Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Landlord falsely claiming intent to sell
Options
-
27-11-2015 7:44pm#1My landlord wants to increase our rent by 100 euro per month, we have a part 4 tenancy of 3+ years and refused the rent increase as the house is the same rent currently as a similar house next door. In fact the house next door was recently refurbished. But the landlord claims he could get an extra 100 euro per month for it because he saw other houses in the area for that price (I don't know what properties he was comparing to, they could be more modern, more bedrooms etc. He probably just looked at some on daft but the houses on our street are small ex-council houses)
A few weeks later he had our estate agent ring me and say he was at the house and asked was I there. I told him no as I was in town and that if he needed to come to the house he should have given us 24 hours notice so we could arrange to be there. The estate agent has never been any good to deal with, repairs take weeks or even months to be done and he is always rude. We are not in arrears, have paid on time always and the landlord inspected the house in September and said it looked great.
On the phone the estate agent said the landlord is now intending to sell the house and was there to serve us notice to leave. I am almost positive he is lying and has no intention to sell.
I know there was recently legislation brought in to stop landlords doing this. Does anyone know when this will take effect? I don't want to leave this house as it is right near both me and my partners work and we like the house. I am thinking he is trying to do this now as maybe the legislation doesn't come in till January (though we don't have to be out till after that due to our length of tenancy.
I don't think I should be forced to leave or to pay above market value. What can I do? At the moment I plan on just digging my heels in, paying the rent as normal and refusing to leave and let him try to evict me if he wants as I know he is not telling the truth and we have made this place our home. If we find another similar place, great, we'll move, but we shouldn't be forced to under false pretenses.0
Comments
-
You can contact the prtb. You have loads of rights but I'm never sure why people want to bring grief and hassle into their life. If it was me I'd either pay the extra safe in the knowledge that their can't be another increase for 2yrs, negotiate with the landlord a smaller increase that leaves both parties someway happy or move.
In reality how do you thing digging your heels in is going to end?.0 -
I'm pretty sure they need to provide proof that they are selling. If you contact the PRTB they will help you with what you wish to do.0
-
Op, just because next door has the same rent as you does not mean the house 3 doors down isn't higher. The new legislation has not been signed into law so the land lord is within his rights to give you notice of a rent increase. No doubt the estate agent will be able to provide evidence of similar properties renting for more. You can bring a case to the prtb but will will be required to pay the increased rate from the date you were notified if you lose so keep that extra money aside in case. The fact that he has served notice of intent to sell means he will be governed by existing laws, not what is enacted in the future.
If you dig your heals in and don't pay, you will be in arrears when the notice of increase elapses and eviction proceedings will no doubt follow. There is no doubt that the botched lead up by the Government announcing new legislation has contributed to higher rents but right now your LL has done nothing wrong and if there are houses in the area renting at the higher rate, you are out of luck.0 -
gordongekko wrote: »You can contact the prtb. You have loads of rights but I'm never sure why people want to bring grief and hassle into their life. If it was me I'd either pay the extra safe in the knowledge that their can't be another increase for 2yrs, negotiate with the landlord a smaller increase that leaves both parties someway happy or move.
In reality how do you thing digging your heels in is going to end?.
So I should just let the landlord lie, increase my rent above what my next door neighbor pays for the exact same size, but more modern house, and above the rent we agreed when moving in just because the landlord likely read a few articles in the Indo about rents going up and saw some other houses in town listed for 100 euro more on daft and got greedy?
When I've been an absolutely top notch tenant for 3 years including making small repairs myself to save him hassle?
Screw that. When talking to the estate agent I said we would actually be interested in buying the house if it was for sale. He then said, 'Uh well, um, okay but the house won't be up for sale unless it is vacant because it won't be suitable for viewings.' I told him we would be happy to accommodate viewings but he was saying that 'the landlord wants to have the house vacant for viewings.' The house is an old granny-type house and not in an area where people are snapping up houses. The few houses around for sale have had for sale signs up for ages (I'm in the Northwest where the 'recovery' has yet to be seen). However, it is hard to find nice houses to rent, so many of the I have lived in on this town are riddled with mold. And the current location is perfect for our needs.
I get what you are saying but to answer your question, by digging our heels in, we get more time to find a house that is simarly suitable, or perhaps this lying chancer realizes it's more hassle than it's worth to obtain a court eviction and gives up. We haven't done anything wrong and I still intend to lodge the rent as normal. It won't be that much hassle for me really to drag it out, and I don't feel like a jerk for doing it under the circumstances. Good tenants should not be forced out under false pretenses.0 -
Just to let you know, market rate isn't what your neighbour next door pays, it's what the landlord would get for the house on the open market.
If you think you can get the same size house in the same area in a reasonably similar condition as the current one for the same rent, then that's grand, refuse the rent increase and give notice to leave.
If not, and the similar property is 100 quid more a month, then that is the market rate.
He can't increase it past that.
You can dispute the rent increase to the prtb, but if They find in favour of the landlord, you'll have to back pay the difference.
If he is selling, which he is legally entitled to do, he has to give you the proper notice and has to make a genuine effort to do so.
While the new legislation hasn't been signed into law yet, it is still illegal for the landlord to evict you using the excuse of sale and move new tenants in a few weeks later. In which case you'd find you'd be entitled to a nice settlement for an illegal eviction.0 -
Advertisement
-
Op, just because next door has the same rent as you does not mean the house 3 doors down isn't higher. The new legislation has not been signed into law so the land lord is within his rights to give you notice of a rent increase. No doubt the estate agent will be able to provide evidence of similar properties renting for more. You can bring a case to the prtb but will will be required to pay the increased rate from the date you were notified if you lose so keep that extra money aside in case. The fact that he has served notice of intent to sell means he will be governed by existing laws, not what is enacted in the future.
If you dig your heals in and don't pay, you will be in arrears when the notice of increase elapses and eviction proceedings will no doubt follow. There is no doubt that the botched lead up by the Government announcing new legislation has contributed to higher rents but right now your LL has done nothing wrong and if there are houses in the area renting at the higher rate, you are out of luck.
I actually know of another house also on the same street that was listed at the same price, we saw it on daft about a year ago when friends of ours were looking for a new place. I would actually be willing to split the difference and pay 50 more per month but the landlord just decided to refuse this and lie about selling the house. We have not been notified in writing of a rent increase, he said it over the phone.
If the legislation referred to here http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/landlords-may-have-to-sign-declaration-of-plans-to-sell-up-1.2423321
comes into effect in January would he not be bound by it? He doesn't intend to sell it until after that, legally he can't as we can't be booted out for a few months under Part 4.0 -
It doesn't matter what your next door neighbour is paying, it's a different property with a different LL. the current legislation is not restricted to what your neighbour is paying, it is the area and is based on what the current rental rate is, and no doubt that has increased. The rules as of today are clear, as long as your rent has not increased within the last 12 months, the landlord is entitled to increase it to current market rate and if there are houses in the area which rent for a higher rate, he is entitled to increase the rent to that rate.
I am not sure whether there has been changes to this aspect of Part 4 entitlement, but after 4 years you can be asked to leave anyway with sufficient notice.
Good tenants are those that pay the market rate, bad tenants ate those who refuse too. If you live in an area where rental properties are at a premium, a reference will be essential as most LL's require them now. In a lot of places, no reference, no rental. You might feel putapon but the LL is entitled to be paid what the market will bare and if right now you are paying below that, then you cannot complain that you are being wronged. Renting property is a business, not a charity.
An awful lot has changed since that other property was listed a year ago.0 -
You sound like a lovely and reasonable tenant. I've no idea why they would even contemplate increasing the rent0
-
So you haven't had a rent increase in over three years and you expect it to stay the same forever? How do you know the neighbours' landlord has not increased the rent for a number of years? If so, then it probably isn't market.
Nevertheless, your current part IV ends at four years and the landlord can evict you with proper notice and with no excuse0 -
quadrifoglio verde wrote: »Just to let you know, market rate isn't what your neighbour next door pays, it's what the landlord would get for the house on the open market.
If you think you can get the same size house in the same area in a reasonably similar condition as the current one for the same rent, then that's grand, refuse the rent increase and give notice to leave.
If not, and the similar property is 100 quid more a month, then that is the market rate.
He can't increase it past that.
You can dispute the rent increase to the prtb, but if They find in favour of the landlord, you'll have to back pay the difference.
If he is selling, which he is legally entitled to do, he has to give you the proper notice and has to make a genuine effort to do so.
While the new legislation hasn't been signed into law yet, it is still illegal for the landlord to evict you using the excuse of sale and move new tenants in a few weeks later. In which case you'd find you'd be entitled to a nice settlement for an illegal eviction.
The situation in the last bit is almost definitely what is occurring. I'd be happy enough to save a hundred euro per month on the chance that I would lose. He would have to prove that he is both selling the house and that the house is worth a hundred euro more. I like my odds there.
Obviously it would be best to just find another similar place. But if I can't, I'm not going anywhere. I'm tired of moving and tired of letting landlords screw me, I've rented in 5 other places in this town and they have all been terrible in different ways, one rented a house that he just 'refurbished', when we couldn't figure out why the house was freezing and moldy even with the heat on, I climbed into the attic and there wasn't a lick of insulation. I know there are plenty of bad tenants as well but I'm not one and I am not going to let another cowboy screw me for the umpteenth time. I've had enough. I know some will disagree with me fighting it but I feel like it's the right thing to do in this case, if I cannot find a suitable place in time. Especially considering they are doing this right before the holidays. Probably because they think the legislation is coming in and are trying to avoid it. But if what you are saying is true, he is already not allowed to 'pretend' to be selling the house.
What really annoys me is we actually maintained the house and garden beautifully, fixed and painted stuff (with permission), because he wasn't bothered to and took ages to fix anything and now that we have the place nice and cozy and he does this. In fact, he was happy enough with the rent until he carried out an inspection and was impressed with how well it looked.0 -
Advertisement
-
It is very easy for the EA to provide proof of similar properties renting for more if they are. You are basing your opinion on your next door neighbour, he has a much wider data base. Not many will like your odds, parcularly if you haven't had a rent increase in 3 years. Have you read a newspaper recently?0
-
Would you not just try & negotiate with the LL? There's a possibility the situation could be salvaged if you don't both go to Def-Con 5.
You've made the place home & he could do without the hassle of finding new tenants. Have you paid any increase in three years? Is there no compromise to be reached?0 -
I actually know of another house also on the same street that was listed at the same price, we saw it on daft about a year ago when friends of ours were looking for a new place. I would actually be willing to split the difference and pay 50 more per month but the landlord just decided to refuse this and lie about selling the house. We have not been notified in writing of a rent increase, he said it over the phone.
If the legislation referred to here http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/landlords-may-have-to-sign-declaration-of-plans-to-sell-up-1.2423321
comes into effect in January would he not be bound by it? He doesn't intend to sell it until after that, legally he can't as we can't be booted out for a few months under Part 4.The situation in the last bit is almost definitely what is occurring. I'd be happy enough to save a hundred euro per month on the chance that I would lose. He would have to prove that he is both selling the house and that the house is worth a hundred euro more. I like my odds there.
Obviously it would be best to just find another similar place. But if I can't, I'm not going anywhere. I'm tired of moving and tired of letting landlords screw me, I've rented in 5 other places in this town and they have all been terrible in different ways, one rented a house that he just 'refurbished', when we couldn't figure out why the house was freezing and moldy even with the heat on, I climbed into the attic and there wasn't a lick of insulation. I know there are plenty of bad tenants as well but I'm not one and I am not going to let another cowboy screw me for the umpteenth time. I've had enough. I know some will disagree with me fighting it but I feel like it's the right thing to do in this case, if I cannot find a suitable place in time. Especially considering they are doing this right before the holidays. Probably because they think the legislation is coming in and are trying to avoid it. But if what you are saying is true, he is already not allowed to 'pretend' to be selling the house.
What really annoys me is we actually maintained the house and garden beautifully, fixed and painted stuff (with permission), because he wasn't bothered to and took ages to fix anything and now that we have the place nice and cozy and he does this. In fact, he was happy enough with the rent until he carried out an inspection and was impressed with how well it looked.
You dont have any right to decline an increase, you do have a right to contest it, but you cant simply say "Im not paying that and thats the end of that"
You say you are tired of moving but have been at this place for 3 years, which is almost the max to which you are entitled, what has occured before (how many times you moved or how little insulation was in the attic) has nothing to do with your current landlord, neither is what some house you are aware of being rented for a year ago! is in anyway relevant unless the house you are living in if you dont move you will very likely have no option but to move next year as no landlord will be forced to house you after your 4 years are up, s/he will simply give you notice and then you will have to move. Your landlord is entitled to ask for market rate, if thats what it is, then they would be wise to keep their own record of this, even if you contest this and win, you will very likely be out in a year, whereas if you negotiate now or even accept, then you wont have any increase for two years, assuming your landlord keeps you on.
The thing is, if you simply decline to pay the increase now, you will put yourself in the worst situation where you will be served with an eviction notice and that will proceed from there if you dont handle that correctly either. Simply digging your heels in doesnt seem like the best option.
I know what I'd do if you simply declined to pay an increase, especially where there had been none for years.
If you havent heard whats occuring over the last 12 months regarding rent, thats not your landlords fault, although Im wondering if this house is on the side of a mountain.0 -
Your predicament is a shame OP, personally I would fight him to the last just for being a dick. It sounds to be exactly as you have stated, he just wants to increase the rent to guarantee it for the next two years. Then he has lied. I cannot think for the life of me why a landlord would prefer to lose money trying to sell an empty house when he has a paying tenant willing to accommodate viewings.
Don't ask for your rights here, there are a lot of folks who are landlords, contact the ptsb and be sure of it. Good luck, I hope you fight, even if you lose,the fight against these scummy practices has to start somewhere.0 -
Regarding the market rate of your dwelling, this is not dependant on your next door neighbours rent or their situation. It is dependant on the market. If the landlord can get 100 euro extra per month from a new tenant then that is the market rate. A sample size of just your neighbour is not enough to sway the adjudicators to your favor. You will likely lose this battle and be forced to pay back rent. Especially if you have not had an increase in 3 years then you are almost certainly paying less than market rent unless you were paying over it in the first place.
As for the notice of termination, since you are on part 4 tenancy with no lease in place to enhance your rights you must follow the notice to terminate. If you overhold you will be breaking the law and will be subject to fines and court judgements against you. You must leave when the notice has told you to leave.
If the landlord has no intent to sell then you can bring a case to the prtb for an illegal eviction. Until the new legislation is put in place the onus will be on you to prove this. The landlord does not have to sell in the end if he does not want to, he just has to make an effort to do so and if I recall correctly (I am not a lawyer, get real legal advice if you want to be sure of anything said here on boards) the landlord decides to put the house back into the rental market then he has to give you first refusal on whether or not you want to live there. He can not refuse you if you decide you want to live there again.
Also, at the 4 year mark, you lose all part 4 rights for a period of 6 months. This allows your landlord to end the tenancy with proper notice (112 days IIRC) with no reason whatsoever. So, it might just be a waiting game for your landlord anyway.
So, in the end of the day since notice has or will be furnished to you, you must leave. From there you can decide what to do if the landlord has not been honest.0 -
FortySeven wrote: »Your predicament is a shame OP, personally I would fight him to the last just for being a dick. It sounds to be exactly as you have stated, he just wants to increase the rent to guarantee it for the next two years. Then he has lied. I cannot think for the life of me why a landlord would prefer to lose money trying to sell an empty house when he has a paying tenant willing to accommodate viewings.
Don't ask for your rights here, there are a lot of folks who are landlords, contact the ptsb and be sure of it. Good luck, I hope you fight, even if you lose,the fight against these scummy practices has to start somewhere.
Freeman stuff with no understanding of how the rental market works. An empty house sells a lot more easily than an occupied house. The market sets the rate, not the occupier so a LL who has invested in a property has a right to ask market rate, the op is a tenent, a customer who must pay the going rate for a commodity, what you posted is ill informed.0 -
FortySeven wrote: »Your predicament is a shame OP, personally I would fight him to the last just for being a dick. It sounds to be exactly as you have stated, he just wants to increase the rent to guarantee it for the next two years. Then he has lied. I cannot think for the life of me why a landlord would prefer to lose money trying to sell an empty house when he has a paying tenant willing to accommodate viewings.
Don't ask for your rights here, there are a lot of folks who are landlords, contact the ptsb and be sure of it. Good luck, I hope you fight, even if you lose,the fight against these scummy practices has to start somewhere.
Mortgages are very hard to get if there is tenants already living there.
What if the landlord is just fed up of being a landlord.
Is he not entitled to give notice to the tenant (which he is legally allowed do) and sell the house?
Is the landlord not allowed increase the rent after 3 years to the market rate?
The op mentioned he hasn't increased it for 3 years and the market rate is 100 quid above his current rent.0 -
quadrifoglio verde wrote: »Mortgages are very hard to get if there is tenants already living there.
What if the landlord is just fed up of being a landlord.
Is he not entitled to give notice to the tenant (which he is legally allowed do) and sell the house?
Is the landlord not allowed increase the rent after 3 years to the market rate?
The op mentioned he hasn't increased it for 3 years and the market rate is 100 quid above his current rent.
I replied to the tenant. The landlords issues are the landlords issues. Plenty houses are sold with tenants residing in fact i recently bought one myself with tenants residing. You know this. Yes the landlord is entitled but anyone with a modicum of common sense can see he is trying one of the oldest tricks in the book.
Market rate is a doozy, landlords have a market cornered with a lack of new units and are gouging every last cent they can, it is a viscous circle of one raising and everyone else using that to justify raising. Tenants have little or no option but to pay. It got so bad the government had to step in.
The OP does not have to take my advice, I advised him to seek clarification of the position through the ptrb, this is good advice, just pay up is not. I also gave my personal opinion. Being accused of being a freeman is insulting and unnecessary. My points are as valid as anyones.0 -
Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »So you haven't had a rent increase in over three years and you expect it to stay the same forever? How do you know the neighbours' landlord has not increased the rent for a number of years? If so, then it probably isn't market.
Nevertheless, your current part IV ends at four years and the landlord can evict you with proper notice and with no excuse
Technically, I wouldnt consider the part 4 rights ending at 4 years and a notice to terminate the agreement as being given an eviction.
My view is that, its just that all thats allowed from the tenants rights end of things, to me it means the landlord can give notice to the tenant to quit as the tenancy is deemed complete/over.
The landlord can decide to not re let to the same people again and if they do re let to them, they can still give them notice to leave within the first 6 months of the following lease.
By the end of the tenancy the landlord must give the appropriate notice (112days?) which I believe can be given 111 days before the end of the tenancy (4years) so that the day after 4 years has elapsed the tenant must leave.0 -
FortySeven wrote: ». Yes the landlord is entitled but anyone with a modicum of common sense can see he is trying one of the oldest tricks in the book.
Market rate is a doozy.
The oldest "trick" in the book is to achieve what a commodity is worth, since time began a commodity is worth what someone (not necessarily the op) will pay for it, ie the market rate.
The "doozy" is not subjective, it is objective, the evidence will be provided by the market, in other words what someone else would be willing to pay based on current rentals in the area.0 -
Advertisement
-
The oldest "trick" in the book is to achieve what a commodity is worth, since time began a commodity is worth what someone (not necessarily the op) will pay for it, ie the market rate.
The "doozy" is not subjective, it is objective, the evidence will be provided by the market, in other words what someone else would be willing to pay based on current rentals in the area.
I do not disagree, however within that market are differing rates, the tenant has the right to try to keep it to that other market, the one where the price is not higher, landlord can chance his arm with the highest if he likes.
People have the right to try and fight an unfair market. Whatever people say. This market is clearly broken and it is coming to, nay, long past time that tenants fought for reasonable rent comparable to wages.
I'm aware that doesn't fit into your rules, regs and wants and desires but life rarely suffers injustice through regulation for long. As you have just seen by the government moving the goalposts.0 -
Freeman stuff with no understanding of how the rental market works. An empty house sells a lot more easily than an occupied house. The market sets the rate, not the occupier so a LL who has invested in a property has a right to ask market rate, the op is a tenent, a customer who must pay the going rate for a commodity, what you posted is ill informed.
I'd believe in this free market claptrap if there was a free market for housing which there isn't.0 -
FortySeven wrote: »I do not disagree, however within that market are differing rates, the tenant has the right to try to keep it to that other market, the one where the price is not higher, landlord can chance his arm with the highest if he likes.
People have the right to try and fight an unfair market. Whatever people say. This market is clearly broken and it is coming to, nay, long past time that tenants fought for reasonable rent comparable to wages.
I'm aware that doesn't fit into your rules, regs and wants and desires but life rarely suffers injustice through regulation for long. As you have just seen by the government moving the goalposts.
I'm not arguing that the market is "broken", that is something we should all take up (both LL's and tenants) when the candidates come knocking on our door in a couple of months time. But the rate a LL can set is based on the highest level that the current market has set, not the average. If a LL can show that the current maximum asking price is "€X" in the area then s(he) has a right to raise rent to that rate. Like it or not, that is the reality. Rental rates have been depressed over the last few years, now that there is not enough rental properties and mortgages are harder to come by, rents are rising, that is the nature of the beast, what is rare is is demand.0 -
Eugene Norman wrote: »I'd believe in this free market claptrap if there was a free market for housing which there isn't.
Why do you believe there isn't a free market? There is a certain amount of housing and a certain amount of tenants, right now there are more tenents than houses so rents are rising, if there was a surplus of housing then rents would fall, what could make a market more free? Equilibrium will never be attained, it never has been because no market is static. This is supply and demand in its purist form.0 -
Eugene Norman wrote: »You miss of course the massive state intervention in propping up housing via Nama and state owned banks not calling on the arrears from deliberately delinquent landlords. Free market?
So you want all those loans to be sold to venture capitalists who will push up rents even further or sold off cheaply to owner occupiers which remove even more properties from the rental market?0 -
So you want all those loans to be sold to venture capitalists who will push up rents even further?
Why would the "venture capitalists" be any worse than the present exactly? I thought we were hitting "market rates" based on pure "supply and demand." Why would venture capitalists be able to push rents higher than what you claim is a free market which by definition is achieving market rates ( furthermore why, in a free market wouldn't we want the most competive capitalists to own property rather than the amateurs who now own?)
But yes I would like to see all landlords in arrears have their property seized. It's the free market way.
p.s I am sure you mean vulture.0 -
Technically, I wouldnt consider the part 4 rights ending at 4 years and a notice to terminate the agreement as being given an eviction.
My view is that, its just that all thats allowed from the tenants rights end of things, to me it means the landlord can give notice to the tenant to quit as the tenancy is deemed complete/over.
The landlord can decide to not re let to the same people again and if they do re let to them, they can still give them notice to leave within the first 6 months of the following lease.
By the end of the tenancy the landlord must give the appropriate notice (112days?) which I believe can be given 111 days before the end of the tenancy (4years) so that the day after 4 years has elapsed the tenant must leave.
Part 4 reasons for termination are set out in section 32 or 34, I assume they are there for a reason, and that the landlord can't just go 'Sorry tenancy is over'. He has to give one of the reasons and it has to be genuine. He's not doing that.
Forget about the rent increase for now. I'm not going to be convinced that I am paying below market rate when 2 houses on the same street at the same size are the same rent. Yes I read the news but I don't live in Dublin and rents in my area have not risen much at all, I could get a house at similar rent but I prefer this location and this house and should not be forced out under false pretenses. The problem isn't getting another house at the same rent. I could have taken the similar one down the road last year at the same rent and would have if I had known I was going to be thrown out of this one, and I wouldn't have bothered painting the kitchen, etc.
Should a landlord be able to force long term tenants out for whatever reason they want by lying about selling up? No, and that's why the laws were brought in. Landlords are using this loophole so often they had to make legislation to combat it.
Someone said 'good tenants pay the market rate'. I am a good tenant paying the market rate! The house was paid off by the landlord's parents who lived here for decades and then left it to the landlord, he doesn't even have a mortgage on it. It's just pure greed.0 -
I have no idea what all this market talk has to do with helping the OP right now.
Simple fact is notice was / is being furnished. OP has to leave and can then proceed to make a complaint to the PRTB if it turns out the landlord has been dishonest. If the OP refuses to leave then it is them that will be breaking the law.
The rent increase has nothing to do with the current situation. The issue is the notice to terminate, which is legal until proven otherwise.0 -
Part 4 reasons for termination are set out in section 32 or 34, I assume they are there for a reason, and that the landlord can't just go 'Sorry tenancy is over'. He has to give one of the reasons and it has to be genuine. He's not doing that.
Forget about the rent increase for now. I'm not going to be convinced that I am paying below market rate when 2 houses on the same street at the same size are the same rent. Yes I read the news but I don't live in Dublin and rents in my area have not risen much at all, I could get a house at similar rent but I prefer this location and this house and should not be forced out under false pretenses. The problem isn't getting another house at the same rent. I could have taken the similar one down the road last year at the same rent and would have if I had known I was going to be thrown out of this one, and I wouldn't have bothered painting the kitchen, etc.
Should a landlord be able to force long term tenants out for whatever reason they want by lying about selling up? No, and that's why the laws were brought in. Landlords are using this loophole so often they had to make legislation to combat it.
Someone said 'good tenants pay the market rate'. I am a good tenant paying the market rate! The house was paid off by the landlord's parents who lived here for decades and then left it to the landlord, he doesn't even have a mortgage on it. It's just pure greed.
Would you get over yourself with "pure greed" crap. It's absolutely none of your business how your landlord finances his property. If you receive an inheritance are you going to donate it all to charity? I doubt it.0 -
Advertisement
-
Part 4 reasons for termination are set out in section 32 or 34, I assume they are there for a reason, and that the landlord can't just go 'Sorry tenancy is over'. He has to give one of the reasons and it has to be genuine. He's not doing that.
Forget about the rent increase for now. I'm not going to be convinced that I am paying below market rate when 2 houses on the same street at the same size are the same rent. Yes I read the news but I don't live in Dublin and rents in my area have not risen much at all, I could get a house at similar rent but I prefer this location and this house and should not be forced out under false pretenses. The problem isn't getting another house at the same rent. I could have taken the similar one down the road last year at the same rent and would have if I had known I was going to be thrown out of this one, and I wouldn't have bothered painting the kitchen, etc.
Should a landlord be able to force long term tenants out for whatever reason they want by lying about selling up? No, and that's why the laws were brought in. Landlords are using this loophole so often they had to make legislation to combat it.
Someone said 'good tenants pay the market rate'. I am a good tenant paying the market rate! The house was paid off by the landlord's parents who lived here for decades and then left it to the landlord, he doesn't even have a mortgage on it. It's just pure greed.
How do you know that the landlord does not actually want to sell the property?0
Advertisement