furniture graveyard.

Pawwed Rig

whatnext wrote: »

To me is seems a bit of a no-brainer to set up something similar here. I thought that was what the PRTB was going to be. If it was state owned / held they could retain at least a 100 of million on deposit which could be levered against the national debt.

Which was a point brought up on the previous thread in that there would be a permanent pool of cash of €500million - €1.5 billion (depending if 1 month or 3 months deposit became the average). This cash would be held by central government and spent. Thereby the government is guaranteeing your deposit.

Folks, the Irish government is not in a position to guarantee anything. We are a country that is still bankrupt.
They also operate at a snails pace with all sorts of bureaucracy and paperwork at every turn. This is never going to be a good system for either LL or tenant.

Scortho

Snakeblood wrote: »

That'd be way better. No more landlords using a house they are renting as an appliance and furniture graveyard.

No more crying chairs either!:)
A proper deposit and a proper deposit system is what's needed.
There's some dodgy landlords out there and a load of dodgy tenants.

Would the interest earned on the deposits be enough to cover the costs of admin as not all deposits are with held.

In fact I don't know of many that are with held. I know my parents had to withhold deposit once in the last 15 years because the place was badly damaged by the tenant. But it was contractors who did this work. They were still out of pocket after the repairs.

whatnext

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Which was a point brought up on the previous thread in that there would be a permanent pool of cash of €500million - €1.5 billion (depending if 1 month or 3 months deposit became the average). This cash would be held by central government and spent. Thereby the government is guaranteeing your deposit.

Folks, the Irish government is not in a position to guarantee anything. We are a country that is still bankrupt.
They also operate at a snails pace with all sorts of bureaucracy and paperwork at every turn. This is never going to be a good system for either LL or tenant.

You could buy german bonds with the funds then? even at their 0.17% yield it "should at least" pay for the running of such a system if not the set up.
Could the NTMA be used? the National Pension Reserve Fund?

These are only suggestions, I'm no economist. But if there was a will it could be done, easily.

the_syco

Would said database have a record of the tenants who'd have a habit of leaving before the lease is up, and another of who destroys property?

So far, it's more rights to favour a tenant, but no reason why the landlords would actually use it, if it cost them anything.

whatnext

the_syco wrote: »

Would said database have a record of the tenants who'd have a habit of leaving before the lease is up, and another of who destroys property?

So far, it's more rights to favour a tenant, but no reason why the landlords would actually use it, if it cost them anything.

It is mandatory in the UK - the fines for non compliance are massive.
Its free to use, but you don't have the use of the money either.

I have used it for a while now and found it fairly painless. If there is a dispute you make your case online and the tenant can accept it or counter dispute it. I've not had a dispute yet, but I'm sure its only a matter of time.

Anecdotally I've heard that most disputes are agreed on there and then as to enter a dispute takes 28 days and unless there is agreement no one wins and no one has access to the money.

murphaph

In the UK the LL doesn't have to waste his time with the equivalent of the PRTB before heading to the magistrates court. He can have a non-paying or otherwise delinquent tenant out in much shorter order than in Ireland, The UK also recently made squatting a crime.

In Germany new laws that came into force in June reduce the time a LL has to spend going through the courts to resolve such issues and allow a fast track back to court for rent nomads who "switch places" at the last minute (an old trick used by rent nomads in Germany to stifle the legal process to get them out).

Where are Ireland's new laws to help landlords remove delinquent tenants from their properties?

I'm for give and take. I'd happily go along with things the OP is proposing (remembering that if the PRTB run it it'll be a disaster) if landlords were given increased protection against delinquent tenants. It can't continue to be a one way street, which is what it has been since independence and the state began "getting one back on landlords", many of whom were British back then. The mentality never went away, even when the absentee landlords did.

gaius c

StillWaters wrote: »

This is in the Programme for Government. A lot of legislation was postponed to get the Protection of Life Bill through. Last I heard this was commencing in the Autumn.

Interesting. Will look that up.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

We discussed this issue before here. The main problem I can see is who will administer this?
The PRTB have not got the competence to do it so it would have to fall to one of the banks or a 'new govt agency'. No govt agency are quick to do anything so I would say there will be a couple of months waiting before anyone receives a deposit back. Also in the event of a dispute they would have to hold onto the money until a determination order was made which could take years.

That's fine then. We'll just keep it exactly the way it is with landlords walking away with peoples' deposits and extremely limited options to get it back...
No reason to change because the challenges to implement systems used by other nations couldn't possibly work here.

whatnext wrote: »

I am an evil landlord in the UK.

Over there deposits now have to be lodged with an approved intermediary. The one I use is http://www.depositprotection.com/

Its really quite simple to use once you figure out how to use it the first time.
The reasoning behind it are here: http://www.depositprotection.com/legislation

To one issue I have with it is that tenants can become a bit agitated because it can take a couple of weeks to actually receive their deposit back as cleared funds, but there is a facility to transfer the deposit on to a new landlord.

To me is seems a bit of a no-brainer to set up something similar here. I thought that was what the PRTB was going to be. If it was state owned / held they could retain at least a 100 of million on deposit which could be levered against the national debt.

Excellent setup and if tenants know that the deposit is going to be back in a few weeks, they can at least plan for that.

murphaph
Lovely points in that first post of yours but they appear to be responding to a different thread altogether.

Pawwed Rig

gaius c wrote: »

That's fine then. We'll just keep it exactly the way it is with landlords walking away with peoples' deposits and extremely limited options to get it back...
No reason to change because the challenges to implement systems used by other nations couldn't possibly work here.

They're better off not to change anything until they can make what is already there work properly. The legislation is available to deal with deposit retention. The issue is that it is too slow. There is no reason why an efficiently run PRTB could not have a hearing within a couple of weeks rather than the 20+ months that it seems to take at the moment.

Mrs OBumble

whatnext wrote: »

I am an evil landlord in the UK.

Over there deposits now have to be lodged with an approved intermediary. The one I use is http://www.depositprotection.com/

Its really quite simple to use once you figure out how to use it the first time.
The reasoning behind it are here: http://www.depositprotection.com/legislation

To one issue I have with it is that tenants can become a bit agitated because it can take a couple of weeks to actually receive their deposit back as cleared funds, but there is a facility to transfer the deposit on to a new landlord.

To me is seems a bit of a no-brainer to set up something similar here. I thought that was what the PRTB was going to be. If it was state owned / held they could retain at least a 100 of million on deposit which could be levered against the national debt.

+1 to all that - except that I am an evil landlord in New Zealand.

Pretty similar scheme though: http://www.dbh.govt.nz/about-tenancy-bonds

As to how it's paid for ... well those bonds generate a pretty large pool of cash, if a government agency cannot fund itself with a bit of treasury manageemnt and the exsiting tenancy registration fee, then some butts need kicking.

odds_on

The principle, I believe, in the UK is that the deposit monies, while in the hands of the deposit holding company, is banked and attracts interest. This was all well and fine when deposit interest rates were at a reasonable level.

However, with low interest rates these days, it may not be a viable option.

sunnysoutheast

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

They're better off not to change anything until they can make what is already there work properly. The legislation is available to deal with deposit retention. The issue is that it is too slow. There is no reason why an efficiently run PRTB could not have a hearing within a couple of weeks rather than the 20+ months that it seems to take at the moment.

The other advantage in the UK is that an independent inventory clerk carries out an exhaustive audit of the condition of the property and provides a multi-page report to all parties. Usually about £100, with the landlord paying for the check-in and the tenant the check-out (or vice-versa). Removes all the he-said-she-said when returning deposits.

I'm surprised it hasn't caught on here.

The_Conductor

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Who would pay for the service is the key. LL paying tax on income, property tax, PRTB registration and repairs (often a result of a tenant)

Wouldn't be happy paying extra for a service I don't actually benefit from. Tenants can pretty much stop paying rent and stay for a year without any problem. If you want added security everybody has to benefit. People have been left ruined by tenants not paying rent and causing damage.

In which case- change the deposit to two months rent- which is similar to many other countries. In conjunction with this- do away with the legal obligation to furnish apartments- which is a unique Irish/UK thing- and allow unfurnished rentals with 2 months deposit held in escrow.

The situation as it stands is ridiculous- on the one hand you have landlords keeping deposits willy-nilly, while on the other hand you have tenants taking the piss and refusing to pay rent- safe in the knowledge it could a year or even longer to get them out of the property.

So- an escrow service, with 2 months rent from the tenant as a deposit (similar to elsewhere), and the legal obligation to let residential properties furnished, done away with?

hfallada

State bodies are painfully slow with pretty much everything and PRTB has to be the slowest of the slow. So if you rent a room your landlord lodges the deposit with the PRTB and they keep it for 9 months and return it. I can imagine them taking about 3/4 months minimum to refund all the deposits to tenants who rented while they were in college. It takes them about 3 weeks to process a registration and everyone knows who slow they are to deal with disputes.

Why do most people assume landlords are all tax evaders. A lot of them brought section and use that to reduce their tax bill. There are probably 10 legitimate landlords for one dodgy one. But the dodgy ones get everyone a bad name

Chris_5339762

...also we only generally hear about the dodgy ones on here. The vast bulk of tenancies are fine.

beauf

gaius c wrote: »

...As an added bonus, landlord is not PRTB registered and wouldn't give PPS number so probably isn't tax compliant either.

How to do something about this?
Lobby TD's until their ears bleed?

Why rent places which aren't registered?

djimi

You wont know the place isnt registered until after you move in and sign the lease (the registered tenancy includes your details, so its not going to be registered in advance of you moving in). The property not being PRTB registered is not sufficient grounds to break a lease.

gaius c

djimi wrote: »

You wont know the place isnt registered until after you move in and sign the lease (the registered tenancy includes your details, so its not going to be registered in advance of you moving in). The property not being PRTB registered is not sufficient grounds to break a lease.

This.

The_Morrigan

beauf please don't drag up old threads