Loss of Rental Income

fend

Moved out of accommodation on the 12th of this month.

As there were repairs and touch ups to do on the house, he has now sent me a wonderful bill stating " 2 Weeks Loss of Rental Income" as apparently he had someone new to move in on the 15th.

Is this legal?

Stheno

Your post doesn't make much sense to be honest, can you expand a little on it?

fend

I moved out of the house I was renting on the 12th of this month.

The Landlord has since told me that he had someone to move in on the 15th of September following my leave. He did not inspect the house before I handed back the keys.

There were some damages that were to be repaired and paint work. The landlord undertook these tasks himself and informed his new tenant that the house would not be ready for 2 weeks.

I have now received a letter from the landlord stating that I owe him 2 weeks rent that he missed out on because he had to tell his new tenants to hang on. Can he do this?

No Pants

Has he returned your deposit yet or is this in addition to the deposit, which is still in the landlord's possession?

Stheno

And what level of damage took two weeks to repair?

No Pants

No Pants wrote: »

Has he returned your deposit yet or is this in addition to the deposit, which is still in the landlord's possession?

Assuming you gave the required notice, bad planning on his part does not make continued occupancy your responsibility.

fend

The deposit is for the damages and paintwork, which he has itemised already and I don't mind paying.

He is adding this on top of the deposit. Can a landlord charge for loss of rental income?

fend

I gave him 1 months notice before I moved out. He never inspected the place before I left.

djimi

Assuming you terminated the property legally then I dont think they can bill you for loss of rental income, only for the cost of repairs for any damage caused.

Write back and say that you will not be paying this "bill", and if they wish to take it further then they will need to raise a case against you with the PRTB.

djimi

fend wrote: »

I gave him 1 months notice before I moved out. He never inspected the place before I left.

How long were you in the property? 1 months notice is most likely not valid unless it specifically allowed for it in the lease; 28 days notice would be required for a tenancy of less than 6 months, 35 for 6-12 months, 42 days for 1-2 years etc.

fend

I signed no contract as none was ever presented to me. There was no rent book although I had asked for one and receipts at the beginning of the tenancy but never heard anything more about it. And as far as I know he is not registered with PRTB.

Im just in the middle of writing a letter back to him and I want to be sure I am not obliged to pay for the loss of income before i put it down and get burnt later.

djimi

fend wrote: »

I signed no contract as none was ever presented to me. There was no rent book although I had asked for one and receipts at the beginning of the tenancy but never heard anything more about it. And as far as I know he is not registered with PRTB.

Im just in the middle of writing a letter back to him and I want to be sure I am not obliged to pay for the loss of income before i put it down and get burnt later.

The fact that no contact was signed is irrelevant; whether signed or not a contract starts the day that the tenancy begins, and the terms of the RTA 2004 take effect that day. There is no such things as an unofficial tenancy or anything of the sort in this country.

The_Morrigan

Fend you have already been advised on your other thread that the lack of a written contract wasn't enough to get you out of your obligations as a tenant and the obligations of your landlord.

The 14 month tenancy would mean a higher notice period was required to legally vacate the premises.

fend

There was sufficient time between announcement of leaving and the leaving itself.

Is it in the law that I have to pay for his loss of rental income.

Is it also legal that I can be charged for cleaning if he undertook it himself as he is charging me a mad amount of money.

(Would also like to let it be known, before I get judged, that the house was clean before I left - And I am not a pig before anyone is thinking it....)

djimi

fend wrote: »

There was sufficient time between announcement of leaving and the leaving itself.

Is it in the law that I have to pay for his loss of rental income.

Is it also legal that I can be charged for cleaning if he undertook it himself as he is charging me a mad amount of money.

(Would also like to let it be known, before I get judged, that the house was clean before I left - And I am not a pig before anyone is thinking it....)

He cannot charge for loss of rental income for the reasons that he gave, however if you gave a months notice of termination when he was entiteld to 42 then he could possibly seek the 12 days or whatever as loss of rental income. You need to make sure that you have your ducks in a row on that one.

He cannot charge for his own time when it comes to any repairs; only for the materials.

You are entitled to seek a detailed breakdown of all the costs of the deductions, along with receipts/invoices to back up all deductions. If he cannot provide a receipt/invoice then he cannot deduct; end of story. If you are unhappy with what has been deducted then you need to take a case with the PRTB.

How much evidence do you have of the state of the property both when you moved in and when you vacated? In other words, were it to go to a PRTB hearing, could you disprove his story about the required cleaning/repairs?

fend

With some investigation, I just spoke to the previous tenants who were in the property before me who advised me that the landlord tried to pull the exact same stunts with them and if she can recall correctly, the figure was the exact same that she was billed also.

I will be taking this to the PRTB afterall. I have been renting 10 years and have never come across a landlord such as this. The bill I received has been derived from a very well thought out plan which his previous tenants have told me is a running routine with him.

djimi

Well unless he can come up with invoiced and receipts that correspond, to the penny, with the amount that he is trying to deduct, his "well thought out plan" is likely to unravel in a hurry when the PRTB get involved!

ted1

Put the bill in the bill.

Also a landlord can not charge(deduct from deposit for any work that they carry out themsleves.

foggy_lad

fend wrote: »

I signed no contract as none was ever presented to me. There was no rent book although I had asked for one and receipts at the beginning of the tenancy but never heard anything more about it. And as far as I know he is not registered with PRTB.

Im just in the middle of writing a letter back to him and I want to be sure I am not obliged to pay for the loss of income before i put it down and get burnt later.

Is he trying to charge you for the cost of normal painting and decorating necessitated by normal wear and tear on the property? You were there 10 years, how often did he paint or decorate in that time? how many carpets were changed etc?

Unless you left the place damaged beyond normal wear and tear he has no right to charge you anything and should return all of the deposit!

Pinklady11

Ugh thank god I don't rent anymore!!

The last landlord I had tried to pull a bit of a stunt on me too.

I was renting the house for 5 yrs and kept it in excellent condition and even freshening up the paintwork when it needed it. Anyway when I cam to giving notice, I gave 30 days.

he cam back to me and said he was due 60 days as I was renting so long but he said as I was such a good tenant he would overlook it and let me go with 30 days notice.

About a week later he called me and said he wanted the rent for the 60 days but was happy for me to leave after 30 days as he wanted to redecorate before the he got new tenants. I told him if I was paying for 60 days, I would be staying for 60 days and I would not leave a minute sooner.

It escalated into a big dispute and I ended up getting PRTB involved who quickly put him back in his box. In the end I left after the 30 days with my full deposit returned.

Sounds to me like your landlord wants his cake and eat it. Most rental properties could do with a freshen up after a tenant leaves but thats on the landlord. They have to make allowances for wear and tear and also the time it takes for work to be carried out. So if the repair that took place is beyond reasonable wear and tear then you are liable but only for those costs to put it right not loss of rent.

It's ridiculous how some landlords think they can charge rent to a tenant that doesn't live there.

Give the PRTB a call and explain everything to them. I found them to be very helpful and they will tell you exactly where you stand.

Good luck.

drumswan

fend wrote: »

I have been renting 10 years and have never come across a landlord such as this.

Youve been renting ten years and seem to have no idea of either your own or a landlords obligations and responsibilities?

djimi

Pinklady11 wrote: »

The last landlord I had tried to pull a bit of a stunt on me too.

I was renting the house for 5 yrs and kept it in excellent condition and even freshening up the paintwork when it needed it. Anyway when I cam to giving notice, I gave 30 days.

he cam back to me and said he was due 60 days as I was renting so long but he said as I was such a good tenant he would overlook it and let me go with 30 days notice.

About a week later he called me and said he wanted the rent for the 60 days but was happy for me to leave after 30 days as he wanted to redecorate before the he got new tenants. I told him if I was paying for 60 days, I would be staying for 60 days and I would not leave a minute sooner.

It escalated into a big dispute and I ended up getting PRTB involved who quickly put him back in his box. In the end I left after the 30 days with my full deposit returned.

Sounds to me like your landlord wants his cake and eat it. Most rental properties could do with a freshen up after a tenant leaves but thats on the landlord. They have to make allowances for wear and tear and also the time it takes for work to be carried out. So if the repair that took place is beyond reasonable wear and tear then you are liable but only for those costs to put it right not loss of rent.

It's ridiculous how some landlords think they can charge rent to a tenant that doesn't live there.

You got lucky to be honest. Assuming this was fairly recently, the landlord was entitled to get 112 days notice for you having been there 5 years, and was entitled to expect rent to be paid in its entirety during the notice period, whether you remained in the property or not.

In the case of the OP they gave a months notice, which almost certainly wasnt valid (no notice period is an even month; only less than 6 months would count at 28 days). I have seen 14 months mentioned in this thread, and that being the case the landlord is entitled to 42 days notice, and can seek unpaid rent for the extra 12 days if only 30 days notice was given.

Pinklady11

djimi wrote: »

You got lucky to be honest. Assuming this was fairly recently, the landlord was entitled to get 112 days notice for you having been there 5 years, and was entitled to expect rent to be paid in its entirety during the notice period, whether you remained in the property or not.

In the case of the OP they gave a months notice, which almost certainly wasnt valid (no notice period is an even month; only less than 6 months would count at 28 days). I have seen 14 months mentioned in this thread, and that being the case the landlord is entitled to 42 days notice, and can seek unpaid rent for the extra 12 days if only 30 days notice was given.

Oh I know he was entitled to the 60 days although I didn't know that at the time but what annoyed me was he agreed to the 30 day notice then changed his mind and demanded to be paid for 60 days yet wanted me to leave after 30 days!!! So he wanted and extra months rent out of me for nothing! He went nuts when I told him I would be staying for every day that I had paid. I was willing to stay out the notice whatever amount that would be but he didn't want me there. He wanted time to redecorate without losing out on rent. Thats were the issues arose.

In the end I think the PRTB put the Sh*tters up him when they informed him of my rights as a tenant and how difficult life could get for him if I stopped paying rent and refused to leave.

The_Conductor

Pinklady11 wrote: »

Oh I know he was entitled to the 60 days

Wrong.
He was in fact entitled to 112 days (aka 16 weeks) notice. Not 60 days notice. If this was prior to September 2008 when the rules changed- he would have been entitled to 84 days notice (12 weeks notice). The notice period increased to 16 weeks in September 2008. These are the notice periods for tenancies of 4 years or greater. Even Citizens Advice would have given you this information- had you checked with them.

fend

To clarify, I have been renting in general for 10 years, have only been with this particular landlord 14months. My fault for the mis-communication. Sincerest apologies. Have never had a problem with landlords in this length of time up until now. Have always been a good tenant and have never missed a days rent in my life.

As said in my earlier thread, I offered to replace what was damaged and I purchased second hand furniture which were snubbed back in my face.

Thankfully, have just purchased my first home and will not have to deal with landlords again. On the bright side, I can keep the above furniture for myself as they are lovely pieces!!

Thanks to everyone for their input - Honestly really appreciated.

Frank Lee Midere

The_Conductor wrote: »

Wrong.
He was in fact entitled to 112 days (aka 16 weeks) notice. Not 60 days notice. If this was prior to September 2008 when the rules changed- he would have been entitled to 84 days notice (12 weeks notice). The notice period increased to 16 weeks in September 2008. These are the notice periods for tenancies of 4 years or greater. Even Citizens Advice would have given you this information- had you checked with them.

Clearly however she could be there for the duration of the notice which is what happened. He also agreed in writing to 30 days. But later he wanted 60 days and her out for some of it. That's not the way notice works. Some people might move on earlier but you are legally entitled to all your notice. Putting any of this in writing is what screwed him.