Overholding nearly year

campingcarist

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/two-women-living-rentfree-in-dalkey-home-with-panoramic-seaviews-told-to-get-out-by-judge-35276408.html

Two women not abiding by a determination order of 16 Jan 2016 still in house.
And how much more time did the case take to get to a determination order - 6 months?

If the link doesn't work, could someone please post the correct link.

GLaDOS

Working link: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/two-women-living-rentfree-in-dalkey-home-with-panoramic-seaviews-told-to-get-out-by-judge-35276408.html

bleary

Asked to Leave in April 2015 according to website, Launched a go fund me to buy the place but sure it's much cheaper to pay nothing at all. God help the landlord, I'd say the chances of them actually leaving are tiny.
http://oursafehaven.ie/

campingcarist

From bleary's link:

Only the following rules will apply:

• No violence, aggression, or misconduct of any kind will be tolerated.

Obviously, over-holding and non payment of rent does not constitute "misconduct of any kind".

newacc2015

If this landlord missed two payments on his mortgage, a bank could appoint a receiver(they don't even have to go to the courts) and within a few weeks/months the house would be sold.

Yet a tenant doesnt pay their rent for a year and arent out of the house. And people say tenants lack rights in this country?

Kristopherus

Turfed out on their ears, they should be, unless its already too late.

AmberGold

Only in Ireland.

No doubt the landlord will be perceived as a capitalist heartless whatever.

<mod snip>

Lumen

newacc2015 wrote: »

If this landlord missed two payments on his mortgage, a bank could appoint a receiver(they don't even have to go to the courts) and within a few weeks/months the house would be sold.

Yet a tenant doesnt pay their rent for a year and arent out of the house. And people say tenants lack rights in this country?

There are approx twenty thousand BTL accounts in arrears of more than 180 days.

Landlords have been treated incredibly gently by the courts.

currants

That safe haven website is totally irrational. I understand they had custody problems 20 odd years ago but the daughter is 38! They've been given Irish citizenship through some sort of mysterious string pulling according to their site,and all the benefits that entails like healthcare and a no fees university education for the daughter. Now they want a free gaff in Dalkey with sea views. I'd put them on the social housing list, if they qualify financially, like every other Irish citizen. All this safe haven nonsense, the daughter is heading fast towards middle age and they're still harking back to her troubled childhood as an excuse for not paying rent.

The word entitlement is bandied around a lot but this pair really are the embodiment of it. Its not often I feel sorry for a landlord but all this talk about trips to Switzerland whilst scrounging for handouts to buy a house in one of the most expensive parts of the country is really taking the biscuit. They also seem to think its unfair of the Landlord to want to end their tenancy after 10 years, very strange attitude.

GGTrek

currants wrote: »

They also seem to think its unfair of the Landlord to want to end their tenancy after 10 years, very strange attitude.

This is also what the Irish government thinks in their latest piece of proposed legislation giving indefinite leases to Tenants!

April 73

I started reading that safe-haven site but it made me want to throw my phone against the wall.
What a nightmare for the landlord.

TresGats

So nobody would 'Gofundme" and buy them a house in Dalkey. Aww diddums.
Welcome to the real world Ladies, and join the housing list like everyone else in your unfortunate situation. .

Cuddlesworth

currants wrote: »

That safe haven website is totally irrational. I understand they had custody problems 20 odd years ago but the daughter is 38! They've been given Irish citizenship through some sort of mysterious string pulling according to their site,and all the benefits that entails like healthcare and a no fees university education for the daughter. Now they want a free gaff in Dalkey with sea views. I'd put them on the social housing list, if they qualify financially, like every other Irish citizen. All this safe haven nonsense, the daughter is heading fast towards middle age and they're still harking back to her troubled childhood as an excuse for not paying rent.

The word entitlement is bandied around a lot but this pair really are the embodiment of it. Its not often I feel sorry for a landlord but all this talk about trips to Switzerland whilst scrounging for handouts to buy a house in one of the most expensive parts of the country is really taking the biscuit. They also seem to think its unfair of the Landlord to want to end their tenancy after 10 years, very strange attitude.

Honestly for the house and the location, at 1600 a month they were paying far less then 50% of the market rate. The landlord is a fool.

But its a really good example of judges giving extensions to people based on sob story's. If they are not out by Feb, my understanding is that the landlord will have to go back to court because he never actually got a proper eviction order. And that might take a while.

athtrasna

The landlord also wants it back for "summer use" according to their website. This may work against the landlord

Graham

athtrasna wrote: »

The landlord also wants it back for "summer use" according to their website. This may work against the landlord

Hasn't the landlord already been granted possession?

newacc2015

Lumen wrote: »

Landlords have been treated incredibly gently by the courts.

Eh? Did you even read my comment? LLs dont even get to go to court. Their bank hands them a letter to say a receiver has been appointed and they have lost their house. I don't know how you think "Landlords have been treated incredibly gently by the courts." when BTL repossessions dont go to court.

Do you even understand how a receiver works or what one is?

Cuddlesworth

Graham wrote: »

Hasn't the landlord already been granted possession?

RTB judgement against them for eviction in July, recently brought to court and ordered to vacate in Jan. If they had left before the court case, they probably would have avoided the 11k in back dated rent and fees.

Cuddlesworth

newacc2015 wrote: »

Eh? Did you even read my comment? LLs dont even get to go to court. Their bank hands them a letter to say a receiver has been appointed and they have lost their house. I don't know how you think "Landlords have been treated incredibly gently by the courts." when BTL repossessions dont go to court.

Do you even understand how a receiver works or what one is?

Receivers are appointed by the court system.

Marcusm

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Receivers are appointed by the court system.

Receivers are generally appointed based on the terms of the loan documentation and outside of any formal juridical process. Court appointed receivers are very rare. Most times you will hear about courts and receivers is when the borrower seeks to challenge the receiver's appointment.

Claw Hammer

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Receivers are appointed by the court system.

Not all of them. The court appointed ones are generally over companies.

Cuddlesworth

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

If they had left before the court case, they probably would have avoided the 11k in back dated rent and fees.

They won't be paying it anyway.

Its no wonder landlords are getting incredibly choosy about who they let into their houses. Also explains the proliferation of the licensee system.

newacc2015

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Receivers are appointed by the court system.

Yeah receivers are appointed by the courts for companies.

For a BTL mortgage, the bank picks up the phone and calls a receiver who gets a solictor to look at the deed of mortgage. If he is happy it with, he is now the receiver for the property. The courts are not in anyway involved. There are cases where people missed 1.7 payments on their mortgage, had a receiver appointed when they were supposed to miss 2 payments to have a receiver appointed.

A receiver is supposed to work on your behalf legally. But in reality they are really working for the banks. That is not my opinion, there are plenty of cases in the courts were receivers allegedly sold houses below market value. Or they sold houses and never even told the owner they even sold the houses.

Receivers for property in this country are not regulated and dont need any qualification. I could legally call myself a receiver tomorrow and take over a mortgage in arrears from a bank. I am not even responsible for my actions as they bank giving me the mortgage to basically repo the house will assume responsibility for my actions.

Serious legal figures have called receivership a legal license for theft and rightly so

handlemaster

In all honesty what is the point of the prtb if not to infuriate landlords

Spanish Eyes

handlemaster wrote: »

In all honesty what is the point of the prtb if not to infuriate landlords

Well if they even had a deposit protection scheme or something, it would be good, for both parties I think.

Their website is pants most of the time, and if you happen to be a LL, well then, just pay the fee and get lost. That is the reality.

The organisation is a good thing, but the length of time it takes for dispute resolution and etc. is just beyond a flippin joke.

handlemaster

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Well if they even had a deposit protection scheme or something, it would be good, for both parties I think.

Their website is pants most of the time, and if you happen to be a LL, well then, just pay the fee and get lost. That is the reality.

The organisation is a good thing, but the length of time it takes for dispute resolution and etc. is just beyond a flippin joke.

The organisation is toothless. Even if a landlord gets a positive out come for him/her the decision is not enforcable

Spanish Eyes

handlemaster wrote: »

The organisation is toothless. Even if a landlord gets a positive out come for him/her the decision is not enforcable

Toothless until the LL doesn't register. Then wham. No problems with enforcement there I'd imagine.

One way street that place. It should be balanced. Regulations for LLs and swift legal redress if tenants wreck the place, are anti social, or don't pay rent.

I think that's fair enough.

handlemaster

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Toothless until the LL doesn't register. Then wham. No problems with enforcement there I'd imagine.

One way street that place. It should be balanced. Regulations for LLs and swift legal redress if tenants wreck the place, are anti social, or don't pay rent.

I think that's fair enough.

Agreed there are a certain tenants who turn into people of straw when it comes to paying what they own. But in the whole every one would benefit if the contracts signed in letting were enforcable

bleary

There is talk of enforcing new legislation to strengthen tenants rights etc, instead could we just try enforcing existing legislation so that I know as a tenant my deposit is not going to be confiscated by a landlord as an extra bonus and as a landlord that if I have valid reasons to evict it happens quickly and without needing to pay off a tenant or costing thousands.
This would benefit good tenants and good landlords .
at the moment they couldn't enact the deposit protection scheme on the basis of current prtb operations it would take years to return the deposit and no valid deductions would ever be made.

ED E

How much work would it take to:

- Make RTB judgements legally binding
- Allow the sheriff to enforce them

Then all you have to do is speed up the RTBs case processing and scrotes lovely ladies like these don't get away with.

GGTrek

bleary wrote: »

There is talk of enforcing new legislation to strengthen tenants rights etc, instead could we just try enforcing existing legislation so that I know as a tenant my deposit is not going to be confiscated by a landlord as an extra bonus and as a landlord that if I have valid reasons to evict it happens quickly and without needing to pay off a tenant or costing thousands.
This would benefit good tenants and good landlords .
at the moment they couldn't enact the deposit protection scheme on the basis of current prtb operations it would take years to return the deposit and no valid deductions would ever be made.

The new legislation is not just a talk, the Oireachtas is actively pushing it forward with the sponsorship of the Irish government, there is a discussion on this topic on this board:
https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057678276
The RTB is a just a bad joke on landlords that pay for their existence, they are just incapable of executing any plan. I would love that they implement the deposit protection scheme with long delays in returning deposits, so that every single tenants in Ireland will feel what every landlord feels already about the RTB, it might just be the tipping point where their inefficiency is exposed in the press and this useless quango is finally abolished giving back to ordinary courts of law the power to decide on residential tenancies disputes.

GGTrek

ED E wrote: »

How much work would it take to:

- Make RTB judgements legally binding
- Allow the sheriff to enforce them

Then all you have to do is speed up the RTBs case processing and scrotes lovely ladies like these don't get away with.

I have always asked myself why RTB adjudications need to be enforced by Circuit courts, I believe that without the approval of a proper court of law the RTB adjudications are not worth the paper they are written on. It might be uncostitutional for an RTB adjudicator, who is not a judge, to issue any kind of enforceable order. I am not sure about this, there are other participants to this board that are more knowledgeable on such legal issues. In any case the real issue at RTB are the spurious appeals which take months to be heard and are not directly enforceable, the RTB tribunal should be absolutely removed and any adjudication appealed to a proper court of law that can then immediately enforce it. This will cut at least a good 6 months to the process.