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

What are the rules if I want my tenant to move out?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Butters1979
    Registered Users Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    rawn wrote: »
    Tbh the SW are well aware that these practices are happening and are turning a blind eye, otherwise the homelessness problem would be twice as bad

    I'm not saying the rules here are correct, but don't blatantly break them then complain when it comes back to bite you.


  • Options
    #33
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Butters1979 wrote: »
    I'm not saying the rules here are correct, but don't blatantly break them then complain when it comes back to bite you.

    How are you to know that the tenant didn't instigate this- and presented it to Social Welfare down the road as a fait accompli, which is when DSP classified it as a rent increase- that they would cover..........

    The whole mess might have been avoided- if the tenant had made a case to DSP for an exception to the ceiling at the outset- on the basis they weren't able to find suitable accommodation within the rent limits- DSP (via Community Welfare Officers) were making exceptions left right and centre. The tenants who didn't have exceptions- were the unusual ones- not those with exceptions.


  • Options
    #34
    dogbert27
    Registered Users Posts: 4,927 ✭✭✭dogbert27


    So
    1. You had a house to rent for X amount of euro
    2. Potential Tenant couldn't get X amount of euro for rent allowance so your family member gave him a lease saying the rent is Y euro and the tenant then got rent allowance for Y euro.
    3. Your family member and the tenant verbally agreed that the tenant would make up the difference to pay X euro rent that you wanted.
    4. Tenant doesn't want to top up the rent anymore so took it upon himself to go to SW and say the rent has been raised and he is now getting the full X euro rent paid by SW
    5. You now think you should be getting Z amount of euro in rent but because the tenant has already gone to SW and said the rent was increased you can't ask the same tenant to pay more.

    So first of all he has an original signed lease saying that his rent is only Y euro. That's all he should legally have been paying. When you made your tax returns for the last four years did you declare Y euros or X euros as the amount of money being received in rent?

    Second, how did he go to SW and say his rent has been increased to X euro without a new lease to prove the rent increase?

    Third, you don't have the original lease to hand only bank statements to show he's there just over 4 years. He could say that he paid you cash in hand before receiving the rent allowance. Have you got a rent book?

    The whole thing seems like a complete mess. If the rent he's paying you is not enough to cover the mortgage on the property and you're topping it up then yes you're losing money on potentially receiving more rent from a new tenant.

    How much money do you think you're losing out by? 50 euro a month, 100 euro a month?

    It all seems a complete mess and it may just be worth your while to ride this out one more year with this tenant when you can do another rent review and legitimately increase the rent.


  • Options
    #35
    Butters1979
    Registered Users Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    The_Conductor wrote: »
    How are you to know that the tenant didn't instigate this- and presented it to Social Welfare down the road as a fait accompli, which is when DSP classified it as a rent increase- that they would cover..........


    lg01 wrote: »
    Unusual situation but a family member used to manage the property for me and did a deal with the tenant whereby they gave them a lease saying the rent was lower than it actually was for the social welfare.

    They both agreed to it, OP or whoever was running the show at the start, did everything dodgy and i wonder if there is more to the story. Either way, their fault.


  • Options
    #36
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,965 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    Mmmm. Your relative and the tenant are both parties to welfare fraud.

    Can you prove that you didn't know about it to begin with? Possibly you can, because you have the bank records showing you were being paid the full amount from the beginning. (Did the money come in one payment from the tenant each month, or were there separate transactions from the tenant and council?)

    If so, then you may have some leverage over the tenant by suggesting that you will report this fraud to Welfare, unless they move out. Something to be aware of: this is a closed system, they need to have somewhere to go. Without a good reference from you, they will find it very difficult to find somewhere to go, so they will stay. So you may find that you need to phrase your reference in a certain way.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    GeorgeOrwell
    Registered Users Posts: 124 ✭✭GeorgeOrwell


    Have you registered this tenancy with the PRTB?

    If not, you've broken the law.

    Have you or your family member tried to pull a fast one with the Welfare system?

    If so, you've broken another law.

    If you decide to try to evict the tenant for any unlawful reason, then you will have broken yet another law.

    My advice - for what it's worth - is to be a professional landlord. If you decide to try to get rid of your tenant, your three breaches of the law will be taken into consideration and you're likely to find yourself in deep, deep water.


  • Options
    #38
    GeorgeOrwell
    Registered Users Posts: 124 ✭✭GeorgeOrwell


    Also, as someone earlier asked, how much rental income did you declare to the Revenue? This will have a bearing on the result of the PRTB case which your tenant will inevitably take against you, and which you will also inevitably lose!


  • Options
    #39
    Sarn
    Registered Users Posts: 3,082 ✭✭✭Sarn


    I can't see how the tenant could take a case to RTB if the tenancy is not renewed after the 4 year period and correct notice is given.


  • Options
    #40
    lg01
    Registered Users Posts: 76 ✭✭lg01


    Butters1979 wrote: »
    So you tried to con social welfare and this is what you got.
    Let me be very clear here - this was the tenants idea - he was conning the social welfare - my relative simply agreed to it to "do him a favour" - which were the words from my tenant last week when I found out. My relative is very old, easily led, and certainly did not know how bad a decision this was. I certainly would not have done this myself. But it was my fault for not being involved and its my responsibility now.

    The tenant definitely contacted the welfare 1 year ago and pretended the rent was being raised to get more money - I had not raised the rent and I had no idea he was doing this. I have not raised the rent a penny from 4 years ago when he moved in and the rental market was in the bin - it's now come back up and he's paying 35% less than market rates.

    I've been paying my tax returns 100% properly on the full amount. He's been paying me the rent himself from his account each week, I have all the records. I may be able to locate the original lease but I need to go searching.

    Anyway, if the law says I'm perfectly within my rights to ask a tenant to leave after 4 years - then it should be pretty straight forward. Thanks for all the advice.


  • Options
    #41
    Tigger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,705 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    dogbert27 wrote: »
    So
    1. You had a house to rent for X amount of euro
    2. Potential Tenant couldn't get X amount of euro for rent allowance so your family member gave him a lease saying the rent is Y euro and the tenant then got rent allowance for Y euro.
    3. Your family member and the tenant verbally agreed that the tenant would make up the difference to pay X euro rent that you wanted.
    4. Tenant doesn't want to top up the rent anymore so took it upon himself to go to SW and say the rent has been raised and he is now getting the full X euro rent paid by SW
    5. You now think you should be getting Z amount of euro in rent but because the tenant has already gone to SW and said the rent was increased you can't ask the same tenant to pay more.

    So first of all he has an original signed lease saying that his rent is only Y euro. That's all he should legally have been paying. When you made your tax returns for the last four years did you declare Y euros or X euros as the amount of money being received in rent?

    Second, how did he go to SW and say his rent has been increased to X euro without a new lease to prove the rent increase?

    Third, you don't have the original lease to hand only bank statements to show he's there just over 4 years. He could say that he paid you cash in hand before receiving the rent allowance. Have you got a rent book?

    The whole thing seems like a complete mess. If the rent he's paying you is not enough to cover the mortgage on the property and you're topping it up then yes you're losing money on potentially receiving more rent from a new tenant.

    How much money do you think you're losing out by? 50 euro a month, 100 euro a month?

    It all seems a complete mess and it may just be worth your while to ride this out one more year with this tenant when you can do another rent review and legitimately increase the rent.
    also did you declare the correct value to revenue
    cos if you didnt i would not pick at the scab, if you did then turf him out for being cheeky


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    dogbert27
    Registered Users Posts: 4,927 ✭✭✭dogbert27


    lg01 wrote: »
    Butters1979 wrote: »
    So you tried to con social welfare and this is what you got.
    Let me be very clear here - this was the tenants idea - he was conning the social welfare - my relative simply agreed to it to "do him a favour" - which were the words from my tenant last week when I found out. My relative is very old, easily led, and certainly did not know how bad a decision this was. I certainly would not have done this myself. But it was my fault for not being involved and its my responsibility now.

    The tenant definitely contacted the welfare 1 year ago and pretended the rent was being raised to get more money - I had not raised the rent and I had no idea he was doing this. I have not raised the rent a penny from 4 years ago when he moved in and the rental market was in the bin - it's now come back up and he's paying 35% less than market rates.

    I've been paying my tax returns 100% properly on the full amount. He's been paying me the rent himself from his account each week, I have all the records. I may be able to locate the original lease but I need to go searching.

    Anyway, if the law says I'm perfectly within my rights to ask a tenant to leave after 4 years - then it should be pretty straight forward. Thanks for all the advice.

    It's not just after 4 years though. It's between 4 years and 4.5 years so you really need to get your hands on the original lease to verify the start date instead of just making an assumption.


  • Options
    #43
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    Also when giving the notice of termination the notice period must be "within" the first 6 months of the further part4 tenancy, so if the notice required is 16 weeks then you must give notice no later than the 10th week of the further part4 tenancy.


  • Options
    #44
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,260 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    GeorgeOrwell wrote:
    My advice - for what it's worth - is to be a professional landlord. If you decide to try to get rid of your tenant, your three breaches of the law will be taken into consideration and you're likely to find yourself in deep, deep water.

    Ah here. If I was in the OP's shoes, I'd want to evict the tenant who was taken on by someone else in some kind of shady deal, and replace them with someone if my choosing, on legal terms. It sounds like OP is in luck as they are in the window where they can legally evict the tenant.

    Go easy.


  • Options
    #45
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,965 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    lg01 wrote: »
    Let me be very clear here - this was the tenants idea - he was conning the social welfare - my relative simply agreed to it to "do him a favour" - which were the words from my tenant last week when I found out. My relative is very old, easily led, and certainly did not know how bad a decision this was. I certainly would not have done this myself. But it was my fault for not being involved and its my responsibility now.

    The tenant definitely contacted the welfare 1 year ago and pretended the rent was being raised to get more money - I had not raised the rent and I had no idea he was doing this. I have not raised the rent a penny from 4 years ago when he moved in and the rental market was in the bin - it's now come back up and he's paying 35% less than market rates.

    Careful now.

    Your relative didn't simply agree: they also filled in paperwork for welfare declaring that the rent was at the lower level, or at least signed paperwork that the tenant filled in for them. And oldness does not exempt people from following the law.

    Also, your tenant didn't just tell welfare that the rent had gone up: if welfare accepted the tenant's word, there would be rent increases from here to the moon. There must have have been some paperwork from you or your relative, advising of the rent increase and the day it is effective from. Mmmm... unless the tenant forged it??? In that case, it could be even more incentive for them to move out as requested instead of overholding.


Advertisement