Eviction notice - help needed

james12326

Hi guys,

First time poster here.

We moved into a 3 bed house on the 19th of last month. Signed the lease ect. The 3rd room is tiny, but the house has a converted attic. We decided to put a double bed in the attic and use that as a room. A friend of ours stayed in the box room for a couple of night.

We sent the landlord a snaglist after moving in. A plumber arrived and fixed some of the items.

It now appears that the landlord also arrived, without us knowing, and took loads of pictures of the house. The bedrooms were untidy - but not dirty.

We now received an eviction notice on the basis that 4 people are living in the house and we are untidy. Do we have any ground to stand on here? In particular the unannounced house inspection.

The estate agent we deal with now says that the landlord didn't sign the lease and so is free to kick us out.

Any advice would be most welcome.

Doom

Landlord is guilty of unlawful entry...call to the gardai.

Michael D Not Higgins

Open a PRTB dispute.

whippet

Before jumping on the high horses to slaughter a landlord .. It sounds like the landlord was with the plumber when the agreed work was carried out, if so there is nothing wrong with this.

Also, what does your lease state about who is permitted to live there?

An attic is not a bedroom and unless permitted by planning conditions can not be used as such. By using the attic as a bedroom there are health and safety concerns, a landlord is right to be concerned with a tenant who has more than the agreed number of people staying inthe house and with the tenant using attic space as a bedroom.

foggy_lad

james12326 wrote: »

Hi guys,

First time poster here.

We moved into a 3 bed house on the 19th of last month. Signed the lease ect. The 3rd room is tiny, but the house has a converted attic. We decided to put a double bed in the attic and use that as a room. A friend of ours stayed in the box room for a couple of night.

We sent the landlord a snaglist after moving in. A plumber arrived and fixed some of the items.

It now appears that the landlord also arrived, without us knowing, and took loads of pictures of the house. The bedrooms were untidy - but not dirty.

We now received an eviction notice on the basis that 4 people are living in the house and we are untidy. Do we have any ground to stand on here? In particular the unannounced house inspection.

The estate agent we deal with now says that the landlord didn't sign the lease and so is free to kick us out.

Any advice would be most welcome.

It looks like the Landlord does not want anyone giving him any hassle or "snag-lists" and has decided that ye are going to be trouble.

Open a dispute with the PRTB and don't worry about the photographs as they should not be admissible in any counter claims made by the Landlord.

How long did your friend stay because if it was any longer than 2-3 nights you might have a problem with that.

On the other hand the place being untidy is not any reason or grounds for eviction or even reason for the landlord to say anything.

Michael D Not Higgins

whippet wrote: »

Before jumping on the high horses to slaughter a landlord .. It sounds like the landlord was with the plumber when the agreed work was carried out, if so there is nothing wrong with this.

Also, what does your lease state about who is permitted to live there?

An attic is not a bedroom and unless permitted by planning conditions can not be used as such. By using the attic as a bedroom there are health and safety concerns, a landlord is right to be concerned with a tenant who has more than the agreed number of people staying inthe house and with the tenant using attic space as a bedroom.

I wouldn't say there's nothing wrong with the landlord being there. He's supposed to notify the tenants of visiting at an agreed time with 24 hours notice, not slip in with a workman to catch them out.

Yes it's likely the attic is not a habitable bedroom space as per the regulations and why the house didn't have a bedroom in the attic in the first place. This is however something that should be sorted between the landlord and the tenants not a straight to eviction notice scenario.

Grandpa Hassan

You can just move in another person. It is likely a breach of the lease and the LL is entitled to issue an eviction notice. It's harsh, but within the rules.

His entry, whether unlawful, is another issue

whippet

We are just getting the OPs version of events, from what I can make out it seems that the OP has moved extra tenants in, utilising the attic space as living quarters which is probably in contravention to the lease.

The landlord has spotted this when following up on the snag list the tenant gave him and decided that this contravention to the lease agreement is worrying enough that he does not want to have the OP as a tenant anymore - nothing worse than a bad start.

The op can of course go to the PRTB, however, if they are in contravention of the lease and the landlord follows the eviction process properly there might not be a case to be answered.

By the sounds of it the landlord seems to be decent enough, following up on a snag list with tradesmen and not allowing an attic as a living space.

foggy_lad

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

You can just move in another person. It is likely a breach of the lease and the LL is entitled to issue an eviction notice. It's harsh, but within the rules.

His entry, whether unlawful, is another issue

Having a visitor or two staying for a few days from time to time is allowed!

james12326

Thanks for the replies. In relation to the attic, the estate agent basically told us to use that as a bedroom as the box room is tiny.

Michael D Not Higgins

whippet wrote: »

We are just getting the OPs version of events, from what I can make out it seems that the OP has moved extra tenants in, utilising the attic space as living quarters which is probably in contravention to the lease.

The landlord has spotted this when following up on the snag list the tenant gave him and decided that this contravention to the lease agreement is worrying enough that he does not want to have the OP as a tenant anymore - nothing worse than a bad start.

The op can of course go to the PRTB, however, if they are in contravention of the lease and the landlord follows the eviction process properly there might not be a case to be answered.

By the sounds of it the landlord seems to be decent enough, following up on a snag list with tradesmen and not allowing an attic as a living space.

This all depends on whether the friend was actually 'staying for a couple of nights' or was in fact moving in without the landlord knowing. If the latter is the case, they will have to plead their respective cases to the PRTB and let them decide who to believe.

barneyrubble46

This issue is more clear cut than you think, firstly speak to your landlord, aplologise if needs be and try and resolve with him, if he still wants to evict you, then you must raise a case with the PRTB this will protect you from eviction. Secondly the landlord illegally entered your home, thats right your home not his. Regardless of who he was with, you arranged for a plumber not plumber and landlord to call. He has no right to take photographs of the interior your home without your permission this is totally illegal. and finally it is very difficult to evict someone these days, stand firm and do not under any circumstances let this landlord intimidate you. Good luck

james12326

Thanks guys for the advice. We are good tenants, slightly untidy rooms due to large hours at work but certainly not trying to pull a fast one. I will try and be friendly about the situation, but I cant afford to be evicted. I am still angry about him coming in and taking photos of our personal belongings but thats for another day.

Kevin the Kid

barneyrubble46 wrote: »

This issue is more clear cut than you think, firstly speak to your landlord, aplologise if needs be and try and resolve with him, if he still wants to evict you, then you must raise a case with the PRTB this will protect you from eviction. Secondly the landlord illegally entered your home, thats right your home not his. Regardless of who he was with, you arranged for a plumber not plumber and landlord to call. He has no right to take photographs of the interior your home without your permission this is totally illegal. and finally it is very difficult to evict someone these days, stand firm and do not under any circumstances let this landlord intimidate you. Good luck

I agree absolutely. Grovel a bit. If that doesn't work and if he is being unreasonable then tell him you have no intention of leaving and he should peruse the necessary legal routes to get you out. It is such a pain to have you removed that he will if he has any sense come to a reasonable and less expensive agreement. It will take him months to evict you but you should continue to pay rent. That way you are not violating the agreement. In the mean time seek legal advise. PTRB can be hit and miss but it is necessary to register a complaint with them. If the landlord has not registered your tenancy he is in for a nice €280 euro fine approx.

barneyrubble46

well look we all have untidy homes, thats life, I forgot to say, any conversation you have with him back this up with a letter, so that you have everything in writing. The PRTB have a phone number you can call, its very understaffed however you can drop them an email and they will phone you and give you advise.

Nomis21

barneyrubble46 wrote: »

This issue is more clear cut than you think, firstly speak to your landlord, aplologise if needs be and try and resolve with him, if he still wants to evict you, then you must raise a case with the PRTB this will protect you from eviction. Secondly the landlord illegally entered your home, thats right your home not his. Regardless of who he was with, you arranged for a plumber not plumber and landlord to call. He has no right to take photographs of the interior your home without your permission this is totally illegal. and finally it is very difficult to evict someone these days, stand firm and do not under any circumstances let this landlord intimidate you. Good luck

I couldn't put it any better. Stand your ground but at the same time look around for another place. It will be more trouble ahead with this Landlord.

Mrs OBumble

Do you have proof that it was the LL and not the plumber who took the photos?

The agent saying that the LL never signed the lease is bollox: the agent should have signed it on their behalf - and the fact that they took your deposit and up-front payment and handed you the keys probably implies agreement from the (but we cannot give legal advice).

But, AFAIK, within the first six months, the LL can give you notice for just about any reason: the fact that they say it's 'cos you're untidy is just a handy line, most likely. Unless you and the general population have different ideas about what counts as untidy vs living in a kip.

Personally I wouldn't be that thrilled with any tenant who came up with a snaglist within a short time of moving in: what was good enough for them when they viewed the place clearly isn't good enough for them any more, so they're likely to be needy and annoying for the duration. And if I found that they were doing other dodgy stuff, like living in an attic, then I'd be moving to end things pretty quickly.

Good luck with repairing the relationship: a good first step is to get the unauthorised tenant out of the place, tidy up and invite a re-inspection.

the_syco

james12326 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies. In relation to the attic, the estate agent basically told us to use that as a bedroom as the box room is tiny.

Have they written it down?

Also, you could argue it was untidy because work was being carried out. The subletting part you could probably fight if the person is now gone.

Open a case with the PTRB, and state that the agent told them that you could use the attic. Have you had any prior interaction with the landlord?

james12326 wrote: »

The estate agent we deal with now says that the landlord didn't sign the lease and so is free to kick us out.

Who did you pay the deposit to? As said, you're not there that long so could be kicked out without notice. I'd look around, but be prepared to fight to get your deposit back.

james12326

Thanks again everyone. I perhaps used 'snag list' incorrectly, there were somethings that were broken when we moved in and we wanted on the record that we couldnt have noticed during our viewing of the property. The toilet flooded the first time we flushed in and water went straight through the kitchen ceiling - hence the use of the word 'snag list'!

cerastes

barneyrubble46 wrote: »

This issue is more clear cut than you think, firstly speak to your landlord, aplologise if needs be and try and resolve with him, if he still wants to evict you, then you must raise a case with the PRTB this will protect you from eviction. Secondly the landlord illegally entered your home, thats right your home not his. Regardless of who he was with, you arranged for a plumber not plumber and landlord to call. He has no right to take photographs of the interior your home without your permission this is totally illegal. and finally it is very difficult to evict someone these days, stand firm and do not under any circumstances let this landlord intimidate you. Good luck

The issue may seem fairly clear cut, but none of us know for sure. We dont know what arrangement or agreement existed with the tenant regarding moving in or inspection visits or with regard to repairs.
It seems reasonable the landlord responded promptly to a snag list and would want to go along with a trades person, in the least it protects the tenant if the landlord doesnt know the tradesperson and its backup for the trades person that they are not accused of taking anything if the landlord is there, perhaps the landlord wanted to see what the problem was and get it fixed and assess the severity of it too and a camera might be required for records to determine and record the cause.

What is clear is the tenant moved in people that are not on the lease, certainly not a good idea ever, but in under a months residence, its obvious to see why the landlord might be unhappy, to add to that, the landlord is legally entitled to evict a tenant in the first six months without any reason, but what reasonable landlord would do that? requiring the money for rental, its not known if the landlord isnt registered, but for certain the tenant hasnt put them in the best situation either.

I wouldnt say there is any limitations on a landlord taking photographs of their property as they could be taking it along for the reported issues, besides how else do they prove any damage if its put to insurance, but they found a bed in an attic room that wasnt a bedroom and then moved people in too into the bargain. That could invalidate the property insurance and that itself is a breach of the tenancy act.
If the tenant declines to be evicted, it would be on their heads on top of everything else and that is bad advice you are giving as its contrary to the law.
Having said a landlord could evict inside 6 months without a reason or even cause, they could still evict for moving in extra people even after 6 months as its a breach of the tenancy agreement if those people werent on the lease.

OP, Id go with begging bowl in hand, apologise, move the bed out and the extra people and hope the landlord agrees to allow you to stay, No one needs to be in a dispute and its very easy for people to get fired up and advise you of such when they dont have to go through the hassle themselves, seems like a good landlord repsonding to snags promptly and discovered some breaches.

Be honest, what was the intention for these visitors, when you made extar space for them by occupying another room as a bedroom? it looks suspicious to me.

foggy_lad

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Do you have proof that it was the LL and not the plumber who took the photos?

The agent saying that the LL never signed the lease is bollox: the agent should have signed it on their behalf - and the fact that they took your deposit and up-front payment and handed you the keys probably implies agreement from the (but we cannot give legal advice).

But, AFAIK, within the first six months, the LL can give you notice for just about any reason: the fact that they say it's 'cos you're untidy is just a handy line, most likely. Unless you and the general population have different ideas about what counts as untidy vs living in a kip.

Personally I wouldn't be that thrilled with any tenant who came up with a snaglist within a short time of moving in: what was good enough for them when they viewed the place clearly isn't good enough for them any more, so they're likely to be needy and annoying for the duration. And if I found that they were doing other dodgy stuff, like living in an attic, then I'd be moving to end things pretty quickly.

Good luck with repairing the relationship: a good first step is to get the unauthorised tenant out of the place, tidy up and invite a re-inspection.

So we now have proof of an unauthorised tenant?

If I moved in and found some issues which would/could not reasonably be found by a fairly thorough inspection I would make a list for my agent or Landlord and would expect them to act on it in a timely manner. (stuff not working properly is not obvious until you move in and start using things like washing machines and cookers etc) Snag lists are very common and only Cowboy landlords will have any issue with them.

The OP moved in after payment of a deposit and agreement to the lease so a signature is not required as there is a verbal agreement in place.

The Landlord can evict without reason in the first 6 months but it could take a year or more to effect the eviction if the OP were to "dig in". See Michael D's post below.

Michael D Not Higgins

foggy_lad wrote: »

The Landlord can evict without reason in the first 6 months but it could take a year or more to effect the eviction if the OP were to "dig in".

Pretty sure this is only with period tenancies, not fixed term which is the norm (and I assume is the case with this tenancy). This is why the agent is saying the landlord didn't sign the lease in order to make it seem like there's only a periodic tenancy in effect.

Beaner1

Apologise and grovel? Tell him to **** off is the only reasonable thing to do.

AlanG

Were you paying for the plumber? If not it is reasonable for the landlord to accompany the plumber and unlikely you would have much grounds to complain as you gave an implied right of entry for the work to be carried out – carrying out the work includes confirmation by the bill payer that it is completed.
Where did you get the double bed to put in the attic? Was it in the tiny box room or did you bring in an extra bed to the house. If you did you have no real grounds for complaint.
The mess of the place is irrelevant to the landlord if it is not visible from outside and would not cause dampness etc.
Apologise and try to work something out if you really like the place – otherwise save the hassle and leave.

Grandpa Hassan

foggy_lad wrote: »

Having a visitor or two staying for a few days from time to time is allowed!

The OP has converted a room to a bedroom, and had someone staying in it. As a LL, supposedly for someone staying 2 days. That would just look like someone had been moved in. A bf / gf staying is one thing, or a mate on a couch. But setting up a spare bedroom suggests more than a 2 day arrangement.

If went to the PTRB, the LL would be fined for illegal every, but suspect that the eviction would be upheld. The tenant would have to argue the case. And converting the room compromises the argument that it was just for a stay over

AlanG

Doom wrote: »

Landlord is guilty of unlawful entry...call to the gardai.

This is rubbish - you you agreed for the work to be done by the plumber you gave implied consent for the landlord to enter to inspect the work.

Grolschevik

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

The OP has converted a room to a bedroom, and had someone staying in it. As a LL, supposedly for someone staying 2 days. That would just look like someone had been moved in. A bf / gf staying is one thing, or a mate on a couch. But setting up a spare bedroom suggests more than a 2 day arrangement.

No. The original post says the OP moved into attic room that was not previously a bedroom.

Their guest stayed a couple of days in the (existing) box room bedroom.

Michael D Not Higgins

AlanG wrote: »

Were you paying for the plumber? If not it is reasonable for the landlord to accompany the plumber and unlikely you would have much grounds to complain as you gave an implied right of entry for the work to be carried out – carrying out the work includes confirmation by the bill payer that it is completed.

There's no such thing as implied right of entry. The landlord may not enter the tenant's home without their permission.

Edit: nonetheless, their entry to allow work to take place is a separate issue to the entry of the landlord in order to inspect the dwelling. Both are allowable with agreement from the tenant but you can't enter under one premise to carry out the other.

AlanG

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

There's no such thing as implied right of entry. The landlord may not enter the tenant's home without their permission.

There is of course. If the plumbers boss turned up and came in you couldn't have them arrested for breaking and entry. Implied consent and implied contracts are an established aspect of law and may well be relevant in this case.

It is true that that implied consent may be limited to the work required and may not include inspecting the attic but there is no doubt that there can be an implied right of entry. Next time you have a worker in and his co-worker / supplier / boss arrives and enters your premises try to have them arrested and charged if you want to test the law.

Michael D Not Higgins

AlanG wrote: »

There is of course. If the plumbers boss turned up and came in you couldn't have them arrested for breaking and entry. Implied consent and implied contracts are an established aspect of law and may well be relevant in this case.

It is true that that implied consent may be limited to the work required and may not include inspecting the attic but there is no doubt that there can be an implied right of entry. Next time you have a worker in and his co-worker / supplier / boss arrives and enters your premises try to have them arrested and charged if you want to test the law.

Apologies I have clarified my post while you were compiling this. We are in agreement that the landlord can enter but cannot conduct an inspection, thus the landlord's entry is unlawful, which is what we were getting at in the first place.

AlanG

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Apologies I have clarified my post while you were compiling this. We are in agreement that the landlord can enter but cannot conduct an inspection, thus the landlord's entry is unlawful, which is what we were getting at in the first place.

Agreed - I am not totally one side or the other on this case but I think the advice being given for the OP to be confrontational with the landlord is counterproductive and unlikely to leave him better off.
The landlord can argue that he had to enter to inspect the plumbers work before the plumber was paid. (alternatively leaking pipes are considered an emergency in which case a landlord can legally enter a premises if they are severe enough) He may also stretch this to argue that as it was a water leak he had to check the attic area to ensure the source was not there or to turn off the water. Seeing the storage area being used as a bedroom against fire regulations he would be obliged to issue a warning to the OP.
I do not think this alone would be grounds for eviction but it all depends on whether the OP added a new bed to the house in the storage area or took it from an existing bed space.