Tenant left behind tons of rubbish

makeorbrake

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

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.

lol. The easiest way the OP can mitigate risk (alongside more thorough vetting) is by taking whatever deposit is required to assuage such potential loss. That's definitely what I would do were I in their shoes - despite your protests.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

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.

Agreed on the regular inspections. As regards 'a final check before the tenant leaves', please read the OP's initial post. This 'type' of tenant doesn't facilitate the final inspection you have in mind!

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

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

Let's put this back in it's proper context, shall we? This was mentioned with regard to whether people should have 'preconceived notions' (your words) about RA tenants. You say wear and tear is a fact of life. I say, fine....with the addendum that wear and tear will be substantially greater with a RA tenant. Would it be fair enough to have this as a 'preconceived notion'?

Kaiser2000 wrote:

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.

We're back to your point re. life and it being full of risks and the need to mitigate risk. Clearly, many landlords feel the need to mitigate risk by furnishing with sub-standard items.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

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.

Preaching to the converted re. renting unfurnished. However, it's going to take a culture change in Ireland to bring that about - and most likely we'll be waiting forever before it actually happens.

foggy_lad

whereto now wrote: »

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.....

Yes I would report it to the local council as they will be happy to note that on any housing application for her, I would also get in touch with the local rubbish collection company and see if they will give you a price to clear the shed contents into the bin lorry, it would fit better in the compactor than in a skip or two and might save you some money.

uck51js9zml2yt

A family member rents several houses. I've lost track of the times he's been burnt by working professionals.
Strangely he's never had a problem with those on RA.

Rented myself for a few years a long time ago and was out of work for a while. When I moved out the landlady didn't even have to clean a cup in tthe flat whereas my neighbour was out working all day and she had to dump everything in the flat and redecorate when he left.

Mrs W

We had a similar one a few months ago, even though the bin was paid for she decided to hide it all in the attic
Had her mams address that she moved to so delivered the whole lot of all the **** she left to the front garden!

I'd love it if there was a registry of tenants, like a credit check?

murphaph

OP look for at least 2 and better 3 months deposit next time. Look for work references which you actually verify. Look up work in phone book, don't use number given on reference. The second last landlord's reference is much more important than the last one. Check Facebook page. Get copies of ID and yes...require some proof they can at least theoretically afford the place. Redacted bank statements showing salary are fine. PRTB won't protect landlords. We have to protect ourselves.

getaroom

I had a similar issue 3 years ago. The tenant left some charming graffiti over every wall - in 2foot letters.
I opened a face book page (in his own name) and posted the photos of the property along with info taken from an old BEBO account I found.
I thought I would have heard from the Data Commissioner - but I did not. The FB page is still live.
I hope it has had a bearing on his employment prospects or even future property rentals.

murphaph

Mrs W wrote: »

I'd love it if there was a registry of tenants, like a credit check?

Should be a registry of tenants and landlords alike to be honest. Let the chancers on both sides find each other I say. Until that day each "side" will have to play the cards they've been dealt. LLs have zero power once a tenancy commences, so they need to get their act together as much as humanly possible BEFORE it commences to discourage anyone who might be a threat to your property/livelihood.

Borderfox

Left in the same position a while ago, I got emerald waste to remove everything for me

_Kaiser_

murphaph wrote: »

OP look for at least 2 and better 3 months deposit next time. Look for work references which you actually verify. Look up work in phone book, don't use number given on reference. The second last landlord's reference is much more important than the last one. Check Facebook page. Get copies of ID and yes...require some proof they can at least theoretically afford the place. Redacted bank statements showing salary are fine. PRTB won't protect landlords. We have to protect ourselves.

Ah see this now is exactly the problem..

Tell me, what "protection" does a tenant have from an unscrupulous landlord or at all really?

- If I'm renting a place from someone and the washing machine decides to flood the place and the landlord sits on the problem or ignores it entirely what recourse do I have?

- If the landlord decides to issue eviction notices because they want to rent the place for a few hundred more next month, what protection have I got from that - especially if they say they're actually planning to move back but later "change their mind"?

- If a landlord decides they're gonna keep my deposit for some nonsense reason, what real option have I got to get it back?

- If the landlord goes bankrupt, where's my protection?

Don't tell me the PRTB is "protecting" tenants because you only have to read the threads here to see how useless and ineffective they are for BOTH sides.

See what you and others like you are forgetting is that a rental property is a tenant's HOME as well (not just their investment/side income) and most people renting (especially in Dublin) don't have the luxury of plodding through the PRTB process for a year - only for any judgement to be ignored in the real world anyway - and most certainly couldn't afford to have 3-5k tied up for months at a time either if the landlord decides they don't want to give it back or has spent it, or indeed gone bankrupt!

The reason the laws are (supposedly) weighted in favour of tenants is because they have a lot more to lose than a landlord who will still have a roof over their own head regardless - even if they themselves aren't paying their mortgage, whereas a tenant can be issued notice immediately for non/late payment of even a single month's rent.

As for your idea of work references, if my employer told you anything beyond the fact that I worked there they would be in breach of data privacy and ultimately that check means feck all anyway.. I could be made redundant or be given a pay cut in the morning - are you going to sue my employer for the rent?

Facebook? Not everyone uses it and anyone with any sense will have it all locked down so that won't tell you anything - or would that be a sign that this tenant must have something to hide rather than them just valuing their privacy against total strangers?

Would you be willing as a landlord to hand over the same information to me in regards to your employment status, mortgage payments, income levels, references from previous tenants etc - after all, I want to be sure you can afford to pay your mortgage every month too with money to spare if that washing machine does go and that you'll fix it without a fuss - that's fair too, right?

See, in the real world your "protections" are as meaningless as they are for tenants and all they really serve to do is alienate the decent ones. As I said if I had some random private landlord who I don't know from Adam acting as if they're my bank in looking for all this personal (and unnecessary for the purpose) information, they'd be told they can keep their property!

The problem is we have landlords who expect all of the reward with none of the risk and as little work required as possible, forgetting that the rental sector - like any business - really revolves on trust on BOTH sides. The focus doesn't need to be so much at "protecting" yourself at the start (notwithstanding practical things like trying to get the best landlord/tenant you can based on your meetings with them), as ensuring that there IS practical, efficient AND enforceable means of resolving any problems if they DO arise, and to be fair I'd say (or would like to think anyway) that 95% of tenancy agreements proceed without a hitch.

Nekarsulm

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....

Depending on the size of town you are from, you can visit the local letting agents and advise them of the facts of the case. They don't need this tenant causing problems, that they will have to deal with down the line. You can report to the council office involved, if so do it in writing and register it. It wont do much good , but it will help your frame of mind! Either way, you are going to be clearing up the mess, and it can get expensive, as some dumps charge up to 3 Euro per bin bag.
(once rented out a little farmhouse to a Taxi driver, he was a keen fisherman, and there were lakes all around the property. One year later, he moved out suddenly, and we found that the three or four small farm sheds were filled to the roof with bin bags of rubbish, so he was drawing them from his entire family and "disposing" of them there) Two skips had to be hired!

makeorbrake

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Ah see this now is exactly the problem..

Tell me, what "protection" does a tenant have from an unscrupulous landlord or at all really?

- If I'm renting a place from someone and the washing machine decides to flood the place and the landlord sits on the problem or ignores it entirely what recourse do I have?

- If the landlord decides to issue eviction notices because they want to rent the place for a few hundred more next month, what protection have I got from that - especially if they say they're actually planning to move back but later "change their mind"?

- If a landlord decides they're gonna keep my deposit for some nonsense reason, what real option have I got to get it back?

- If the landlord goes bankrupt, where's my protection?

Don't tell me the PRTB is "protecting" tenants because you only have to read the threads here to see how useless and ineffective they are for BOTH sides.

See what you and others like you are forgetting is that a rental property is a tenant's HOME as well (not just their investment/side income) and most people renting (especially in Dublin) don't have the luxury of plodding through the PRTB process for a year - only for any judgement to be ignored in the real world anyway - and most certainly couldn't afford to have 3-5k tied up for months at a time either if the landlord decides they don't want to give it back or has spent it, or indeed gone bankrupt!

The reason the laws are (supposedly) weighted in favour of tenants is because they have a lot more to lose than a landlord who will still have a roof over their own head regardless - even if they themselves aren't paying their mortgage, whereas a tenant can be issued notice immediately for non/late payment of even a single month's rent.

As for your idea of work references, if my employer told you anything beyond the fact that I worked there they would be in breach of data privacy and ultimately that check means feck all anyway.. I could be made redundant or be given a pay cut in the morning - are you going to sue my employer for the rent?

Facebook? Not everyone uses it and anyone with any sense will have it all locked down so that won't tell you anything - or would that be a sign that this tenant must have something to hide rather than them just valuing their privacy against total strangers?

Would you be willing as a landlord to hand over the same information to me in regards to your employment status, mortgage payments, income levels, references from previous tenants etc - after all, I want to be sure you can afford to pay your mortgage every month too with money to spare if that washing machine does go and that you'll fix it without a fuss - that's fair too, right?

See, in the real world your "protections" are as meaningless as they are for tenants and all they really serve to do is alienate the decent ones. As I said if I had some random private landlord who I don't know from Adam acting as if they're my bank in looking for all this personal (and unnecessary for the purpose) information, they'd be told they can keep their property!

Earlier in the thread, you said this when referring to landlords =>

Kaiser2000 wrote:

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.

If the attitude towards the landlord is "tough", then would you not be applying the very same logic (after all, this is YOUR logic) to all of the above?


Would it not be far better for landlords and tenants to come together and lobby for the PRTB to be disbanded and replaced with a functioning body that can implement all of the logical steps necessary to protect both parties?

In the meantime, until that happens, you couldn't possibly argue against landlords protecting their interests by way of increased deposits.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

The problem is we have landlords who expect all of the reward with none of the risk and as little work required as possible, forgetting that the rental sector - like any business - really revolves on trust on BOTH sides.

Trust? I would have said that the OP worked on the basis of trust and look where that got him/her?

Kaiser2000 wrote:

The focus doesn't need to be so much at "protecting" yourself at the start (notwithstanding practical things like trying to get the best landlord/tenant you can based on your meetings with them)

Ok, so by that logic there's no need for ANY deposit taking whatsoever!

Kaiser2000 wrote:

as ensuring that there IS practical, efficient AND enforceable means of resolving any problems if they DO arise, and to be fair I'd say (or would like to think anyway) that 95% of tenancy agreements proceed without a hitch.

Like your 'final inspection' concept? Time and time again, we see people suggest that they withhold the last months (or months plural) rent in lieu of a 'final inspection'. "Practical, efficient and enforceable" is not the current reality - and it won't be until the PRTB is reformed. In the meantime, a large enough deposit might go some way to insuring the tenant actually sticks around for that 'final inspection'.

_Kaiser_

makeorbrake wrote: »

Earlier in the thread, you said this when referring to landlords =>

If the attitude towards the landlord is "tough", then would you not be applying the very same logic (after all, this is YOUR logic) to all of the above?


Would it not be far better for landlords and tenants to come together and lobby for the PRTB to be disbanded and replaced with a functioning body that can implement all of the logical steps necessary to protect both parties?

In the meantime, until that happens, you couldn't possibly argue against landlords protecting their interests by way of increased deposits.

I agree and that's my point - as it stands BOTH sides are taking a chance, but landlords expecting tenants to hand over a load of personal information that has no relevance to the purpose, or demanding several thousand euro as deposit with no security for the tenant is both unreasonable, unwarranted and unrealistic.

Yes, as I also said, an effective, efficient and impartial appeals process to resolve any disputes is what's needed but unfortunately (as I keep saying!) until the private rental sector in this country is treated like a professional transaction/business by ALL sides - tenants, landlords and regulators/government - I wouldn't hold my breath for any significant change

The FIRST thing that needs to happen is for people to stop viewing the rental market as a stepping stone/temporary must do on the road to ownership, or as the option for the poor with no other choice... but with our government, media (and indeed ordinary people if this forum is any indication) all itching to kick it off again and "get on the property ladder", I can't see it happening.

The problem is a culture change is needed, not just regulatory and that's a lot harder to achieve given our obsession with owning property.

fash

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Tell me, what "protection" does a tenant have from an unscrupulous landlord or at all really?

Plenty- the PRTB will eventually get you your money.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If I'm renting a place from someone and the washing machine decides to flood the place and the landlord sits on the problem or ignores it entirely what recourse do I have?

plenty- deduct it from the rent- it says so right in the RTA.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If the landlord decides to issue eviction notices because they want to rent the place for a few hundred more next month, what protection have I got from that - especially if they say they're actually planning to move back but later "change their mind"?

Have they broken the lease? Attempted to charge above the market? Increased rent within the last year? If not-why do you suggest their rights should be limited? Bearing in mind that any other system ( of even longer changes back to market rent) will bring its own problems to be borne by society- especially new and arriving tenants.

Regarding their claim to move in-
Is there evidence their claim is invalid? Do they own their own house? From a different county? Bring their notice to the PRTB and they'll be fined.
Plus even beyond that, they have to tell tenant if they situation changes within 6 months.
So if you have been kicked out like that, and haven't got any evidence their notice was invalid- knock on the door 5 months later and see is the landlord is living there. If not- ka-ching - you know what the penalty for an illegal eviction is I assume.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If a landlord decides they're gonna keep my deposit for some nonsense reason, what real option have I got to get it back?

PRTB- what more do you want?

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If the landlord goes bankrupt, where's my protection?

how often does that happen?
Besides when a receiver is put in place this is the one time I would personally suggest tenants to "run down the deposit". Safe in the knowledge that there is no comeback.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Don't tell me the PRTB is "protecting" tenants because you only have to read the threads here to see how useless and ineffective they are for BOTH sides.

they are pretty effective if you follow through for respondents with assets and when you know where that respondent lives.
To which category of respondent are those conditions more likely to apply?

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I could be made redundant or be given a pay cut in the morning - are you going to sue my employer for the rent?

if there was misrepresentation- I'd certainly consider it. Beside if you were made unemployed- and had recently been employed, you are more likely to get a job quickly - since the "just fired" includes both "can find job quickly" and "can't find job quickly" categories of people.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Would you be willing as a landlord to hand over the same information to me in regards to your employment status, mortgage payments, income levels, references from previous tenants etc - after all, I want to be sure you can afford to pay your mortgage every month too with money to spare if that washing machine does go and that you'll fix it without a fuss - that's fair too, right?

sure it's fair- so ask them. All they can say is no.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

The problem is we have landlords who expect all of the reward with none of the risk and as little work required as possible, forgetting that the rental sector - like any business - really revolves on trust on BOTH sides. The focus doesn't need to be so much at "protecting" yourself at the start (notwithstanding practical things like trying to get the best landlord/tenant you can based on your meetings with them), as ensuring that there IS practical, efficient AND enforceable means of resolving any problems if they DO arise, and to be fair I'd say (or would like to think anyway) that 95% of tenancy agreements proceed without a hitch.

I'd say 80-85% proceed without a significant hitch- that being in my experience.

Like all businesses, being a landlord is about reducing your risks and increasing your return.

Better vetting and- our laws being what they are-higher deposits coupled not accepting certain categories of risk is the way forward for landlords.

Regarding business, there are 2 types of business- ones who deal with repeat custom- and ones who don't.
Ones who don't include things like restaurants in tourist areas, hotdog sellers at football games etc. For these because there is no repeat custom whether they are good or bad- there is little incentive to be good. Certainly they get nothing out of it.
For repeat customer business- where providing a good service ensures increased revenue and profit- there is an incentive.
Which more closely describes the Irish rental market?

makeorbrake

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

The problem is a culture change is needed, not just regulatory and that's a lot harder to achieve given our obsession with owning property.

Cultural change is a slow burner. Effective regulation should come first - and there is no earthly reason why it can't be achieved a thousand times better than the current implementation.

_Kaiser_

Replying to your edits...

makeorbrake wrote: »

Trust? I would have said that the OP worked on the basis of trust and look where that got him/her?

So the OP getting burned once mean that all future tenants should be met with unreasonable demands? (given the reality of the rental sector).

What if I had a bad experience with a landlord? Should I proceed on the assumption that you're some sort of cowboy as well that I'll need to "protect" myself against... or should I take you at your word and deal with you fairly and handle any issues IF they arise?

Ok, so by that logic there's no need for ANY deposit taking whatsoever!

Where did I say that a deposit shouldn't be required? What I'm saying is expecting a tenant to hand over 3-5k to average Joe landlord with no guarantee they'll see most of that, or indeed ANY of it back is ridiculous.

Like your 'final inspection' concept? Time and time again, we see people suggest that they withhold the last months (or months plural) rent in lieu of a 'final inspection'. "Practical, efficient and enforceable" is not the current reality - and it won't be until the PRTB is reformed. In the meantime, a large enough deposit might go some way to insuring the tenant actually sticks around for that 'final inspection'.

And what's to stop a landlord deciding they want to keep some or all of that deposit for some nonsense reason (we see threads on it all the time here). Oh sure, go to the PRTB you say but that takes a year and even if they find in the tenant's favour, the judgements are unenforceable in the real world unless you are willing to spend even more time on chasing it.

The only REAL way then would be to keep aside 10k to cover both the potential loss of your current deposit and a future one... but I can't see many tenants having that kind of cash to spare.

And what if the landlord goes bankrupt (another thing we're seeing more of on this forum). What happens to the tenant's deposit then?

As I said... landlords can't expect to get all the reward and none of the risk and a tenant has a LOT more to lose in reality

murphaph

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Would you be willing as a landlord to hand over the same information to me in regards to your employment status, mortgage payments, income levels, references from previous tenants etc - after all, I want to be sure you can afford to pay your mortgage every month too with money to spare if that washing machine does go and that you'll fix it without a fuss - that's fair too, right?

I wouldn't provide any information to a prospective tenant no. It's my property. If I only want to let to people who provide me with what I require to commence a tenancy then that's my choice and it's your choice not to entertain such requests and to move on to a landlord that doesn't. It's not about fairness. It's about minimising my risk as I see it. Yes, I will certainly alienate some potentially good tenants, but I calculate that I will alienate almost all potentially delinquent tenants by requesting such things, so the move is a sensible one from my perspective.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

See, in the real world your "protections" are as meaningless as they are for tenants and all they really serve to do is alienate the decent ones. As I said if I had some random private landlord who I don't know from Adam acting as if they're my bank in looking for all this personal (and unnecessary for the purpose) information, they'd be told they can keep their property!

That's your prerogative. If the market changes around you though and these things become common place, you'll have to either live with friends or family or buy your own place. The increased deposit is already becoming more commonplace in Dublin.

dissed doc

Report her to the council, and get cleaners in. Keep receipts, then sue her for the amount over what the deposit is worth if it that much.

Then charge the next tenant two months deposit up front.

murphaph

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

demanding several thousand euro as deposit with no security for the tenant is both unreasonable, unwarranted and unrealistic.

It's no longer unrealistic in high demand areas to request 2 or 3 months deposit because it's happening!

_Kaiser_

murphaph wrote: »

It's no longer unrealistic in high demand areas to request 2 or 3 months deposit because it's happening!

More fool any tenant then who is willing to hand over large sums of money with no guarantee or (realistic/practical) comeback if it goes wrong.

But then the current situation in Dublin is an aberration and unsustainable as we're already starting to see.

Personally I wouldn't be basing my business model on a temporary set of circumstances - unless we are indeed back in 2006 where property and rent can only go up!! :rolleyes:

murphaph

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

More fool any tenant then who is willing to hand over large sums of money with no guarantee or (realistic/practical) comeback if it goes wrong.

But then the current situation in Dublin is an aberration and unsustainable as we're already starting to see.

Personally I wouldn't be basing my business model on a temporary set of circumstances - unless we are indeed back in 2006 where property and rent can only go up!! :rolleyes:

Once 2 or 3 months rent becomes the norm then that'll remain the norm. I'm sure a month's rent wasn't being asked for 20 years ago. As I said...tenants ARE now handing over 2 or 3 month's deposits.

makeorbrake

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

So the OP getting burned once mean that all future tenants should be met with unreasonable demands? (given the reality of the rental sector).

I'll ask you again. Are you STILL suggesting that the OP - having had this experience - doesn't mitigate any potential future loss by increasing the deposit? You can't seriously suggest that they don't protect their interests. The answer to your question is a resolute YES - there will have to be fallout for ALL tenants due to the actions of a minority of bad ones.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

What if I had a bad experience with a landlord? Should I proceed on the assumption that you're some sort of cowboy as well that I'll need to "protect" myself against... or should I take you at your word and deal with you fairly and handle any issues IF they arise?

If you have an issue, you can go to the PRTB. Unlike errant tenants, errant landlords can't just up sticks and take off (at least certainly not without great difficulty). You'll have to wait for the outcome (the fault lying with the PRTB on that aspect) but you will get the correct outcome ultimately.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Where did I say that a deposit shouldn't be required? What I'm saying is expecting a tenant to hand over 3-5k to average Joe landlord with no guarantee they'll see most of that, or indeed ANY of it back is ridiculous.

You said that such arrangements should be based largely on TRUST!
If you don't want to pay over a certain level of deposit - then don't. However, don't be surprised if you find it more and more difficult to find a property that meets your needs.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

And what's to stop a landlord deciding they want to keep some or all of that deposit for some nonsense reason (we see threads on it all the time here). Oh sure, go to the PRTB you say but that takes a year and even if they find in the tenant's favour, the judgements are unenforceable in the real world unless you are willing to spend even more time on chasing it.

Don't put the delay on the landlord! How are the judgements not enforceable by the PRTB against a landlord?

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

As I said... landlords can't expect to get all the reward and none of the risk and a tenant has a LOT more to lose in reality

I don't accept that the tenant has 'a LOT more to lose'. Furthermore, 'risk' is a double edged sword...

quadrifoglio verde

dissed doc wrote: »

Report her to the council, and get cleaners in. Keep receipts, then sue her for the amount over what the deposit is worth if it that much.

Then charge the next tenant two months deposit up front.

This depends on his location. If the op is on ballygobackwards (no offence op) he'll have trouble getting anything more than one months deposit as the demand isn't as strong.
If it's dublin however and it's priced at the market rate, he can easily get away with 2-3 months deposit up front as tenants are that desperate.

Fkall

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

More fool any tenant then who is willing to hand over large sums of money with no guarantee or (realistic/practical) comeback if it goes wrong.

But then the current situation in Dublin is an aberration and unsustainable as we're already starting to see.

Personally I wouldn't be basing my business model on a temporary set of circumstances - unless we are indeed back in 2006 where property and rent can only go up!! :rolleyes:

Rents and supply in Dublin are fast returning to levels last seen in late 90's and early 00's.

mad m

Don't know if it was advised to you OP but before you clear rubbish up, take photos to back up your claim in case you are asked.

sunnysoutheast

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....

If the tenant had loft access I would also be checking up there too. Another favourite dumping ground.

whereto now

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

If the tenant had loft access I would also be checking up there too. Another favourite dumping ground.

Just got time to have another look around yesterday and I see the loft has stuff in it too, no ladder so I have no idea whats up there....

I have'nt been online in a couple of days and I see this started a pretty heated debate....I've calmed down and decided its not worth the hassle of chasing her, I'd only stress myself out for nothing, hopefully karma will bite her in the ass oneday ....

The lastest is that it looks like she has a council house now so shes set for life, I imagine she was on the waiting list while she was in mine..... I hope she has more respect for it.....as we're all paying for it but I doubt it...

So time to put it all behind me and move on.....for the people who think I'm one sided I lived abroad for years in rental properties and would never have treated someone elses property any different than my own. Thanks for all the comments....

makeorbrake

By total coincidence, met someone on the weekend who told me he had a portfolio of 20 houses spread between the UK and Ireland. In the UK, he said that you can't get anywhere close to renting a place without providing ALL of the things (bank statements, fully verifiable references, substantial deposit, proof of employment, copy of passport, etc.) mentioned earlier in this thread. The law is adequate and applied fairly.

This guy has 20 years worth of skin in the game. After 20 years experience - knowing every facet of the workings of it all, he still can't get on the right side of it [in Ireland]. One guy stripped the house of all metal (copper, electric wiring - ALL of it!), etc - causing €15K worth of damage.

He's gone to the trouble in the past of pursuing right to the bitter end (with all the hassle and legal fees that entailed) - to be told that the other party was on the dole - had no money - so no dice!


Of course, he didn't 'vet' his tenants properly right? After 20 years in the business? :rolleyes:


Just to add...he's also had the scenario the OP has presented with on numerous occassions. The last one to leave the place in a state (he said pigs would have been cleaner!) - with a mountain of rubbish - and the rest - was no less than an architect!

spaceHopper

I've rented but never been a LL. I'd no problem giving references from bank, work LL..

If I were a LL my rule one would be make sure the neighbours had my number any problems let me know that would have saved the OP a lot of trouble he'd have know that they were making a tip out of the back garden then found the rest.

Just as there are good tenants there are good land lords but unfortunately there are also very bad of both in almost equal measure.

Dietsquirt

OP could you post a picture so we can understand the extent of the 'damage' - although your explanation was good, we'd appreciate a visual.

murphaph

spaceHopper wrote: »

If I were a LL my rule one would be make sure the neighbours had my number any problems let me know that would have saved the OP a lot of trouble he'd have know that they were making a tip out of the back garden then found the rest.

This can be a real double edged sword. Some neighbours will then be on to the LL about every little thing even if it's lawful and only annoys the neighbour (smoking in back garden, for example) or having the ODD party. The LL should simply be performing inspections on the property, but there is only so much anyone can do against a filthy pig tenant who stores up a load of rubbish to save the bin tag money. The law needs to be radically improved to make sure such pigs can be identified to potential landlords.

spaceHopper wrote: »

Just as there are good tenants there are good land lords but unfortunately there are also very bad of both in almost equal measure.

Most probably true...if only the state could fix it so that good tenants and landlords could be protected from bad tenants and landlords. Now there's an idea...