Changes to Letting Situation

djimi

Not really. In theory you are supposed to inform them of your intention to remain on a part 4 prior to the lease expiring (this is the legal requirement that I refer to), but the only actual repercussion of not doing so is that you might be liable for any costs that they incur while under the assumption that you were leaving, which basically amounts to readvertising costs. In reality its highly unlikely that not informing them of your intention to remain on a part 4 will have any bearing on you whatsoever.

A landlord can never refuse you part 4 rights.

runawaybishop

djimi wrote: »

Not really. In theory you are supposed to inform them of your intention to remain on a part 4 prior to the lease expiring (this is the legal requirement that I refer to), but the only actual repercussion of not doing so is that you might be liable for any costs that they incur while under the assumption that you were leaving, which basically amounts to readvertising costs. In reality its highly unlikely that not informing them of your intention to remain on a part 4 will have any bearing on you whatsoever.

A landlord can never refuse you part 4 rights.

You dont need to state part 4 if you are rolling on each month though, which is the case i think here (lease up in sept). Not that it will be a negative if you do mention it.

OldNotWIse

Thanks guys very much for all your helpful advice!

runawaybishop

djimi wrote: »

If you accept the rent increase then say nothing. If you wish to dispute it then lodge a dispute and let her know. Alternatively, you could try and negotiate a lower increase (she has given you a good opening here as the reason for the increase is nonsense).

Agreed, should probably do this anyway before disputing the increase.

OldNotWIse

I sent a letter to the landlord stating our intention to remain under part 4 tenancy. I did not mention anything about proposed rent increase - Threshold informed me that a text does not constitute sufficient written notification. I will wait for written notification and then reply, stating that we can stretch to a halfway point between the two amounts, if this is not acceped then we will refer to PRTB for assessment. I suspect that LL will meet us halfway at the mention of PRTB. If not, we will proceed with review. If the increase is found to be fair I will pay backdated difference but it is likley we will look for somewhere else if this happens. Let's just wait and see. Trying not to stress about it too much, so many things going on at the moment.

runawaybishop

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I sent a letter to the landlord stating our intention to remain under part 4 tenancy. I did not mention anything about proposed rent increase - Threshold informed me that a text does not constitute sufficient written notification. I will wait for written notification and then reply, stating that we can stretch to a halfway point between the two amounts, if this is not acceped then we will refer to PRTB for assessment. I suspect that LL will meet us halfway at the mention of PRTB. If not, we will proceed with review. If the increase is found to be fair I will pay backdated difference but it is likley we will look for somewhere else if this happens. Let's just wait and see. Trying not to stress about it too much, so many things going on at the moment.

Did threshold say why the text wasn't sufficient?

djimi

It seems that Threshold are wrong about the text message not being valid notification as the PRTB seem to accepting it as a valid form of written communication (or so Ive heard anyway).

OldNotWIse

runawaybishop wrote: »

Did threshold say why the text wasn't sufficient?

No. Could be related to the fact that I have texts from same LL only weeks before offering another 12 month lease with same rent. I dont know. Thats just what I was told. Anyway, going to see what reply I get. If LL texts/calls I will ask for written notification.

OldNotWIse

According to the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, "notice" (for anything that requires it) can be done:

A) by delivering it to the person
by leaving it at the address where the person ordinarliy resides
C) by sending it by post to where the person ordinarliy resides
D) by affixing to a conspicuous place - although this only refers to notices in respect of a dwelling and nobody seems to live there!:D

The_Conductor

OldNotWIse wrote: »

According to the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, "notice" (for anything that requires it) can be done:

A) by delivering it to the person
by leaving it at the address where the person ordinarliy resides
C) by sending it by post to where the person ordinarliy resides
D) by affixing to a conspicuous place - although this only refers to notices in respect of a dwelling and nobody seems to live there!:D

Note- they have precedent for accepting e-mails and text messages, as valid methods of communication too (as per several recent cases). Not ideal- but acceptable, apparently.

djimi

Thomas D wrote: »

The €150 is a 21% rental price increase in a year. No way is that justified. You can use this to prove your case.

http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/Statire/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?maintable=RIQ02&ProductID=DB_RI&PLanguage=0

Take your starting rent as fair market price. Put in the equivalent property and location type in the index abbove. Get a percentage increase (if there is one) from when you started renting to the current month. If they are requesting more than this increase you do not have to pay it. This is a proper statistical index and far superior to random ads on daft.

Percentage increase means nothing without knowing what the original rent was and how the increased amount compared to the current market.

Simply put, if the landlord is likely to get the increased rent for the property from a new tenant (this is where comparing Daft ads comes into it) then the increase will be deemed to be fair. €150 increase on the face of it sounds high, but if the place was rented for a low amount to start with, and is in a high demand area, then it might not be unjustified at all. Unfair perhaps, but unfortunately fair does not come into it.

OldNotWIse

Well still haven't heard anything from LL.