Rented house burgled, landlords obligations ?

seamus

ZENER wrote: »

We'll probably just have to take this one on the chin but let them know that in future they need to inform us straight away - as per their lease - of any issues. It's clearly set out in their lease what they should do in such cases. My phone number is there as a contact too.

Tbh, I'd make a point of being a bit obtuse about this.

Let them know that you will be issuing them with a notice of arrears if they don't transfer over the €250, and that you expect to be provided with a tax invoice for the work done. You will then review the invoice and the repair job before deciding on reimbursement.

Then a week or two later, you give them their €250. You're just making a point about how things are supposed to be done.

And if they don't give you the €250, issue the notice of arrears. They don't sound like particularly good tenants, so they're no loss to you.

April 73

Have the tenants given you a tax invoice/receipt for the work carried out?

delthedriver

runawaybishop wrote: »

What's that got to do with punitive rent raises that may be illegal?

I never suggested punitive! I said a serious rent rise!

murphaph

I'd up the rent these jokers pay to the max allowable at the next possible opportunity tbh.

delthedriver

enricoh wrote: »

A mate of mine had similar problems with a tenant - the boiler broke down and it cost 150 to fix - so here's the rent minus the 150. No receipts, no nothing. After it working two or 3 times he then stopped paying rent and only moved when he moved to a new town.
Read them the riot act and split the 250 if it was me

It really is sickening how such scumbags can get away with this. PRTB are helpful to a point. However getting an enforcement order against a scumbag will take for ever and an age. There should be a central register for recording these chancers.


How many months rent was your friend left short of ?


I hope he did not trash the property before he left !

delthedriver

murphaph wrote: »

I'd up the rent these jokers pay to the max allowable at the next possible opportunity tbh.

+ 1

tomdublin

Have you installed a burglar alarm to help protect your tenants?

tomdublin

tomdublin wrote: »

Have you installed a burglar alarm to help protect your tenants?

The only thing burglar alarms are good for is annoying neighbours when they go off in the middle of the night for no reason.

delthedriver

Was there a break in and was it reported to the Gardai????


Did the Garda investigate????? If so it must be recorded on Pulse!!

Mmmmmm..............?????

There is something strange going on .....................

The sooner these tenants move on the better !

ted1

tomdublin wrote: »

Have you installed a burglar alarm to help protect your tenants?

If the tenants wanted an alarm they should have checked was their one fitted at the time. Besides alarms are pretty useless especially monitored ones.

TheChizler

delthedriver wrote: »

Was there a break in and was it reported to the Gardai????

Yes. Post 1 sentence 4.

cerastes

3DataModem wrote: »

The tenants are totally within their rights and obligations to mitigate their risk (and your risk).

I would ask for a receipt, inspect the installation, and reimburse them fully. I would also ask if their contents insurance might cover the loss of house keys.

And as for the idea that it's "your house", it's more importantly "their home".

Its more important they read their lease and follow their obligations, not to offset any rent for any reason, not replace locks without consent of landlord are usually two big ones, the former is definitely in the RTA.

seamus wrote: »

Tbh, I'd make a point of being a bit obtuse about this.

Let them know that you will be issuing them with a notice of arrears if they don't transfer over the €250, and that you expect to be provided with a tax invoice for the work done. You will then review the invoice and the repair job before deciding on reimbursement.

Then a week or two later, you give them their €250. You're just making a point about how things are supposed to be done.

And if they don't give you the €250, issue the notice of arrears. They don't sound like particularly good tenants, so they're no loss to you.

Id make a point of giving them a notice asap, Id look for receipts and the name of the business that did it, if they cant name them on the spot or dont have a receipt then Id be suspicious, on top of that ID be ebquiring what the actual cost of such a job is off that and other locksmiths, if they have no receipts, Id check the quality of the lock and offset the cost that should have been paid, as the locksmith was at their choice without informing the landlord well after the emergency was over, I suggest the fee for that is theirs. I would not be giving back their 250, at best pay them for the lock or better replace it and return their lock, they had the opportunity to contact but didnt. Not OPs fault,
worst case Id split the bill, but only after a serious talk, however Id be looking to move them on, at the correct time implement acceptable rent increase.

delthedriver

TheChizler wrote: »

Yes. Post 1 sentence 4.

Thank you. Noted


However it took 2 days for tenants to inform the landlord.


If the Garda investigated have they details of the broken door/lock. Is it not strange that the Garda did not contact the landlord when called by tenant.??


Many years ago following an attempted break in at one of my properties I had a call from my letting agent and the Garda within minutes of each other.


Don't think these tenants are entirely straight, they have also messed the landlord around on other issues?????

newacc2015

delthedriver wrote: »

Was there a break in and was it reported to the Gardai????


Did the Garda investigate????? If so it must be recorded on Pulse!!

Mmmmmm..............?????

There is something strange going on .....................

The sooner these tenants move on the better !

My parents are Landlords. We got a phone call recently that there had been a break in one of their houses(the second time in 3 months).

Well according to the Gardai in the first one 'break in'. The Gardas theory was that one of the tenants went to the shop and didnt actually close the first door. There was no sign of forced entry and no even a sign of a bumped lock. We asked all the tenants who was locking the Chubb lock regularly and not of them were(far more important than an alarm).

During the second 'break in'. The burgler allegedly managed to get though one of the doors, despite all them having 5 lever Chubb locks locked at the time. The burgler then proceeded in kick in all the internal doors and didnt rob any of the countless camera, laptops and IDs around house. Which is extremely weird IMO. I noticed that their wheelie bin was completely layered with cans.

I think they might have had a party and a "one night stand" that a person brought back tired to break into the rooms. Or one of them was out of it on drugs and lost their ****(like in my last job one of the employees trashed the office one night off his head). But the locksmith thought someone might have been looking for drugs in the house

A majority of break ins are prevented with installing and using 5 lever chubb locks. Closing all windows and using proper window locks on sliding sash window.

0ph0rce0

Yous are all mad in here. It's 250 quid ffs. "UP THEIR RENT" "KICK EM OUT" I see the problem with not paying the full rent without even a chat, a bit cheeky but what if the burgler had killed one of the Tennants would you still be upping the other halfs rent? Cause he/she changed a lock for fear of thier lives.

No wonder landlords get a bad name. Yous are mean *****

rawn

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

Yous are all mad in here. It's 250 quid ffs. "UP THEIR RENT" "KICK EM OUT" I see the problem with not paying the full rent without even a chat, a bit cheeky but what if the burgler had killed one of the Tennants would you still be upping the other halfs rent? Cause he/she changed a lock for fear of thier lives.

No wonder landlords get a bad name. Yous are mean *****

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

athtrasna

OP have you received copies of the new keys from the tenants? If not they have effectively locked you out.

I'd look for receipts and use the cost as a tax write off but would reimburse the tenant with a stern insistence that it's a once off.

cerastes

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

Yous are all mad in here. It's 250 quid ffs. "UP THEIR RENT" "KICK EM OUT" I see the problem with not paying the full rent without even a chat, a bit cheeky but what if the burgler had killed one of the Tennants would you still be upping the other halfs rent? Cause he/she changed a lock for fear of thier lives.

No wonder landlords get a bad name. Yous are mean *****

yep, as 250 quid is nothing to most landlords, rolling in cash!
Thats akin to the kind of people who think its ok to rob someones car, shure they have insurance!?
Killed one of them? where does that come from? Id hazard a guess most burglars scum as they are, arent murderers, and as none of the tenants was murdered, it seems irrelevant.
As for what you seem to be suggesting both (if thats how many) tenants are collectively responsible for the rent, so no the landlord wouldnt be upping the rent, the other tenant/s would be liable for the full amount though, as they still are, offsetting rent to pay for whatever the tenant decides is not allowed.

The tenants fear seems a bit misplaced, as they only replaced the locks, I believe the OP said days after the event. Why didnt they call the landlord??? The OP described a host of other difficulties too.

OP, if they are already bad, I would not be inclined to pay them the 250 or the problems will get even worse, I would start formal proceedings, ie depending on the type of lease,
Id tell them how you plan to proceed and give them an informal but written notice to rectify the rent situation, a 14 day notice if not rectified promptly and then a 28 day notice to quit.

The lock situation is seperate to the rent which must be paid and they have put themselves in a bad situation by not paying it, look into and deal with the lock how you see fit but at best Id only half the cost and only if you are convinced it wasnt malicious or down to the tenant/a person who had a gripe with tenant.

wandererz

I appreciate that the OP could have resolved the problem.

He/she should clarify to the people renting the property (in no uncertain way) what the expected route to resolution is/are following such incidents.

From the perspective of the renters however, there may be a perception in terms of what is done, how it is done and the time-frame involved.
They may feel that the property owner may simply replace locks with similar from B&Q etc. What does that accomplish?
A proper locksmith, along with receipts etc(and while costing more) may serve better for future incursions and insurance claims.
The property owner should be able to accommodate and account for these expenses one way or the other.

Perhaps the renters feel that they aren't getting the level of response that they would expect?

I say this having been in the rental market for over 13years previously, having owned property that was let out and strangely enough having been a renter and a landlord at the same time.

You do need to communicate with your tenants.
250 euro isn't a great amount of money. That may have been their way of thinking about it in comparison to what occurred and the rental they are paying etc.

They had a security as well as a lighting issue which they resolved (ostensibly by professionals).

I have been in this situation before and my way of tackling it is to fix the problem as best as i can while ensuring my safety.
Sometimes it may be a single-minded focus. i.e If you have been violated then your mind-frame changes.

Have you stopped to consider that these people now feel unsafe living in your property and may want to move on?
You then need to re-list etc.

Or perhaps it may suit you to do so, in which case a minor situation of 250 euro is enough to get them out and someone else in?

Honestly, i have spent close to 190,000 euro on rent over 12 years in Dublin (roughly) and never had a situation such as this.
At the 52% tax rate that means close to 400K in gross earnings.

If you appreciate your tenants, what they have to put up with, what they have to pay, what little they get in return then you will understand why they don't want you replacing their locks and lights.

I have replaced our own locks in our home when we moved back in. It did take a trip to Woodies, but i still have everything connected to the internet so that i can be alerted and have everything filmed when there are problems.

Why do you want to replace a failed system with another self-installed and ultimately failed system?

The days are gone from when you think you can simply replace one lock for another store bought lock.

cerastes

wandererz wrote: »

I appreciate that the OP could have resolved the problem.

He/she should clarify to the people renting the property (in no uncertain way) what the expected route to resolution is/are following such incidents.

From the perspective of the renters however, there may be a perception in terms of what is done, how it is done and the time-frame involved.
They may feel that the property owner may simply replace locks with similar from B&Q etc. What does that accomplish?
A proper locksmith, along with receipts etc(and while costing more) may serve better for future incursions and insurance claims.
The property owner should be able to accommodate and account for these expenses one way or the other.

Perhaps the renters feel that they aren't getting the level of response that they would expect?

I say this having been in the rental market for over 13years previously, having owned property that was let out and strangely enough having been a renter and a landlord at the same time.

They would get no response though as they made no effort to contact the landlord, what would they like?
B&Q sells yale and other good quality locks and they may well have been suited to the job, or the OP may have fitted something in the interim while they priced solutions, they may even have had to get a replacement door and that 250 might have been preferable to spend on an excess rather than replacing a damaged door that will need replacing anyway.The tenant has overstepped the mark and shouldnt get off completely free.
If its in their lease and they have had a other problems then its time to lay down the law.

Simply put, the tenant had no right to make these decisions, they have now breached their responsibilities by not paying the correct rent, Id want to see damage like that firsthand before a repair is made, to see if it looks genuine and as close to the time its done and to determine the course of action, Id want to see the state of the tenants at that time, you'd be able to determine if it was genuine or not.

wandererz

cerastes wrote: »

They would get no response though as they made no effort to contact the landlord, what would they like?
B&Q sells yale and other good quality locks and they may well have been suited to the job, or the OP may have fitted something in the interim while they priced solutions, they may even have had to get a replacement door and that 250 might have been preferable to spend on an excess rather than replacing a damaged door that will need replacing anyway.The tenant has overstepped the mark and shouldnt get off completely free.
If its in their lease and they have had a other problems then its time to lay down the law.

Simply put, the tenant had no right to make these decisions, they have now breached their responsibilities by not paying the correct rent, Id want to see damage like that firsthand before a repair is made, to see if it looks genuine and as close to the time its done and to determine the course of action, Id want to see the state of the tenants at that time, you'd be able to determine if it was genuine or not.

Agreed.

But over 250 euro??

Surely there should be a bit of:
"hey, lets just step back into reality here"

Considering the landlords expenditure in terms of the equipment involved/ time involved/fuel costs etc.. is this really even worth it?

Or are we getting into the litigious society that is the USA?

wandererz

On another note though, if renting a property, shouldn't i have a reasonable right to safety or even a sense of safety?
And if that safety, that sense of defense is violated, why then should i be castigated for that and my attempts to remediate those viiolations? The landlords defenses have proven to be inadequate. Should he not be taken to court/sued etc?

After all, i am entrusting all my holdings to the security that he dictates - i.e his security and at his terms.

Keep in mind here that i am defending this as a non-tenant.
However, having spent close to half a million euro in rent over the years shouldn't i or the OP's tenants or indeed others have a legitimate say in these seemingly silly rants???

Why not consider what your tenant pays you, what the expected running costs are, what the tax costs are, what the monthly/annual additional costs are (washing machine, dishwasher, boiler, etc. etc)

And the other potential costs, BEFORE putting your property up for rental.

dissed doc

wandererz wrote: »

On another note though, if renting a property, shouldn't i have a reasonable right to safety or even a sense of safety?
And if that safety, that sense of defense is violated, why then should i be castigated for that and my attempts to remediate those viiolations? The landlords defenses have proven to be inadequate. Should he not be taken to court/sued etc?

After all, i am entrusting all my holdings to the security that he dictates - i.e his security and at his terms.

Keep in mind here that i am defending this as a non-tenant.
However, having spent close to half a million euro in rent over the years shouldn't i or the OP's tenants or indeed others have a legitimate say in these seemingly silly rants???

Why not consider what your tenant pays you, what the expected running costs are, what the tax costs are, what the monthly/annual additional costs are (washing machine, dishwasher, boiler, etc. etc)

And the other potential costs, BEFORE putting your property up for rental.

landlord isnt responsible for feelings or emptions of the tenant. if the property is damaged signifanctly, the tenant is obliged to immediately inform the landlord or his agent.


take him to court for what? he was prevented by the tenant is solving the issue because the tenant delayed informing him.


the tenant is under tge assumption that tge tenant can agree and sign repair contracts on behalf of the landlord. that is not the case.


the tenant is also the one required to keep it in a functional state. if they blew the door or windows out themselves, they are still obliged to inform the landlord. carpet destroyed, washing machine damaged, etc. any thing that was a part of the property, that the tenant is due to maintain reasonably, that is irrevocably damaged or requiring specialist repair needs to be reported immediately.

if you dont, you are the one as tenant, that is responsible.

April 73

wandererz wrote: »

On another note though, if renting a property, shouldn't i have a reasonable right to safety or even a sense of safety?
And if that safety, that sense of defense is violated, why then should i be castigated for that and my attempts to remediate those viiolations? The landlords defenses have proven to be inadequate. Should he not be taken to court/sued etc?

I think I've seen it all now. Sue the landlord because a burglar broke in?

Jen44

whilst i appreciate that they needed to secure their home I have to say I wouldnt be impressed if my tennats changed to locks to my house without first informing and okaying the price with me.

Flatzie_poo

wandererz wrote: »

On another note though, if renting a property, shouldn't i have a reasonable right to safety or even a sense of safety?
And if that safety, that sense of defense is violated, why then should i be castigated for that and my attempts to remediate those viiolations? The landlords defenses have proven to be inadequate. Should he not be taken to court/sued etc?

If they don't feel safe, people generally are more concerned with moving out than a law suit...

REXER

newacc2015 wrote: »

My parents are Landlords. We got a phone call recently that there had been a break in one of their houses(the second time in 3 months).

Well according to the Gardai in the first one 'break in'. The Gardas theory was that one of the tenants went to the shop and didnt actually close the first door. There was no sign of forced entry and no even a sign of a bumped lock. We asked all the tenants who was locking the Chubb lock regularly and not of them were(far more important than an alarm).

During the second 'break in'. The burgler allegedly managed to get though one of the doors, despite all them having 5 lever Chubb locks locked at the time. The burgler then proceeded in kick in all the internal doors and didnt rob any of the countless camera, laptops and IDs around house. Which is extremely weird IMO. I noticed that their wheelie bin was completely layered with cans.

I think they might have had a party and a "one night stand" that a person brought back tired to break into the rooms. Or one of them was out of it on drugs and lost their ****(like in my last job one of the employees trashed the office one night off his head). But the locksmith thought someone might have been looking for drugs in the house

A majority of break ins are prevented with installing and using 5 lever chubb locks. Closing all windows and using proper window locks on sliding sash window.

Wow, I wonder what the signs of a "bump keyed" lock are???

Eugene Norman

April 73 wrote: »

I think I've seen it all now. Sue the landlord because a burglar broke in?

Sure. If there were no locks or inferior locks why wouldn't that be legal? If a corporation is broken into in a rental it can sue the landlord if the security is breached.

I don't get the OP here. Sure the tenants shouldn't have deducted from rent but is he assuming he doesn't have to pay for the locks? If so if the tenants leave can they take the locks with them.

colm_mcm

wandererz wrote: »

The days are gone from when you think you can simply replace one lock for another store bought lock.

I'm trying to figure out what you mean here.

148multi

If the op pays the 250 is the lease broken by the landlord also, while also setting a precedent for the reasonable expectation of payment of any future bills incurred by the tenants for repairs.