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

Landlord changed locks, what can I do?

Options
245678

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭fash


    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    Don't attempt to screw the landlord for compensation. You're both at fault
    Move on, try to get alternative accommodation asap
    As a landlord, I say screw the landlord- that is not acceptable behaviour from him, it is illegal and the state views it as behaviour deserving punishment with 5 figure sum fines for a reason.


  • Options
    #33
    Engine No.9
    Registered Users Posts: 1,128 ✭✭✭Engine No.9


    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    If the LL in this case was a business the. I would agree with you. But I'm guessing that like the majority of LLs, they are private individuals not protected by company law

    And therein lies the problem. Too many pensions tied up in property. Their only interest is paying the mortgage and not running it like the business it should be. Landlords in this country haven't a clue about property management.


  • Options
    #34
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    But that not protection for the landlord. That's no use to him when he hasn't been able to pay the mortgage for 3 months and and the bank initiates proceedings against him. Where's the protection there?

    Yes of course he shouldn't have changed the locks but seriously the regulations need to change drastically. We all know that tenants don't have to pay rent these days if they decide not to.
    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    10 months is a long time. Bank can foreclose in that time.

    That's the entire problem here. It shouldn't take 10+ months. There should be immediate results for both tenant (in the case where landlord is acting incorrectly) and landlord, in cases where they aren't getting paid.

    It's cases such as this that put LLs off accepting SW tenants, and it's completely understandable. If there was a rapid resolution system in place then it would help to eliminate the risk of taking any type of tenant. Surely that would be a win win for renting for everyone
    The landlords mortgage and finance situation are nothing to do with any tenants they may have and only a total cowboy would rely on the next months rent to pay the bank!
    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    So do you agree that they should live there rent free?
    There are procedures in place for the landlord to follow and he would/should have been aware of these before renting out any property!

    Any landlord that does not take into account that rent can sometimes be late or stop altogether should sell up and get out of the rental business.


  • Options
    #35
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,534 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Have you proof he changed locks. Perhaps as money was tight he just failed to maintain them.
    Pay your rent and I'm sure he can fix them.

    Just as a FYI its worth lanflords while putting in a clause that failure to pay rent when due implies that the tenant wishes to terminate lease. land lord may provide packing assistance will be provided. Deposit shall be forefitted if clause is invoked as minimum notice period shall not be given


  • Options
    #36
    rubberdiddies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 717 ✭✭✭rubberdiddies


    pajopearl wrote: »
    And therein lies the problem. Too many pensions tied up in property. Their only interest is paying the mortgage and not running it like the business it should be. Landlords in this country haven't a clue about property management.

    The other side to that coin is that if the "pension landlords" didn't exist there would be thousands of people homeless


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    dmrules wrote: »
    they thought about locksmith but landlord is a nut case... he owns a riffle and already told them that he will kill their dog if he sees him on his property again( landlord lives next door) they just afraid...

    They should immediately report this threat to the Gardai and make a statement and ensure that the Gardai visit this thug and remove any weapons in his possession! He should not be allowed hold any firearms licence if making threats like that!


  • Options
    #38
    rubberdiddies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 717 ✭✭✭rubberdiddies


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    The landlords mortgage and finance situation are nothing to do with any tenants they may have and only a total cowboy would rely on the next months rent to pay the mortgage.

    I'm in total agreement that the LL in this case is in the wrong but you do remember the bubble followed by the recession, right?

    The landlords who do rely on the rent to pay the next months rent don't exactly have a choice, particularly if they are unemployed. Not sure how someone who bought a property in 2006 and has since list their job can be considered a cowboy


  • Options
    #39
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,534 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    dmrules wrote: »
    they thought about locksmith but landlord is a nut case... he owns a riffle and already told them that he will kill their dog if he sees him on his property again( landlord lives next door) they just afraid...

    Is the house on the grounds of the land lords house? He could also stop access.


  • Options
    #40
    Engine No.9
    Registered Users Posts: 1,128 ✭✭✭Engine No.9


    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    The other side to that coin is that if the "pension landlords" didn't exist there would be thousands of people homeless

    Which.is where social housing comes into play.


  • Options
    #41
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    ted1 wrote: »
    Have you proof he changed locks. Perhaps as money was tight he just failed to maintain them.
    Pay your rent and I'm sure he can fix them.

    Just as a FYI its worth lanflords while putting in a clause that failure to pay rent when due implies that the tenant wishes to terminate lease. land lord may provide packing assistance will be provided. Deposit shall be forefitted if clause is invoked as minimum notice period shall not be given
    ted1 wrote: »
    Is the house on the grounds of the land lords house? He could also stop access.

    All this would be just as illegal as changing the locks. Maybe you should read the residential tenancies act.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭fash


    ted1 wrote: »
    Have you proof he changed locks. Perhaps as money was tight he just failed to maintain them.
    Pay your rent and I'm sure he can fix them.

    Just as a FYI its worth lanflords while putting in a clause that failure to pay rent when due implies that the tenant wishes to terminate lease. land lord may provide packing assistance will be provided. Deposit shall be forefitted if clause is invoked as minimum notice period shall not be given
    Unlikely to work as a strategy- since it at a minimum indirectly goes against the act and arguably directly goes against the act. At best you can create a "presumption" to avoid the direct conflict with the act-but all it would take is for the tenant to say "actually I'm not leaving" to remove the presumption.


  • Options
    #43
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,534 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    All this would be just as illegal as changing the locks. Maybe you should read the residential tenancies act.

    Tell me what part is illegal?


  • Options
    #44
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,534 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    fash wrote: »
    Unlikely to work as a strategy- since it at a minimum indirectly goes against the act and arguably directly goes against the act. At best you can create a "presumption" to avoid the direct conflict with the act-but all it would take is for the tenant to say "actually I'm not leaving" to remove the presumption.

    Contract Law allows implied clauses


  • Options
    #45
    ectoraige
    Registered Users Posts: 2,100 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    They should immediately report this threat to the Gardai and make a statement and ensure that the Gardai visit this thug and remove any weapons in his possession! He should not be allowed hold any firearms licence if making threats like that!

    Just to stress this again, local Gardaí need to be hear of the threat made, forget about the other issues when talking to them, they need to be aware a firearms holder is making threats.


  • Options
    #46
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    ted1 wrote: »
    Tell me what part is illegal?
    The clauses you suggest won't be enforceable and preventing access on what would be a right of way enshrined in the lease agreement won't go well for you either! just ask Pat Kenny.

    Read up on the act yourself, It might save you thousands in compensation payments!


  • Options
    #47
    zom
    Registered Users Posts: 1,908 ✭✭✭zom


    rubberdiddies wrote: »
    To me there is no difference there to walking into a shop and stealing something every day for 6 weeks. You can dress it up whatever way you want but it's stealing.

    To be absolutely clear - stealing something to eat for hungry-dying family. Living in the accommodation is need, not a fancy thing.


  • Options
    #48
    The_Morrigan
    Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭The_Morrigan


    ted1 wrote: »
    Contract Law allows implied clauses

    This is why we don't allow legal advice here!

    /Mod

    Contract law may allow for implied clauses, however, it also allows for a contract to be voidable, if it contains clauses that are unfavourable or contrary to law. You cannot draft a legal document that takes rights away from a person, that is not to say that both parties cannot agree to a mutually beneficial arrangement upon termination of the lease (shorter notice period for instance), but it cannot be decided unilaterally by the landlord.


  • Options
    #49
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,534 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    The_Morrigan wrote: »
    This is why we don't allow legal advice here!

    /Mod

    Contract law may allow for implied clauses, however, it also allows for a contract to be voidable, if it contains clauses that are unfavourable or contrary to law. You cannot draft a legal document that takes rights away from a person, that is not to say that both parties cannot agree to a mutually beneficial arrangement upon termination of the lease (shorter notice period for instance), but it cannot be decided unilaterally by the landlord.

    What I said also helps the tenant. The landlord will not chase them for remaining rent of lease period. It is off mutual benefit


  • Options
    #50
    The_Morrigan
    Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭The_Morrigan


    ted1 wrote: »
    What I said also helps the tenant. The landlord will not chase them for remaining rent of lease period. It is off mutual benefit

    If that was written into a lease it wouldn't be enforceable - that isn't how the law works.


  • Options
    #51
    dmrules
    Registered Users Posts: 150 ✭✭dmrules


    I am not trying to defend them ( they did not pay the rent, but i know for sure thats a mistake by Social Welfere and its gonna be rectified) ...its just the case of locking them out of their house...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    The_Morrigan
    Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭The_Morrigan


    OP the most important thing they can do now, is lodge a complaint immediately with the PRTB and ensure they do not break any rules or play dirty to get back at the landlord. They should also contact the SW or their community officer to get them re-housed asap.

    When they contact the PRTB ask them how they can legally get their possessions back.


  • Options
    #53
    lukesmom
    Registered Users Posts: 4,400 ✭✭✭lukesmom


    dmrules wrote: »
    I am not trying to defend them ( they did not pay the rent, but i know for sure thats a mistake by Social Welfere and its gonna be rectified) ...its just the case of locking them out of their house...

    He should never have changed the locks end of story. They need to ring ptrb.


  • Options
    #54
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    The_Morrigan wrote: »
    OP the most important thing they can do now, is lodge a complaint immediately with the PRTB and ensure they do not break any rules or play dirty to get back at the landlord. They should also contact the SW or their community officer to get them re-housed asap.

    When they contact the PRTB ask them how they can legally get their possessions back.
    They should also make a statement at their local Garda station about the landlord threatening to shoot their dog with a rifle he owns, they should follow this up and have any firearms owned by this clown removed ASAP. He is not fit to hold a dog licence never mind a gun licence!


  • Options
    #55
    The_Morrigan
    Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭The_Morrigan


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    They should also make a statement at their local Garda station about the landlord threatening to shoot their dog with a rifle he owns, they should follow this up and have any firearms owned by this clown removed ASAP. He is not fit to hold a dog licence never mind a gun licence!

    You are assuming he has one!!


  • Options
    #56
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    The_Morrigan wrote: »
    You are assuming he has one!!
    Licensed or not just the threat is enough to have him arrested and charged for using threatening language under section 5 of the public order act and probably involves more serious offences under firearms legislation.


  • Options
    #57
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭fash


    ted1 wrote: »
    Contract Law allows implied clauses
    Common law ( including contract law) cannot trump legislation.
    If you mean"implied termination" - then that is a clear breach of the legislation- and so the clause falls.
    If you mean "presumption" - that might stand- but is paper thin in strength- as it can be rebutted.


  • Options
    #58
    Paybel
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭Paybel


    ted1 wrote: »
    Tell me what part is illegal?

    Information from www.citizensinformation.ie

    Illegal eviction
    If your landlord locks you out or physically evicts you, you may be able to apply for an injunction to force him/her to let you back into the property or you may apply to the PRTB to do so on your behalf. Similarly if your landlord cuts off water, gas or electricity, you may be able to take legal action to restore the supply. In either case, you should get legal advice and assistance before you proceed. Your landlord cannot remove your possessions from your flat or house without a court order.

    If your landlord is going to take you to court, you should get advice about your situation from Threshold or a solicitor. The Free Legal Advice Centres (FLAC) operates a network of legal advice clinics throughout the State. These clinics are confidential, free of charge and open to all. Contact your nearest Citizens Information Centre for information on FLAC services in your area. FLAC also runs an information and referral line during office hours for basic legal information.


  • Options
    #59
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    The landlords mortgage and finance situation are nothing to do with any tenants they may have and only a total cowboy would rely on the next months rent to pay the bank!

    There are procedures in place for the landlord to follow and he would/should have been aware of these before renting out any property!

    Any landlord that does not take into account that rent can sometimes be late or stop altogether should sell up and get out of the rental business.


    I read a similar post from you on another thread and I thought you were trolling but apparently not.

    Many people buy investment properties, all rely on rental income to pay part/all of mortgage. This makes good business sense as you limit your own expenditure and maximise returns from rental surplus/ property price increase. In recent years rental income has dropped (Dublin is now bucking the trend), tax relief has decreased, income from other sources has dropped, taxes both direct and indirect have increased so LLs are less able to subsidise mortgage repayments when rental is not paid. This is not bad business practice, it is just reality.

    Everyone would like to be sitting on a cash pile so big that they could be indifferent to a deadbeat tenant not paying the rent but In your position as understudy to the Oracle of Omaha, can you explain to all the cowboys who rely on the rent to pay the bank your business model?


  • Options
    #60
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    davo10 wrote: »
    I read a similar post from you on another thread and I thought you were trolling but apparently not.

    Many people buy investment properties, all rely on rental income to pay part/all of mortgage. This makes good business sense as you limit your own expenditure and maximise returns from rental surplus/ property price increase. In recent years rental income has dropped (Dublin is now bucking the trend), tax relief has decreased, income from other sources has dropped, taxes both direct and indirect have increased so LLs are less able to subsidise mortgage repayments when rental is not paid. This is not bad business practice, it is just reality.

    Everyone would like to be sitting on a cash pile so big that they could be indifferent to a deadbeat tenant not paying the rent but In your position as understudy to the Oracle of Omaha, can you explain to all the cowboys who rely on the rent to pay the bank your business model?

    I do understand that people have bought rent to buy properties and the bottom has fallen out of the market now so they are left with bigger than expected payments on properties worth less than they paid. Many of these people should not be landlords as they do not understand the business and do not have the financial means to provide a proper service to their tenants. the best they can do now is to sell up for as much as they can and let real businesses take over the rental market

    The landlords need to keep a slush fund available to cover things like repayment of deposits and the occasional late rent payment or missing rent payments or even for when tenants trash a house/apartment.

    This is not any concern of any tenants in those properties.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,534 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Paybel wrote: »
    Information from www.citizensinformation.ie

    Illegal eviction
    If your landlord locks you out or physically evicts you, you may be able to apply for an injunction to force him/her to let you back into the property or you may apply to the PRTB to do so on your behalf. Similarly if your landlord cuts off water, gas or electricity, you may be able to take legal action to restore the supply. In either case, you should get legal advice and assistance before you proceed. Your landlord cannot remove your possessions from your flat or house without a court order.

    If your landlord is going to take you to court, you should get advice about your situation from Threshold or a solicitor. The Free Legal Advice Centres (FLAC) operates a network of legal advice clinics throughout the State. These clinics are confidential, free of charge and open to all. Contact your nearest Citizens Information Centre for information on FLAC services in your area. FLAC also runs an information and referral line during office hours for basic legal information.

    And I said he mightn't have changed locks, the " might" have broke


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement