Three rent increases in a month

grumpydwarf

I rent an apartment with a six month lease which ends next week. On 3 February I sent a letter to the agents to say I wanted to exercise Part 4. Immediately I got a letter saying the rent is going up €100.

A week later I got letter #2 from agent saying the rent is going up another €75 (€175 more).

Today I got letter #3 from the agent saying the rent is going up €75 (so €250 more than my current rent). I can't afford €1250.

I checked the PRTB website and the rent for my area as €875 (2 bedroom apartment, D11) which is lower than what I pay now (€1000)

The people I work with said if I dispute the rent increase the letting agent will just give me notice to leave. My boss said as the apartment owner's company is in receivership I should dispute the rent increase but send it to the receiver.. that way hopefully by the time they get around to opening the post, it will be too late to give me notice but we can then hopefully come to a reasonable amount for a rent increase. I think if I want to dispute it I have to contact the agent first but if that fails, I can lodge a complaint with the PRTB using the receivers details? I don't want the letting agent to end my lease as revenge.

djimi

Rent can be reviewed once in a 12 month period.

If you feel that the increase is unjust then dispute it with the PRTB. They absolutely cannot terminate the lease for this, and you can remain paying the current rent until the case is heard some months from now. If you lose then you will be liable for the difference backdated to the date on the notice (the first notice; the other two are invalid), but if its true what you say that the average rent in your area is €875 then there isnt a hope that they will be allowed to raise the rent to €1100.

hfallada

The prtb estimates are not in anyway accurate. A lot of land lords under declare on the form as the Irish government doesn't believe in data protection when it comes to tax evasion. There is a strong believe that prtb might hand over the rent amount details to revenue.

A far better reflection of actual rent amounts is daft.ie. as you can see what similar apartments are making in your area. If similar apartments are still more than what you will pay with €250 increase just accept the increase. It's near impossible to find housing in Dublin

foggy_lad

hfallada wrote: »

The prtb estimates are not in anyway accurate. A lot of land lords under declare on the form as the Irish government doesn't believe in data protection when it comes to tax evasion. There is a strong believe that prtb might hand over the rent amount details to revenue.

A far better reflection of actual rent amounts is daft.ie. as you can see what similar apartments are making in your area. If similar apartments are still more than what you will pay with €250 increase just accept the increase. It's near impossible to find housing in Dublin

this is incorrect, the rent figures on websites like daft.ie don't take haggling for a lower rent into account. Using the figures on the PRTB site you can get the average rents for similar properties in your general area and also get trends for rent increases/decreases.

djimi

Sorry I misread where you got the info about average rent from.

That PRTB index means next to nothing; rent prices can vary wildly from complex to complex, and the prices given on that index are far too broad to be of any real use in a matter like this. To give you an example, the PRTB index for my area has 2 bedroom apartments down about being worth about €200 less than I know my apartment would get if it was relet. If I were to take a case with the PRTB and argue that I should be paying €200 less based on the PRTB index I would be laughed out of it!

The law states that the landlord cannot raise the rent beyond market rate, which is defined at the rate at which a new tenant would be willing to pay for the property if it were to be put back on the market. As such, Daft is a much better indicator of the sort of money that the property would fetch now. You can drop a few quid off the Daft price for haggling room perhaps, although in many parts of Dublin at the moment supply is low and demand is high, so if anything the price shown on Daft is going to be the lowest price that a property will get, and its not unheard of for people to start bidding higher amounts than the adverstised price in order to secure a rental.

The_Conductor

foggy_lad wrote: »

this is incorrect, the rent figures on websites like daft.ie don't take haggling for a lower rent into account.

It really depends on where the apartment is- but more often than not these days- the haggling is between prospective tenants- and its upwards, not downwards. Have you been to an open day lately? Its like nothing I've ever seen. Six prospective tenants- with deposits with them- screaming higher and higher sums at a bewildered agent- who obviously goes with the highest one...... If you said it was like a cattle mart- I'd have to say, its nowhere near as civilised as that..........

QuiteInterestin

Rent can only be reviewed once in a 12 month period and not within the first 12 months of a tenancy

Residential tenancies act 2004

20.—(1) Subject to subsection (3), a review of the rent under the
tenancy of a dwelling may not occur—
(a) more frequently than once in each period of 12 months, nor
(b) in the period of 12 months beginning on the commencement
of the tenancy.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/pdf/2004/en.act.2004.0027.pdf

As others have said, you should open a case with the PRTB regarding rental increase. You should also reply in writing to the letter regarding the rental increase informing them that you do not accept the increase in rent and that you have referred the matter to the PRTB for dispute resolution stating the above section of the RTA 2004.

While a case is being resolved by the PRTB you remain paying the current rental rate and cannot asked to leave or penailised for taking a case with the PRTB. Hopefully when they look into it they will realise that they are incorrect in trying to increase the rent and will retract the rental increase, saving you the hassle of going through the PRTB.

ted1

djimi wrote: »

Rent can be reviewed once in a 12 month period.

If you feel that the increase is unjust then dispute it with the PRTB. They absolutely cannot terminate the lease for this, and you can remain paying the current rent until the case is heard some months from now. If you lose then you will be liable for the difference backdated to the date on the notice (the first notice; the other two are invalid), but if its true what you say that the average rent in your area is €875 then there isnt a hope that they will be allowed to raise the rent to €1100.

If his apartment is more desirable or a better spec the rent can be different. You can't base rents solely on averages, it's also a free market.

davo10

Playing devils advocate in this:

• if OP has a six month lease, she does not assume Part 4 tenancy until after this. The lease will conclude next week so isn't LL allowed to raise rent at the end of a lease agreement and before a new one begins, giving necessary notice?
• if OP does not agree with increase, the existing lease agreement ends before Part4 begins, can't LL ask OP to leave?
• Are the increases amendments to a single increase?, ie rather than 3 seperate increases, are these amendments to the amount the rent will go up when the new lease begins?
• For those that say the rent can only rise once in twelve months, if the OP has already started paying the higher amounts that would be correct but if the increases relate to a higher rent to be paid beginning next week when existing lease runs out, then the rent will have only have increased once.

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

• if OP has a six month lease, she does not assume Part 4 tenancy until after this. The lease will conclude next week so isn't LL allowed to raise rent at the end of a lease agreement and before a new one begins, giving necessary notice?

How often the rent can be reviewed has nothing to do with part 4 rights and its not necessarily tied into when a lease expires. Rent can be reviewed once in a 12 month period; in this case it was set at the start of the tenancy and therefore cannot be reviewed again until the tenancy is at least 12 months old.

davo10 wrote: »

• For those that say the rent can only rise once in twelve months, if the OP has already started paying the higher amounts that would be correct but if the increases relate to a higher rent to be paid beginning next week when existing lease runs out, then the rent will have only have increased once.

What I would be questioning is the validity of the notice letters. If the landlord revoked (formally, in writing) the first one and then a week later issued the third one then I would say that it is valid. As it stands, the first letter is still in force, and if the OP were to accept this notice then I dont see how the other two have any validity whatsoever.

marathonic

The PRTB rent figures are littered with tenancies registered up to four years ago where rents have changed but the PRTB hasn't been updated by the landlord.

davo10

djimi wrote: »

How often the rent can be reviewed has nothing to do with part 4 rights and its not necessarily tied into when a lease expires. Rent can be reviewed once in a 12 month period; in this case it was set at the start of the tenancy and therefore cannot be reviewed again until the tenancy is at least 12 months old.

.

That's my point djimi, the lease is for 6 months and is coming to the end of its term next week. OP does not have Part4 rights unless she stays longer and to stay longer does she have to pay the new rate as it will be a new lease agreement.

This would be a different scenario if the original lease was longer than 6 months and Part4 was automatically a right for the OP.

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

That's my point djimi, the lease is for 6 months and is coming to the end of its term next week. OP does not have Part4 rights unless she stays longer and to stay longer does she have to pay the new rate as it will be a new lease agreement.

This would be a different scenario if the original lease was longer than 6 months and Part4 was automatically a right for the OP.

A lease and a tenancy are two seperate entities. A tenancy does not come to an end just because a lease expires, and the rent can only be reviewed once in every 12 month period during the tenancy. If the OP wishes to remain on a part 4 once the 6 month lease expires then the tenancy will continue, and as such the rent cannot be reviewed for at least a further 6 months.

davo10

djimi wrote: »

A lease and a tenancy are two seperate entities. A tenancy does not come to an end just because a lease expires, and the rent can only be reviewed once in every 12 month period during the tenancy. If the OP wishes to remain on a part 4 once the 6 month lease expires then the tenancy will continue, and as such the rent cannot be reviewed for at least a further 6 months.

Part4 applies after a tenant has rented a property for AT LEAST 6 months, OP has a lease agreement for 6 months only which has not elapsed so is not entitled to Part4, yet.

LL has communicated with OP during the relevant time frame and is awaiting a reply. OP could still receive notice once LL receives the letter.

the world wonders

davo10 wrote: »

Part4 applies after a tenant has rented a property for AT LEAST 6 months, OP has a lease agreement for 6 months only which has not elapsed so is not entitled to Part4, yet.

LL has communicated with OP during the relevant time frame and is awaiting a reply. OP could still receive notice once LL receives the letter.

Read the law, it's perfectly clear. You are wrong.

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

Part4 applies after a tenant has rented a property for AT LEAST 6 months, OP has a lease agreement for 6 months only which has not elapsed so is not entitled to Part4, yet.

LL has communicated with OP during the relevant time frame and is awaiting a reply. OP could still receive notice once LL receives the letter.

Once again, the rent review has nothing whatsoever to do with part 4 rights (or lack thereof). If the tenancy continues beyond the 6 month lease (so that the issues becomes relevant) then the review cannot happen until the tenancy has existed for at least 12 months. It has nothing to do with lease type; be it part 4, fixed term or otherwise, the 12 month period relates to the time in which the tenancy exists (ie from the time the tenant moved in until the time they move out).

odds_on

davo10 wrote: »

Playing devils advocate in this:

• if OP has a six month lease, she does not assume Part 4 tenancy until after this. The lease will conclude next week so isn't LL allowed to raise rent at the end of a lease agreement and before a new one begins, giving necessary notice?
• if OP does not agree with increase, the existing lease agreement ends before Part4 begins, can't LL ask OP to leave?
• Are the increases amendments to a single increase?, ie rather than 3 seperate increases, are these amendments to the amount the rent will go up when the new lease begins?
• For those that say the rent can only rise once in twelve months, if the OP has already started paying the higher amounts that would be correct but if the increases relate to a higher rent to be paid beginning next week when existing lease runs out, then the rent will have only have increased once.

I think davo10 may be correct and the agents have sent 3 letters advising of an increase.

First of all, a notification of rent increase must state the amount of the new rent, not the amount of the increase. So from what the OP has said, it would be an invalid notice of rent increase.

Also, the tenant must be served with the notice of rent increase at least 28 days before the increase comes into effect. therefore, at least one of the OP's notices is invalid, if not 2 of them.

davo10

the world wonders wrote: »

Read the law, it's perfectly clear. You are wrong.

Which statement is wrong?

davo10

djimi wrote: »

Once again, the rent review has nothing whatsoever to do with part 4 rights (or lack thereof). If the tenancy continues beyond the 6 month lease (so that the issues becomes relevant) then the review cannot happen until the tenancy has existed for at least 12 months. It has nothing to do with lease type; be it part 4, fixed term or otherwise, the 12 month period relates to the time in which the tenancy exists (ie from the time the tenant moved in until the time they move out).

Djimi, I understand that. My point again is that OP is not going to get to the twelve month marker as she has no right to tenancy beyond her six month lease. She can still get her notice. It's a tough position to be in, LL can give notice (this was why I mentioned Part4 as because OP assumed that she was entitled to it by writing to LL) because she has not reached the six month mark.

Grumpydwarf's OP has three main points:

• the desire to stay in property and have Part 4 tenancy rights.
• the legitimacy of a rent increase.
• the amount rent is increasing.

Taking each in reverse order, the rent must be at market rate, the rent increase is not legit but both these points are moot if OP cannot stay in the property and right now OP has no right to stay in the property beyond the lease because, you guessed it .......

drumswan

davo10 wrote: »

Djimi, I understand that. My point again is that OP is not going to get to the twelve month marker as she has no right to tenancy beyond her six month lease. She can still get her notice. It's a tough position to be in, LL can give notice (this was why I mentioned Part4 as because OP assumed that she was entitled to it by writing to LL) because she has not reached the six month mark.

Grumpydwarf's OP has three main points:

• the desire to stay in property and have Part 4 tenancy rights.
• the legitimacy of a rent increase.
• the amount rent is increasing.

Taking each in reverse order, the rent must be at market rate, the rent increase is not legit but both these points are moot if OP cannot stay in the property and right now OP has no right to stay in the property beyond the lease because, you guessed it .......

This forum is sometimes useful for highlighting the thought processes of the cowboys renting residential properties in Ireland. This is someones home you are talking about.

OP, a short note to the agent stating you are away or dealing with an emergency situation and will engage on return would be prudent in this situation. You'll be in a more secure position once Part 4 rights have accrued.

davo10

drumswan wrote: »

This forum is sometimes useful for highlighting the thought processes of the cowboys renting residential properties in Ireland. This is someones home you are talking about.

OP, a short note to the agent stating you are away or dealing with an emergency situation and will engage on return would be prudent in this situation. You'll be in a more secure position once Part 4 rights have accrued.

The irony of this post is staggering.

You are advising the OP to lie? Also, by doing that the LL would not be agreeing to renew her lease, he would be agreeing to postpone ending it for now as a gesture of goodwill. Besides which, all LL has to do is show that he sent notice by registered letter, it doesn't matter if the OP is "away" or dealing with an "emergency".

And it's only someone's home as long as they are renting it.

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

Djimi, I understand that. My point again is that OP is not going to get to the twelve month marker as she has no right to tenancy beyond her six month lease. She can still get her notice. It's a tough position to be in, LL can give notice (this was why I mentioned Part4 as because OP assumed that she was entitled to it by writing to LL) because she has not reached the six month mark.

Im not entirely sure that a landlord can give notice to coincide with the end of the 6 month fixed term lease. I have asked this question on several occasions and nobody, Threshold included, seem to know the answer for sure.

The way I see it, the lease is for six months, and notice cannot be given to coincide with a fixed term lease. This means that the earliest the tenant could be asked to leave the property is the first day of the 7th month, but seeing as how the tenant is entitled to be in the property until 23.59 on the day on which the notice is due to expire, they have acquired part 4 rights by being in the property for more than 6 months (albeit by a day) and as such the landlord can only terminate the tenancy by using the clauses as set out in the part 4 tenancy laws.

I would be interested to see a definitive ruling on this, because it very much seems to be a grey area.

davo10

djimi wrote: »

Im not entirely sure that a landlord can give notice to coincide with the end of the 6 month fixed term lease. I have asked this question on several occasions and nobody, Threshold included, seem to know the answer for sure.

The way I see it, the lease is for six months, and notice cannot be given to coincide with a fixed term lease. This means that the earliest the tenant could be asked to leave the property is the first day of the 7th month, but seeing as how the tenant is entitled to be in the property until 23.59 on the day on which the notice is due to expire, they have acquired part 4 rights by being in the property for more than 6 months (albeit by a day) and as such the landlord can only terminate the tenancy by using the clauses as set out in the part 4 tenancy laws.

I would be interested to see a definitive ruling on this, because it very much seems to be a grey area.

Ah, a term contract is for a specific term, not the term plus one day. If you want to be pedantic about it, a six month lease would end at the the exact time of the day six months after it was signed. And I do not see an issue with giving someone up to midnight on the day the contract ends to move out, do you?

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

Ah, a term contract is for a specific term, not the term plus one day. If you want to be pedantic about it, a six month lease would end at the the exact time of the day six months after it was signed.

A tenancy does end just because a fixed term lease has expired, and while the tenant has the option of saying to the landlord that they wish to end the tenancy on the day that the lease expires, the landlord does not have the same option.

davo10 wrote: »

And I do not see an issue with giving someone up to midnight on the day the contract ends to move out, do you?

A landlord must give appropriate notice if they wish to end a tenancy, and seeing as how this notice cannot fall during the term of a fixed term lease, I dont see how a six month lease would not see the tenant enter into a part 4 tenancy, as there is no way that the landlord can prevent it from happening. At best, the landlord can only give notice to terminate the day after the lease has expired, and by that point the tenant has acquired part 4 rights.

davo10

Djimi, leaving aside the Part4 issue, that comes later, why is it exactly that if a LL has given the required notice you believe that a six month lease cannot end at midnight on the last day of the term?

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

Djimi, leaving aside the Part4 issue, that comes later, why is it exactly that if a LL has given the required notice you believe that a lease cannot end at midnight on the last day of the term?

Because notice cannot be served to end during a fixed term lease. 23.59 on the last day of the lease is still during the term of the lease.

davo10

djimi wrote: »

Because notice cannot be served to end during a fixed term lease. 23.59 on the last day of the lease is still during the term of the lease.

The lease expires at midnight, if LL gives notice it will not be renewed, why then would it go on to the next day?

grumpydwarf

I am worried if I dispute the increase the letting agent will give me notice to leave and the 28 days for disputing the increase ends the day before the six months end. I hope if I dispute the increase by letter the receivers (as owners) by the time they get around to looking at it I will have entered into Part 4 (the receiver is PWC). The PRTB website said to notify the landlord, not the letting agent.

The_Morrigan

davo10 wrote: »

The lease expires at midnight, if LL gives notice it will not be renewed, why then would it go on to the next day?

...because the landlord can not terminate the fixed term lease while it is still active unless the tenant has been in breach of the lease.

http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/terminating-a-fixed-term-tenancy

Technically this means he can only serve notice to quit on six months +1 day and if the tenant has already given notice to stay and operate under part 4, instead of renewing the lease for another 6 months or more, then the landlord must adhere to the termination provisions for a Part 4 tenancy.

djimi

davo10 wrote: »

The lease expires at midnight, if LL gives notice it will not be renewed, why then would it go on to the next day?

There is no such thing as the landlord not renewing the lease. Either they terminate the tenancy, or it continues on. They cannot terminate a tenancy while a fixed term lease is still in effect (which is what would be happening if they said to leave on the last day of a 6 month lease), which means that the earliest the tenant can be asked to leave is the first day of the 7th month, at which point they have acquired part 4 rights.

odds_on

The_Morrigan wrote: »

...because the landlord can not terminate the fixed term lease while it is still active unless the tenant has been in breach of the lease.

http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/terminating-a-fixed-term-tenancy

Technically this means he can only serve notice to quit on six months +1 day and if the tenant has already given notice to stay and operate under part 4, instead of renewing the lease for another 6 months or more, then the landlord must adhere to the termination provisions for a Part 4 tenancy.

Under which section of the RTA or other law, does it say that a landlord cannot serve a notice of termination during a fixed term lease provided the NoT expires during a subsequent Part 4 tenancy?