Tenant left behind tons of rubbish

whereto now

My tenant was due to move out on Mon but I discovered 2 days ago that she had already moved, she had stopped answering my calls so I knew something was up..... I went to the house today and to say its filthy would be an understatement !! The house is not my issue though, I can deal with that, although how anyone can leave a house in that condition.....don't get me started.....

The garden shed is packed and I mean packed with black bags full of rubbish, I've never seen anything like it, the garden has about another 30 bags of rubbish plus loose rubbish all over the place.....

The tenant was on rent allowance and I'd like to know if there is any point in reporting this to the council, I know I'm screwed but I'd like to save another landlord this problem if I can....I have contacted PRTB so I'll wait to see what they say....

Anyone thinking that I'm one of those bad landlords is welcome to come and see the mess left by this person, who's rent every worker including myself is paying for... I consider myself a good landlord and try to work with my tenants, if I could I would sell up and never have this hassle but the house is'nt worth what I paid for it so I'm stuck with it..... thats not my gripe...
I am now going to have to pay for a skip and pay at least 2 people to clear out this shed and garden, its way too big a job for me on my own.......

So rant over.... my question is ... Is there any point in reporting this to the council or am I just wasting my time ????
I feel better now after that little rant...... glass of wine now I think....

Penny Tration

Did you take a deposit from the tenant?

If so, keep invoices for all work carried out beyond normal wear and tear, and deduct the cost from their deposit.

FourFourRED

Thems the breaks

PLUG71

Scumbags!!

It happening everywhere to be honest!

Hope you got a deposit?

If you did I would make sure they did not see a cent of it again..

whereto now

Aodhagan wrote: »

Thems the breaks

If you read my post you would see that I said I realise theres nothing I can do but my question was is there any point in reporting this to the council to save some other landlord the same headache.....

whereto now

green_screen wrote: »

Did you take a deposit from the tenant?

If so, keep invoices for all work carried out beyond normal wear and tear, and deduct the cost from their deposit.

Yeah in a perfect world that'd be my solution too but she has'nt paid any rent in a month so theres nothing left there I'm afraid.....I just really want to try to stop her doing this to someone else......

PLUG71

whereto now wrote: »

Yeah in a perfect world that'd be my solution too but she has'nt paid any rent in a month so theres nothing left there I'm afraid.....I just really want to try to stop her doing this to someone else......

I see these stunts day after day where I live and i'm afraid its like p1ssing in the wind with these types of people!

Did you use an agency, maybe if you did you could make like difficult for them be complaining to the agency?!!

whereto now

PLUG71 wrote: »

I see these stunts day after day where I live and i'm afraid its like p1ssing in the wind with these types of people!

Did you use an agency, maybe if you did you could make like difficult for them be complaining to the agency?!!

No did'nt use an agency.... I'll be contacting the council and social welfare on Monday,I'm just going to get the place sorted and put it behind me but I won';t be as friendly to the next tenants which is sad but I'm not going through this again...
Thanks for the replies, I think I just needed to get it off my chest.....

PLUG71

whereto now wrote: »

No did'nt use an agency.... I'll be contacting the council and social welfare on Monday,I'm just going to get the place sorted and put it behind me but I won';t be as friendly to the next tenants which is sad but I'm not going through this again...
Thanks for the replies, I think I just needed to get it off my chest.....

Been there bud and its not a nice situation.

Maybe try to get private letters the next time that work and are less likely to trash your house/

whereto now

PLUG71 wrote: »

Been there bud and its not a nice situation.

Maybe try to get private letters the next time that work and are less likely to trash your house/

Yeah thats the plan for next time, feeling better now, don't know if it was the wine or boards..... thanks all...

Fratton Fred

Happened to a friend a couple of years ago. They left behind a Jack Russell as !

Mrs OBumble

What would you hope to achieve by telling the council?

Chances are they are on the housing list - so if the council got the idea that there's a problem with the tenant, then they might stay on the list (and thus in private rental with another LL) for longer.

I'm actually surprised you didn't get complaints about rats from the neighbours and the council already.

homerno

whereto now wrote: »

Yeah thats the plan for next time, feeling better now, don't know if it was the wine or boards..... thanks all...

Been there got the tee shirt , Rent allowance tenants are too high a risk , The prtb are are just money grabbers so landlords are left high and dry ,, you stand a much better chance with working tenants, sad but true . I am a landlord many years and had to learn the hard way. I was tempted to advertise a property on daft a few years back using pictures of the house taken the day an african lady left it like wild pigs had been let run wild in the house for months with just a note saying it would be available as soon as it was revamped in the coming weeks, You got away light my friend , chalk it down to experience .

UserNo1

blah blah blah

Santa Cruz

And people wonder why landlords wont take rent allowance tenants

The_Morrigan

Folks if this turns into another RA tenant bashing thread I will lock it up.

Think_then_talk

Rent allowance tenants are the not all the same, In every walk of life you will get dirty rotten people, However we now ask for eight weeks in advance. If they don't own it they don't respect it.

martinn123

This happened to me a few years ago, rubbish, nappies, and cinders from the fire, all in the garden. Grass was two feet high, carpets had been used to toilet train the children, and curtains to wipe their bottom.

Strangely they also left a wreck of a car, in my driveway.

So a little detective work, found out their new address, I packed all the rubbish, nappies bags of Krap, etc, into the car, barely room for the driver, and towed it to the new home. Might have been a rat in there as well.

Knocked on the door, and said, " you left this stuff behind you "

Strangely their new landlord was a Guard, don't think they saw out the lease.

LFC Murphy

You could ring the welfare officer and report. I had a similar issue a few years back... Fun thing was I had the tenants ring me pleading for me to retract so they could regain RA...

And no not bashing RA, as my current tenants are RA and are a dream (fingers crossed)

_Kaiser_

whereto now wrote: »

No did'nt use an agency.... I'll be contacting the council and social welfare on Monday,I'm just going to get the place sorted and put it behind me but I won';t be as friendly to the next tenants which is sad but I'm not going through this again...
Thanks for the replies, I think I just needed to get it off my chest.....

First off, I completely sympathise - the mess you've been left is completely unacceptable by any standards and I'd definitely report it and keep any deposit to cover the costs of cleaning it up.

BUT.. to hold your NEXT tenant "responsible" is equally unacceptable in my opinion. Sure, once bitten twice shy and all that, but all that's needed here is closer vetting, occasional visits to inspect (pre-arranged of course!), and a final inspection before they leave.

Not every tenant is a dirty scumbag and to assume they are by refusing certain tenants automatically, demanding higher deposits (with no security for the tenant if you go into bankruptcy in the meantime, spend it, or decide to otherwise keep it without just cause) and so on, is equally a bad idea - to put it another way, innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Don't forget tenants are equally taking a chance with you. You do sound like a decent sort to be fair but if I met you tonight to look at your place how would I know that? I could proceed based on the idea that you'll be another one of those cowboy landlords that are all too common, OR I could take you at your word, expect you to be straight with me, and go from there - which would you prefer?

I personally have always dealt fairly and honestly with landlords, and I deal direct with them - none of this agency muppetry where you are left chasing people who don't give a toss either way - but in return for that I expect a certain standard, responsiveness and fairness as well.. it is after all a pretty expensive service you're offering - not the get rich quick/easy money scheme that too many landlords think it is. In return I treat the place as if it was my own and it's kept as good or better than when I got it.

Just suggesting that you keep some perspective here and look at it from both sides before you go turning away potentially excellent tenants purely because they fit some preconceived notion.

homerno

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

First off, I completely sympathise - the mess you've been left is completely unacceptable by any standards and I'd definitely report it and keep any deposit to cover the costs of cleaning it up.

BUT.. to hold your NEXT tenant "responsible" is equally unacceptable in my opinion. Sure, once bitten twice shy and all that, but all that's needed here is closer vetting, occasional visits to inspect (pre-arranged of course!), and a final inspection before they leave.

Not every tenant is a dirty scumbag and to assume they are by refusing certain tenants automatically, demanding higher deposits (with no security for the tenant if you go into bankruptcy in the meantime, spend it, or decide to otherwise keep it without just cause) and so on, is equally a bad idea - to put it another way, innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Don't forget tenants are equally taking a chance with you. You do sound like a decent sort to be fair but if I met you tonight to look at your place how would I know that? I could proceed based on the idea that you'll be another one of those cowboy landlords that are all too common, OR I could take you at your word, expect you to be straight with me, and go from there - which would you prefer?

I personally have always dealt fairly and honestly with landlords, and I deal direct with them - none of this agency muppetry where you are left chasing people who don't give a toss either way - but in return for that I expect a certain standard, responsiveness and fairness as well.. it is after all a pretty expensive service you're offering - not the get rich quick/easy money scheme that too many landlords think it is. In return I treat the place as if it was my own and it's kept as good or better than when I got it.

Just suggesting that you keep some perspective here and look at it from both sides before you go turning away potentially excellent tenants purely because they fit some preconceived notion.

In the ideal world there is nothing wrong with your advice, Unfortunately because of the prtb being our only port of call which is completely unfair and useless to any landlord if the op wants to survive he or she needs to smarten up or face the possibility of getting themselves into a situtation where they could quickly become bankrupt, 3 months up front is fast becoming the norm along with two previous landlord references , work references copies of passports , and ( 3 months bank statements, which i find a step too far?) even with all this there is still a risk of getting burned , however until the prtb office is closed down sadly these inportant steps could and should be used to lesson the risks .

_Kaiser_

homerno wrote: »

In the ideal world there is nothing wrong with your advice, Unfortunately because of the prtb being our only port of call which is completely unfair and useless to any landlord if the op wants to survive he or she needs to smarten up or face the possibility of getting themselves into a situtation where they could quickly become bankrupt, 3 months up front is fast becoming the norm along with two previous landlord references , work references copies of passports , and ( 3 months bank statements, which i find a step too far?) even with all this there is still a risk of getting burned , however until the prtb office is closed down sadly these inportant steps could and should be used to lesson the risks .

3 months deposit could be what? 3/4 grand in Dublin? I can't see many tenants handing that over with no security they'll get it back at all

I wouldn't be giving anyone my bank statements or passport details - I might as well just hand it out on the street

This may be the "norm" for some of these landlords with "notions" in Dublin but I can tell you as a professional with a damn good job and spotless rental history anyone who asked me for that sort of stuff would be told to keep their palace.

Until there's the same security for tenants as landlords are looking for, anyone who would hand over the stuff you mention is crazy IMO

ballyharpat

I have to say that I agree with most people not wanting to let to people on RA-the main reason for me would be wear and tear, if people are not working they are going to be in the house a lot more and put items to their limit, also, if there is a problem with RA, there is nothing the landlord can do about it and not much the tenent can do either. Having said that, I have two properties let out at the moment. One apartment to two single guys they pay the rent and have no problems-touch wood. But the place is a typical sweaty bachelor pad with boxes and beer bottles etc piled up-but not my business really. I got them through a friend of mine that works with one of them.
MY other place is a house that I have let out to a single mother with a 2 year old. She had no references and no history of renting, It didn't bother me, I checked out her Facebook page, saw that her cousin was married to someone I went to school with, I rang them and said would they stand by her if there were any problems with rent or damage to the property and they guaranteed that my place would be looked after, it's been 3 months and the place is great and she is very happy.

I also stipulate in the contracts that I will be giving a walk through to check for any minor repairs that need to be done-after all, it's a rental, they do not care as much about my property as I do....

Both properties were let within 2 hours of advertising and 1/2 the deposits were given before the move in date. I would have them both let in a few hours again if I wanted.....

homerno

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

3 months deposit could be what? 3/4 grand in Dublin? I can't see many tenants handing that over with no security they'll get it back at all

I wouldn't be giving anyone my bank statements or passport details - I might as well just hand it out on the street

This may be the "norm" for some of these landlords with "notions" in Dublin but I can tell you as a professional with a damn good job and spotless rental history anyone who asked me for that sort of stuff would be told to keep their palace.

Until there's the same security for tenants as landlords are looking for, anyone who would hand over the stuff you mention is crazy IMO

regarding your( notions) I recently changed tenants in sereral properties due to rent increases, i looked for all the above including the bank statements ,(I did not look at them however but it eased my mind a little that they could provide them) If i had ten times the amount of properties to rent i could still have let them all, in fairness they were all in the dublin area,,, i hate the way everything has changed for the worst in ireland , when i started out everything was done with a handshake and im a man of my word ,, sadly them days are gone,, its ironic the prtb are there to protect tenants when in fact they cause more trouble for tenants than anything else, and put many accidental landlord/ladys into horrible stressfull unnessary situtations mentally and financially .regards

makeorbrake

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

all that's needed here is closer vetting...
Don't forget tenants are equally taking a chance with you.

So closer vetting yet both parties are still taking a chance, right? Therefore, closer vetting still doesn't give the landlord any guarantee.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

BUT.. to hold your NEXT tenant "responsible" is equally unacceptable in my opinion.

You cannot seriously propose to the OP that they don't protect themselves after what has happened. From a tenants perspective, sure - it's not ideal if landlords feel they have to up the amount of deposit taken. However, clearly this is not coming about without good reason, right? You should channel your dissatisfaction with this type of outcome to the PRTB. Clearly, the blame for this lies at their door. If they dealt with things properly and in a timely manner, then there may be no need for larger deposits.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

I could proceed based on the idea that you'll be another one of those cowboy landlords that are all too common, OR I could take you at your word, expect you to be straight with me, and go from there - which would you prefer?

The OP can come back and respond. However, if I was in their shoes, on the basis that the PRTB offers no protection, I'd take the required deposit off you (required being enough to cover eventualities such as this one).
On the 'cowboy landlords' bit, clearly there are equally a substantial number of errant tenants around!

Kaiser2000 wrote:

it is after all a pretty expensive service you're offering - not the get rich quick/easy money scheme that too many landlords think it is.

Easy money? Get rich quick? You honestly think there's anyone out there that thinks that!?

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Just suggesting that you keep some perspective here and look at it from both sides before you go turning away potentially excellent tenants purely because they fit some preconceived notion.

Preconceived notions?

suave.4u

whereto now wrote: »

My tenant was due to move out on Mon but I discovered 2 days ago that she had already moved, she had stopped answering my calls so I knew something was up..... I went to the house today and to say its filthy would be an understatement !! The house is not my issue though, I can deal with that, although how anyone can leave a house in that condition.....don't get me started.....

The garden shed is packed and I mean packed with black bags full of rubbish, I've never seen anything like it, the garden has about another 30 bags of rubbish plus loose rubbish all over the place.....

The tenant was on rent allowance and I'd like to know if there is any point in reporting this to the council, I know I'm screwed but I'd like to save another landlord this problem if I can....I have contacted PRTB so I'll wait to see what they say....

Anyone thinking that I'm one of those bad landlords is welcome to come and see the mess left by this person, who's rent every worker including myself is paying for... I consider myself a good landlord and try to work with my tenants, if I could I would sell up and never have this hassle but the house is'nt worth what I paid for it so I'm stuck with it..... thats not my gripe...
I am now going to have to pay for a skip and pay at least 2 people to clear out this shed and garden, its way too big a job for me on my own.......

So rant over.... my question is ... Is there any point in reporting this to the council or am I just wasting my time ????
I feel better now after that little rant...... glass of wine now I think....

Sorry but I want to hear the other side of the story as well.

_Kaiser_

makeorbrake wrote: »

So closer vetting yet both parties are still taking a chance, right? Therefore, closer vetting still doesn't give the landlord any guarantee.

Well to be blunt, there ARE no guarantees in life and certainly not property. If you (not you personally) aren't prepared to accept the potential risk, then maybe getting into landlording isn't for you

You cannot seriously propose to the OP that they don't protect themselves after what has happened. From a tenants perspective, sure - it's not ideal if landlords feel they have to up the amount of deposit taken. However, clearly this is not coming about without good reason, right? You should channel your dissatisfaction with this type of outcome to the PRTB. Clearly, the blame for this lies at their door. If they dealt with things properly and in a timely manner, then there may be no need for larger deposits.
The OP can come back and respond. However, if I was in their shoes, on the basis that the PRTB offers no protection, I'd take the required deposit off you (required being enough to cover eventualities such as this one).
On the 'cowboy landlords' bit, clearly there are equally a substantial number of errant tenants around!

I've no problem with a landlord protecting themselves but that doesn't absolve them of THEIR responsibility to vet their prospective tenants properly first rather than just accepting the first one who'll pay up

The PRTB are equally useless for tenants. Oh sure, the laws are there and in theory there's a process but have a read of some of the threads here to see how much weight they carry in the real world - for both landlords AND tenants

As I keep saying, what's needed here is for the rental sector to be taken seriously and treated as a professional service by ALL SIDES - landlords, tenants and regulators/government. Until that happens it'll continue to be "cowboy country" with amateur landords and bad tenants abound.

Easy money? Get rich quick? You honestly think there's anyone out there that thinks that!?

Yep, or are you forgetting the "good times" when everyone thought they too could be a landlord. You only have to look at the BTL arrears situation to see how many got into it without thinking it through properly, or the "reluctant landlords" who bought unsuitable property to get on the "ladder" and are now stuck with it and renting it out without realising their responsibilities

Preconceived notions?

Indeed, such as "all RA tenants are wasters and not worth the effort!"

makeorbrake

suave.4u wrote: »

Sorry but I want to hear the other side of the story as well.

Forget my query in my last post re. preconceived notions. You've just clarified that.

makeorbrake

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Well to be blunt, there ARE no guarantees in life and certainly not property. If you (not you personally) aren't prepared to accept the potential risk, then maybe getting into landlording isn't for you

Ok, so the OP should learn nothing from this experience and change nothing in their approach to letting out a property? Ah sorry, they should carry out closer vetting.
Yet you say this =>

Kaiser2000 wrote:

I wouldn't be giving anyone my bank statements or passport details - I might as well just hand it out on the street

So you would be the landlord with that sixth sense - nobody would get a dodgy reference past you right? ...or if they did, oh well, then - take the hit, is what you propose.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Yep, or are you forgetting the "good times" when everyone thought they too could be a landlord. You only have to look at the BTL arrears situation to see how many got into it without thinking it through properly, or the "reluctant landlords" who bought unsuitable property to get on the "ladder" and are now stuck with it and renting it out without realising their responsibilities

This is 2014. What you are talking about is now historic - and it only serves to underscore my point i.e. there's no easy money to be had here. As an aside, you're also talking about people that were speculating on the rising tide of property prices (because they certainly weren't motivated by rental yields!) rather than landlords who approach it principally from the point of view of rental income.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

The PRTB are equally useless for tenants. Oh sure, the laws are there and in theory there's a process but have a read of some of the threads here to see how much weight they carry in the real world - for both landlords AND tenants

Agreed.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Indeed, such as "all RA tenants are wasters and not worth the effort!"

There are additional issues with RA tenants. Additional wear and tare being one. Issues with payment (not necessarily the tenants fault) being another.

_Kaiser_

makeorbrake wrote: »

Ok, so the OP should learn nothing from this experience and change nothing in their approach to letting out a property? Ah sorry, they should carry out closer vetting.
Yet you say this =>
So you would be the landlord with that sixth sense - nobody would get a dodgy reference past you right? ...or if they did, oh well, then - take the hit, is what you propose.

Pretty much. Sorry, but there are no guarantees in life. You weigh up the risks and you take your chances and hopefully it works out - but sometimes it doesn't and that's life.

However in the OP's case, he should also make regular inspections of the property (within reason and always agreed in advance) and a final check before a tenant leaves. In that way he can help mitigate that risk.

This is 2014. What you are talking about is now historic - and it only serves to underscore my point i.e. there's no easy money to be had here. As an aside, you're also talking about people that were speculating on the rising tide of property prices (because they certainly weren't motivated by rental yields!) rather than landlords who approach it principally from the point of view of rental income.

It may have started in 2006 but the effects are still very much being felt in 2014. Landlords who got into it as an investment without looking into it properly or knowing their rights and obligations, or who are forced into it because the place they bought is no longer suitable and/or they are struggling to meet the mortgage themselves

These people haven't gone away.

There are additional issues with RA tenants. Additional wear and tare being one. Issues with payment (not necessarily the tenants fault) being another.

Sorry, but "wear and tear" is another fact of life you should accept as a landlord. What do you propose? Hours of occupancy?

Besides, most places I've seen are very clearly fitted out to the minimum standard required with cheap furniture and appliances. It doesn't actually make sense as the risk is higher that you'll need to replace/fix the stuff sooner anyway through no other reason than it IS cheaper/not as good.

I'm not saying the place needs to be kitted out with top-dollar stuff but again, weigh up the risks and proceed accordingly - OR just rent it unfurnished or with the very basics.

ballyharpat

Sorry, but "wear and tear" is another fact of life you should accept as a landlord. What do you propose? Hours of occupancy?
No, the landlord cannot suggest or impose 'hours of occupancy' however, I would much rather have a working couple with one child in my 2/3 bedroom property than 3 couples. If I have the choice between the two, guess which one I will choose?

If you rent a car, you are allowed a certain mileage, when you go above that mileage, you have to pay extra for the 'wear and tear'

I can minimise my wear and tear by doing my own 'Vetting'