Unusual new lease proposal

Whyner

Howdy,

Renting our property for 4 years and received a strange new lease proposal yesterday. Our current rent is 1675 and they didn’t raise it last year as a result of raising it the previous year

New proposal starting in January 2017:

First 3 months 1675
Middle 6 months 1837
Last 3 months 2000

That averages out at 1837 but rather than go with 1837 a month they appear to be locking us down for 2000 for 2018, did they think I wasn’t going to cop on to this?

Questions:

1. Am I right in assuming that their proposal is not allowed since they’re increasing it within 24 months?

2. If I did agree to it, what would be our rent for 2018, the average or the last paid month? It’s not something I’d gamble on without confirming with them first, just curious as it’s an unusual

Their proposal could work in our favour as we hope to leave in early 2018 but if we ended up staying, 2k would be a stinger

godtabh

that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen.

Ms Doubtfire1

I would agree with Godtabh. Ridicolous. Politely decline.

Mr. Incognito

That breaches the RTA.

One increase allowed every 24 months. They are seeking to increase 3 times in 12 months. Not allowed.

I'm guessing this is your typical gordon gecko moron estate agent that came up with this idea.

johnb25

Whyner wrote: »

Howdy,

Renting our property for 4 years and received a strange new lease proposal yesterday. Our current rent is 1675 and they didn’t raise it last year as a result of raising it the previous year

New proposal starting in January 2017:

First 3 months 1675
Middle 6 months 1837
Last 3 months 2000

That averages out at 1837 but rather than go with 1837 a month they appear to be locking us down for 2000 for 2018, did they think I wasn’t going to cop on to this?

Questions:

1. Am I right in assuming that their proposal is not allowed since they’re increasing it within 24 months?

2. If I did agree to it, what would be our rent for 2018, the average or the last paid month? It’s not something I’d gamble on without confirming with them first, just curious as it’s an unusual

Their proposal could work in our favour as we hope to leave in early 2018 but if we ended up staying, 2k would be a stinger

No experience of this, but could you accept, and then decline the €2k when it falls due, as you already had one increase in the two years.
Turn it back on the LL.

April 73

When did your first lease begin? The four years that you mentioned is very important as you be able to come out of your Part IV tenancy. This leaves you vunerable to being asked to vacate the premises.

Whyner

johnb25 wrote: »

No experience of this, but could you accept, and then decline the €2k when it falls due, as you already had one increase in the two years.
Turn it back on the LL.

No idea but I'm sure the 3 amounts would be listed in the new lease which I'd have to sign so not risking that

Whyner

April 73 wrote: »

When did your first lease begin? The four years that you mentioned is very important as you be able to come out of your Part IV tenancy. This leaves you vunerable to being asked to vacate the premises.

We signed a 6 month contract in June 2011 for 6 months and have signed new yearly contracts since then every January

Effects

I guess they don't want to raise it to 2000 in one go and are trying to help you out. It's not legal though so if you decline they will probably raise to 2000 from January.
With the 24 month period they have to allow for rental price increase in the future, now.

Whyner

Effects wrote: »

I guess they don't want to raise it to 2000 in one go and are trying to help you out. It's not legal though so if you decline they will probably raise to 2000 from January.
With the 24 month period they have to allow for rental price increase in the future, now.

Doubt it, they know we won't accept 2000

No 90 days notice either, just a phone call - Do they need to give 90 days as we'll be signing a new lease?

Michael D Not Higgins

Whyner wrote: »

Doubt it, they know we won't accept 2000

No 90 days notice either, just a phone call - Do they need to give 90 days as we'll be signing a new lease?

Just because it's part of a lease doesn't give them any method of subverting their legal obligations. They must give you 90 days written notice, with 3 comparable properties to show market rate.

whoopsadoodles

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Just because it's part of a lease doesn't give them any method of subverting their legal obligations. They must give you 90 days written notice, with 3 comparable properties to show market rate.

Since when did they have to include 3 comparable properties?

Atari Jaguar

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

Since when did they have to include 3 comparable properties?

Since they stopped allowing the rent to go up more often than every 2 years.

Michael D Not Higgins

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

Since when did they have to include 3 comparable properties?

It was included in the 2015 amendment that came into force about this time last year.

whoopsadoodles

Jesus, I missed that completely. I thought there just had to be comparable rent in the area. Didn't realise you had to include it in the notice.

pilly

The 'LL could genuinely be trying to do a favour there by doing it incremental. Of course all the 'LL haters would never consider that.

Whyner

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/rent_increases.html

Notice of rent review

The notice of new rent must comply with the provisions of Section 26 of the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2015. The notice must:

State the amount of new rent and the date from which is to have effect
Include a statement that any dispute about the setting of the rent must be referred to the RTB before the date the new rent takes effect, or within 28 days from the date that the tenant gets the notice, whichever is the later

Include a statement by the landlord that, in their opinion, the new rent is not greater than the market rent, having regard to the other terms of the tenancy and to letting values of dwellings of a similar size, type and character and situated in a comparable area

Specify the rent amount being asked for 3 dwellings of a similar size, type and character and in a comparable area, which have been advertised for rent in the 4-week period immediately before the notice

Be signed by the landlord or their authorised agent and include the date on which it was signed

Whyner

pilly wrote: »

The 'LL could genuinely be trying to do a favour there by doing it incremental. Of course all the 'LL haters would never consider that.

No chance

cruizer101

What's the going rate for properties in your area? Are you getting a good deal by them suggesting a lower rate earlier on in year? or is the 2000 reflective of average rates for similar properties.

I know these are kind of irrelevant in terms of he can't increase three times but be good for you to know when you go back to him to negotiate.

Claw Hammer

The sensible thing to do is sign it and them when they try and increase it from €1675 take a case to the RTB and complain about it. You will be on €1675 for years.

davo10

When was your last increase? If it was more than 24 months ago then they can increase by giving correct notice (90 days) The amount they can increase it by depends on the market rate for that area, if that is €2k or above and they have 3 examples of that, then your rent will be set at €2k plus, from the date the new rent rate begins. On that date you might wish you had accepted the incremental increases offered, I too think this is being offered to help you out op, if rates are €2k or higher, the LL could just as easily set it at that from day one (giving correct notice of course). You should get on daft and see what properties are renting for, then see if this is to your benefit or not.

Whyner

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The sensible thing to do is sign it and them when they try and increase it from €1675 take a case to the RTB and complain about it. You will be on €1675 for years.

or get turfed out

Claw Hammer

Whyner wrote: »

or get turfed out

How can he be turfed out?

davo10

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The sensible thing to do is sign it and them when they try and increase it from €1675 take a case to the RTB and complain about it. You will be on €1675 for years.

Yip, personally I would put up the rent to the €2k plus from day one, saves this type of thing happening. So what if the tenant has to pay two thousand more this year, best to have things right from the start.

emeldc

pilly wrote: »

The 'LL could genuinely be trying to do a favour there by doing it incremental. Of course all the 'LL haters would never consider that.

Whyner wrote: »

No chance

I have the same good tenant for three years. I did not increase the rent in that time and at the time of review was 30% lower than similar properties (€750/€525). The new rent was set at €700 but because they are good tenants I discounted the first 6 months to €600. Point me the legislation that says I can't do that.

davo10

emeldc wrote: »

I have the same good tenant for three years. I did not increase the rent in that time and at the time of review was 30% lower than similar properties (€750/€525). The new rent was set at €700 but because they are good tenants I discounted the first 6 months to €600. Point me the legislation that says I can't do that.

Nicely put, the lower rates are "discounts" rather than the higher rates being increases, in this case the €2k would be the rent for the next 2 years but the first nine months are discounted. I like your style.

Whyner

emeldc wrote: »

I have the same good tenant for three years. I did not increase the rent in that time and at the time of review was 30% lower than similar properties (€750/€525). The new rent was set at €700 but because they are good tenants I discounted the first 6 months to €600. Point me the legislation that says I can't do that.

Sure who'd even question that, you're sound. Anyway, don't think I said you did anything illegal

Our rent has been increased at every opportunity since 2011. The guy I deal with is ACTUALLY a property manager who works on behalf of the owners. They gave it to him after parting their ways with <mod snip>. They put him in charge last year and since then he

Tried to increase the rent when he wasn't allowed to - he wasn't aware of new rules
Has given me a stupid proposal

Told me has recently qualified to become a Property Manager.

Claw Hammer

emeldc wrote: »

I have the same good tenant for three years. I did not increase the rent in that time and at the time of review was 30% lower than similar properties (€750/€525). The new rent was set at €700 but because they are good tenants I discounted the first 6 months to €600. Point me the legislation that says I can't do that.

Residential Tenancies Act 2004 as amended.

davo10

Whyner wrote: »

Sure who'd even question that, you're sound. Anyway, don't think I said you did anything illegal

Our rent has been increased at every opportunity since 2011. The guy I deal with is ACTUALLY a property manager who works on behalf of the owners. They gave it to him after parting their ways with. They put him in charge last year and since then he

Tried to increase the rent when he wasn't allowed to - he wasn't aware of new rules
Has given me a stupid proposal

Told me has recently qualified to become a Property Manager.

A stupid proposal which saves you €2k of a discount in the first 9 months. Stupid indeed.

You should stand on your principals and ask to pay the full €2k per month from the start.

davo10

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Residential Tenancies Act 2004 as amended.

You are missing the point, emeldc's rate is €700 for the next 2 years, but a good tenant is receiving a discretionary discount of €600.

Michael D Not Higgins

davo10 wrote: »

You are missing the point, emeldc's rate is €700 for the next 2 years, but a good tenant is receiving a discretionary discount of €600.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I know this staged rent increase makes it more palatable for the tenants but the RTB may view it as two increases within 6 months then you're out 100/month for the 18 months you had planned to have it at 700.

I wouldn't dismiss an unfavourable ruling by the RTB in a case such as this particularly with their bias to tenant rights.