Has anyone had experience with debt collectors?

GuitarMusic

Ive a tenant which destoyed my property and left with rent arears after bing issued with the appropriate notice by me (thank god she didn't overstay which was my main concern).

Anyhow I followed the proper chanels re prtb dispute who voted in my favour and issued a determination order of a sum in the low four figures payable to me.

Ive had contact with said tenant several times over the phone and each time she says that she is refusing to pay.

I had a similar case several years ago, went through the proper chanels the whole way, and did not see any money at the end of it (in fact going through the proper chanels you have to pay more money re sherrif etc).

The 28 days of the determination order is nearly up and I know that I will not see a cent.

Therefore I am wondering if it would be worth calling in debt collectors (with perhaps a physical presence) instead of chasing the money through courts etc as I did last time.

I'd happily pay 20% of money received to the debt collectors.

The tenant made absolutely s**t of my apartment (holes in walls etc), told numerous lies so I don't really want her to get away with it.

Has anyone had any experience with debt collectors in this regard and if so what were your experiences.

Just so you know I own multiple properties and most of my tenants have occupied happily for many years so I do consider myself a good landlord. This tenant was just one of those horrid tenants you come across once in a while. The seem nice at the start and then turn into demons for no reason.

L1011

They're useless. Without an actual proven (e.g. court judgement) debt assigned to them they're powerless and the "physical presence" is pretty much illegal in all forms. These kind of debt collectors now exist solely to send pseudo-legal letters to people in the hope it scares them a bit.

Lux23

Can you not pursue it through the courts?

handlemaster

Chill cat and move on. Life s to short and ireland has no protection for honest landlord's in these situations . The tenant sc#m will always get away with it

TSQ

Could you not bring a case in the small claims court? Anyone know if the small claims court deals with this type of claim - but if it does, then perhaps it is the way to go, and then once / if judgement received, give it to debt collector.

vandriver

....."Excluded from the small claims procedure are claims arising from:
(a) agreements to which the Consumer Credit Act 1995 applies (including credit agreements, hire-purchase agreements and consumer-hire agreements)

(b) a breach of a leasing agreement......."

TSQ

vandriver wrote: »

....."Excluded from the small claims procedure are claims arising from:
(a) agreements to which the Consumer Credit Act 1995 applies (including credit agreements, hire-purchase agreements and consumer-hire agreements)

(b) a breach of a leasing agreement......."

Guess there's no easy/affordable way to claim for criminal damage either.

lawred2

I've had a few encounters with them

They have next to zero powers in Ireland. They need court orders to have any power. They don't usually take this route as it's often too costly. Especially when one considers how often the material required to prove the existence of debts is not in their possession. They rely on people's ignorance of the law and auto generated bully boy letters.

In fact they can provide a bit of fun if you chose to engage with them..

Ultimately they are toothless.

Cuddlesworth

You need to go to the District Court with the PRTB order and then afterwards, go back to court to involve the sheriff if she ignores that. The PRTB themselves are toothless and a waste of time in the process. An old boss of mine would pursue if it was above 2.5k, otherwise he wouldn't bother. Not sure if that's still the case.

Eric Cartman

its really sad that landlords are effectively powerless against this sort of thing. We really should have an effective mechanism for recovering debts under 5k that nobody is immune to. Im talking taking 50% of somebody's salary and or welfare payments to sort debts. It would even be a great incentive to keep people from damaging property.

Cuddlesworth

Eric Cartman wrote: »

its really sad that landlords are effectively powerless against this sort of thing. We really should have an effective mechanism for recovering debts under 5k that nobody is immune to. Im talking taking 50% of somebody's salary and or welfare payments to sort debts. It would even be a great incentive to keep people from damaging property.

The only difference between a landlord and anybody else is the landlord has to go through the PRTB first. If you want to recover a debt from a person who doesn't want to pay, its always court and sheriff. People who don't pay their debts know this and hedge their bets by keeping the amount at the point where there is no point in recovery in terms of further money or time invested. Or in the case of those on social welfare, nothing to really take.

Eric Cartman

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

The only difference between a landlord and anybody else is the landlord has to go through the PRTB first. If you want to recover a debt from a person who doesn't want to pay, its always court and sheriff. People who don't pay their debts know this and hedge their bets by keeping the amount at the point where there is no point in recovery in terms of further money or time invested. Or in the case of those on social welfare, nothing to really take.

this 5er a week garnish in that instance is nonsense. We should be able to escalate it to 50% of all non RA cash benefits (why hurt landlords twice) to pay back debts. There has to be a severe deterrent for the seemingly immune from responsibility section of society.

4ensic15

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

You need to go to the District Court with the PRTB order and then afterwards, go back to court to involve the sheriff if she ignores that. The PRTB themselves are toothless and a waste of time in the process. An old boss of mine would pursue if it was above 2.5k, otherwise he wouldn't bother. Not sure if that's still the case.

There is no need for the Sherrif after the District Court. The Sherrif only need be involved after the Circuit Court. The District Court is much cheaper and more effective.

the_syco

4ensic15 wrote: »

The District Court is much cheaper and more effective.

Have not seen proof that the District Court can get money from someone on Social Welfare.

Cuddlesworth

4ensic15 wrote: »

There is no need for the Sherrif after the District Court. The Sherrif only need be involved after the Circuit Court. The District Court is much cheaper and more effective.

I'm not hugely up on the process but it's interesting to read what you can and can't do at that stage.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/personal_finance/debt/enforcement_of_judgments.html

It seems like regardless of the court type, if the person earns no money, chooses not to pay a cent, doesn't care about jail time and owes a substantial sum, the only option is execution against goods order? Which is effectively sending in the Sheriff for seizure of goods/property. Which in most cases, could also be considered a waste of time. I've heard of orders against social welfare tenants of a "fiver" a month but I had heard that the court is not able to garnish at source in the case of social welfare payments. Edit, Turns out garnishing social welfare was enacted in July

4ensic15

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I'm not hugely up on the process but it's interesting to read what you can and can't do at that stage.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/personal_finance/debt/enforcement_of_judgments.html

It seems like regardless of the court type, if the person earns no money, chooses not to pay a cent, doesn't care about jail time and owes a substantial sum, the only option is execution against goods order? Which is effectively sending in the Sheriff for seizure of goods/property. Which in most cases, could also be considered a waste of time. I've heard of orders against social welfare tenants of a "fiver" a month but I had heard that the court is not able to garnish at source in the case of social welfare payments. Edit, Turns out garnishing social welfare was enacted in July

A lot of tenants do not want a criminal conviction. They don't care about the sherriff but they do want to be able to travel abroad. It is the best way of getting money out of them. Many want to avoid a conviction.