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

Buying a house with tenants still in place

Options
  • 10-03-2014 2:49pm
    #1
    c-dog
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭


    Hi All,


    Looking to see if anyone has any experience with this;

    We are interested in buying a house that is being sold with tenants still in place. It is a repossessed house and the tenants have been there for 2 years ( only signed lease for one year ). It would be a family home so we have no interest in keeping the tenants. They have been told they will have to leave and they say they are currently looking for alternative accommodation.

    The eastern european family living there gave a different impression, they didnt leave the house for any of the viewings and walked around pointing out faults to turn people off. We got the impression they didnt want to go anywhere.

    Our solicitor instructed us to go ahead and she can address issue's at contract stage but I am just wondering if anyone has any experience or knowledge of house sales like this?

    What are the new owners rights in terms of removing tenants?


    Thanks,
    c


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    GavMan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭GavMan


    I'm not expert but I think if you buy the house, you just give them the required notice period once you've closed the sale and then they have to go, I'd imagine. Open to being corrected.

    My concern would be that if they're that keen on staying and you give them notice, they might get a bit PO'd and thrash the place or something stupid like. Then again, that's only speculation on my part.


  • Options
    #3
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Firstly unless your buying for cash forget about it.

    Bank wont allow you drawdown a mortgage without vacant posession so continuing to the contract stage is just going to cost you money in legal fees if you are expecting to buy with a mortgage.

    secondly you have no additional rights as owners in removing tenants to that of the current LL. Notice can be given legitimatly under part 4 rules as you want to move in there. You can give notice, followed by notice of eviction if they refuse to move, but if they refuse to move you unfortunatly will have to go via the courts to evict them.

    Like the alst psoter said Id also be concerned that they may thrash the place on you. Id be very careful if I were you with proceding here.


  • Options
    #4
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    If they dont want to leave then you are going to have a big mess on your hands. There is a fair chance that your lender wont let you draw down the money unless you have vacant possession (assuming you are buying with a mortgage), and even if they did then you would become the landlord if the tenants were still in occupation when you bought.

    If they dig their heals in and decide not to leave then whether it before or after you buy, you could be looking at a year or even more before you take possession of the house by the time everything is sorted out to legally remove them from the property.


  • Options
    #5
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    GavMan wrote: »
    I'm not expert but I think if you buy the house, you just give them the required notice period once you've closed the sale and then they have to go, I'd imagine. Open to being corrected.

    In theory. You can give them the required notice, but if they decide that they are not going anywhere then its a case of chasing them through the PRTB and eventually the courts before you can legally remove them from the property. This is not going to be a quick process if they cling on until the bitter end...


  • Options
    #6
    subway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,131 ✭✭✭subway


    ask for vacant possession. do not sign without it.

    your solicitor will advise you, but you could be in for a nightmare situation if you dont get it.

    current landlord has rights to issue notice on his tenants as house is for sale. if they refuse to leave he will have to deal with it.

    if you take over without vacant possession you will have to evict them, if they refuse to leave you will go through prtb, if they refuse to pay rent you will be left out of pocket.

    worst case:
    could be around 12 months to get them out if they wont go. you will be paying mortgage etc and they can live rent free. if you do somehting wrong during this, you could have an illegal eviciton and be sued by the tenant.

    its just notr worth it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    joejobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭joejobrien


    dont buy a proplem . If bank is selling its them has to get tenants out NOT YOU.Simlpe as that. Therefore sign nothing and the longer you hold out the bank will move eventually on the tenants. Why should you do the dirty work :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #8
    c-dog
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭c-dog


    Thanks for the replies, makes a lot of sense when you think about it to be refused a mortgage unless you have vacant possession and we would be looking at a mortgage.

    Has anyone ever been in this situation and if so did the bank selling the house agree to vacant possession and took care of the tenants?


  • Options
    #9
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    c-dog wrote: »
    Has anyone ever been in this situation and if so did the bank selling the house agree to vacant possession and took care of the tenants?

    The problem you face is that what the bank agree to and what they are able to deliver are two very different things. It all depends on the tenants and how they react to being asked to leave. They might be perfectly fine, accept the termination and be gone by the end of their notice period. Or they might decide to dig their heals in and stick it out until they are dragged from the property. The bank have no special powers in this situation; they must follow the same procedure as anyone else when seeking possession of a property from tenants, and as such it could prove to be a lengthy process if the tenants decide to be difficult. There is little real way of knowing how it is going to play out either.


  • Options
    #10
    bigblackmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 145 ✭✭bigblackmug


    Don't "ask". Demand Vacant Possession. Sellers solicitor will do what is necessary even if the tenants aren't co-operating.
    If they can't sell house to you with vacant possession then there is a serious problem.


  • Options
    #11
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    bigblackmug wrote: »
    Don't "ask". Demand Vacant Possession. Sellers solicitor will do what is necessary even if the tenants aren't co-operating.
    If they can't sell house to you with vacant possession then there is a serious problem.

    Sellers solicitor isnt above the law. Demanding wont do any good if the tenants decide not to cooperate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    bigblackmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 145 ✭✭bigblackmug


    djimi wrote: »
    Sellers solicitor isnt above the law. Demanding wont do any good if the tenants decide not to cooperate.
    exactly! buy a house, don't buy a problem. if house can't be sold without problem then back out.


  • Options
    #13
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    bigblackmug wrote: »
    exactly! buy a house, don't buy a problem. if house can't be sold without problem then back out.

    I agree. But dont have any expectations that demanding anything is going to yield results, because it wont. The seller knows the score; they will want the tenants out before the house can be sold, however they are bound to the same laws as everyone else when seeking to make it happen.


  • Options
    #14
    bigblackmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 145 ✭✭bigblackmug


    No really you need to demand. It focuses the mind of the Seller's solicitor. They don't get paid if the sale doesn't complete so while they may not be carrying the cost of the house they will assume they'll get the conveyancing done eventually and pick up their fee unless the buyer makes it clear they have no time to waste and no tolerance for being messed around.


  • Options
    #15
    joejobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭joejobrien


    bigblackmug wrote: »
    No really you need to demand. It focuses the mind of the Seller's solicitor. They don't get paid if the sale doesn't complete so while they may not be carrying the cost of the house they will assume they'll get the conveyancing done eventually and pick up their fee unless the buyer makes it clear they have no time to waste and no tolerance for being messed around.
    Fully agree with you. The banks has two options
    1. The Bank moves tenants out in the proper means OR
    2.They will convince you to move THEIR PROPLEM if you are not able to stand up to them. Make up your own conculision????


  • Options
    #16
    subway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,131 ✭✭✭subway


    djimi wrote: »
    Sellers solicitor isnt above the law. Demanding wont do any good if the tenants decide not to cooperate.

    they don't need to be above the law.
    it's not unknown or illegal for a seller to offer a sitting tenant some money to buy them out if the tenant is not planning on leaving.


  • Options
    #17
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    subway wrote: »
    they don't need to be above the law.
    it's not unknown or illegal for a seller to offer a sitting tenant some money to buy them out if the tenant is not planning on leaving.

    That's fair enough I suppose. I read "do what is necessary" to involve baseball bats and heavy set men :pac:


Advertisement