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

PTRB - tenant not paying - need evict

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    JimmyMW wrote: »
    Don't fix it, correct me if I am wrong but its not illegal to be a bad landlord is it?

    It is and the tenant can fix it themselves and then take the LL to PRTB notwithstanding the arears to reclaim the costs.


  • Options
    #63
    mel123
    Registered Users Posts: 2,209 ✭✭✭mel123


    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    No but let's say you do... the tenant can break down the door and then asjk you to fix it.

    God the whole system is just so wrong on landlords for this kind of stuff.

    *if* you illegally evicted someone, and they brought u to court, would a judge honestly rule in favor of a tenant who hadnt been paying their rent for a long period? genuine question, is there any precedent of cases?


  • Options
    #64
    April 73
    Registered Users Posts: 846 ✭✭✭April 73


    Trending wrote: »
    Harry that's just desperate. I know exactly how it takes its toll because this also happened to us. PRTB were /are worse than useless. We lost so much in rent and tried to approach the situation by doing all the right things legally. It got us no where. PRTB dragged it all out. We are sorry now that we didn't just evict them ourselves. We would've been better off. I struggled with serious stress and became ill. We fell into serious mortgage arrears and just today our property is gone up for sale. We are devastated. The tenants were social welfare recipients so we're on RA. SW were not interested in discussions with us. The property is very close to our home so we regularly see the tenants - they drive a Honda jeep (141 model) I had to sell my car because we couldn't afford it. I'm angry and upset. Sorry we ever became 'rich landlords'. Our situation went on for 2 years - we started to really struggle after 5/6 months.

    I sincerely wish for you to get some better result than us...and soon.

    I realise this is stating the obvious but this situation is just all wrong. There is no way this situation should be happening.

    Trending - I hope you have better luck in the future & that things improve for you. Your tenants are despicable.


  • Options
    #65
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    mel123 wrote: »
    God the whole system is just so wrong on landlords for this kind of stuff.

    *if* you illegally evicted someone, and they brought u to court, would a judge honestly rule in favor of a tenant who hadnt been paying their rent for a long period? genuine question, is there any precedent of cases?

    Firstly don't confuse criminal and civil court, I'm not saying you are just being clear.

    So let's say I pitch up and change the locks. Firstly that's a burglary, secondly if I try and stop the person gaining entry it's likely an assult. So once I get out of the 'joy I can look forward to a civil case.

    A cross compliant might result in somesort of wash (damages on one side offsetting another) in regard to the illegal eviction which would still go through the PRTB. The damages for the seperate civil case that even the worst qualified of Ambulance chasers would be able to come up with in 5 minutes on the back of a napkin - for assualt at the very least - would probably mean they end up owning my house.

    Legally and dispassionately you've a constitutional right to inviolbility of the dwelling vs. the LLs right to make a few quid in what should be a business. I dont agree with hows it's stacked but legally I can see the approach.

    Sorry for the spelling at work.

    Edit: Sorry for clarity the Burglary is contingent on the assult. The criminal damage is not arrestable IIRC.


  • Options
    #66
    JimmyMW
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭JimmyMW


    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    It is and the tenant can fix it themselves and then take the LL to PRTB notwithstanding the arears to reclaim the costs.

    If the tenant breaks down the door, it should technically come out of their deposit, however as there deposit is already used up in the arrears, i cannot see how they could have a valid claim for costs through the PRTB


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    JimmyMW wrote: »
    If the tenant breaks down the door, it should technically come out of their deposit, however as there deposit is already used up in the arrears, i cannot see how they could have a valid claim for costs through the PRTB

    Becuase the LL caused the issue.


  • Options
    #68
    JimmyMW
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭JimmyMW


    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    Becuase the LL caused the issue.

    How did the landlord cause the issue, the tenant broke the door.


  • Options
    #69
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    JimmyMW wrote: »
    How did the landlord cause the issue, the tenant broke the door.

    Jimmy - you might not see it - I can't bring you too it any more than I have. I've do direct experiance of this sort of litigation, just some small amount of general litigation experiance.

    It really doesn't matter eitherway though, the door is about 0.01% of your potential liability so feel free to try it and let us know how you got on.


  • Options
    #70
    JimmyMW
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭JimmyMW


    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    Jimmy - you might not see it - I can't bring you too it any more than I have. I've do direct experiance of this sort of litigation, just some small amount of general litigation experiance.

    It really doesn't matter eitherway though, the door is about 0.01% of your potential liability so feel free to try it and let us know how you got on.

    Fair enough, I am not claiming to have any knowledge of this area, I was just looking at it from a practical point of view. If this is the way the law works our country has serious problems


  • Options
    #71
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    JimmyMW wrote: »
    Fair enough, I am not claiming to have any knowledge of this area, I was just looking at it from a practical point of view. If this is the way the law works our country has serious problems

    Apologies, I didnt mean to be rude.

    It's more a legislative issue.

    Courts have to uphold the Constitution first, legislation second (ish) and then in Ireland they have very limit powers to make decisions. The issue is the inviolbility of the dwelling is a very heavily protected constitional right. There's good historic reasons for this. The government need to legislate to allow evictions and speed up the process. There's a huge amount of work that needs to be done in the area.

    In all honesty at the PRTB you as a LL would occourse argue the position you've taken. I personally don't think it would get very far but I could be completely wrong. I will say though that at the very least you'd be looking at a five figure settlelemt with a tenant and potential criminal charged.

    Personally I've move back in, take all the stuff out and sit there saying "What are you talking about guard, this is my gaffe and I've no idea what this mad man is talking about!" Leases and neighbours might paint a different picture though so you might have to get a bit more creative!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    pc7
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 14,121 Mod ✭✭✭✭pc7


    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    Apologies, I didnt mean to be rude.


    Personally I've move back in, take all the stuff out and sit there saying "What are you talking about guard, this is my gaffe and I've no idea what this mad man is talking about!" Leases and neighbours might paint a different picture though so you might have to get a bit more creative!

    I wonder are you on to something there, if you gave correct notice saying you needed dwelling for yourself and then just arrived in, what can they do really you need the home.


  • Options
    #73
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    pc7 wrote: »
    I wonder are you on to something there, if you gave correct notice saying you needed dwelling for yourself and then just arrived in, what can they do really you need the home.

    I'm not trying to turn this into a (very bad) legal lesson but when you rent out the property you pass on many of the rights to the renter (paying or not). You never really own real property, you just own rights surrounding it. Absolute ownership only applies to chattle (and women of course :pac:).


  • Options
    #74
    April 73
    Registered Users Posts: 846 ✭✭✭April 73


    This question was asked before on here about whether a landlord can move back into their own property (with correct legal notice) and whether the tenant then becomes a licensee - which carries few rights.
    I don't remember whether a final answer/conclusion was ever reached? It's an interesting question though especially in the situation of a non-paying tenant.

    Whatever the rights & wrongs & what's legal & illegal of that scenario above - no landlord should be in a situation where a non-paying tenant has the law on their side to stay for two years not paying rent, with no come-back, while the landlord may lose the property as a result.


  • Options
    #75
    JimmyMW
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭JimmyMW


    April 73 wrote: »
    Whatever the rights & wrongs & what's legal & illegal of that scenario above - no landlord should be in a situation where a non-paying tenant has the law on their side to stay for two years not paying rent, with no come-back, while the landlord may lose the property as a result.

    Your very right, this is ridiculous situation under Law


  • Options
    #76
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    JimmyMW wrote: »
    You're very right, this is ridiculous situation under Law

    Recent report that the acting Minister wants a constitutional referendum to reduce the property rights contained in the constitution.... probably to obtain the support of some independent . Of course anything like that would be massively counter-productive if it actually happened...


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement