Unusual new lease proposal

davo10

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

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.

So you don't think the RTB will look unfavourably on a situation where a tenant was given a discount for a period on a rate set for 2 years at market rate? Crikey, shows how f**ked up the system is when people look with suspicion on something which benefits them.

Michael D Not Higgins

davo10 wrote: »

So you don't think the RTB will look favourably on a situation where a tenant was given a discount for a period on a rate set for 2 years at market rate? Crikey.

That's not the point, it's how the law is interpreted and applied. If they interpret the situation as two de facto increases, they could deem it an illegal rent increase and force the landlord to accept the lower level. I'm not saying it would happen, but if I were a landlord I'd rather not even take that risk.

emeldc

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

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.

Point taken but the lease actually states that the rent is €700, signed, agreed and sealed. The way I see it if the tenants kick up after their discount period has finished then they'll owe me €600. I really doubt the RTB would get involved in 'side' agreement between myself and the tenant when there is a perfectly legal written agreement in place.

Michael D Not Higgins

emeldc wrote: »

Point taken but the lease actually states that the rent is €700, signed, agreed and sealed. The way I see it if the tenants kick up after their discount period has finished then they'll owe me €600. I really doubt the RTB would get involved in 'side' agreement between myself and the tenant when there is a perfectly legal written agreement in place.

Oral agreements are also part of the law and are specifically called up in the RTA. I'm not saying you would have this issue, and likely you have a grateful tenant who's not going to complain about a discount, but just that there's the risk of that happening. I, for one, am not going to advise anyone to take this particular course of action. It's much less risky to just do a single increase.

davo10

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

That's not the point, it's how the law is interpreted and applied. If they interpret the situation as two de facto increases, they could deem it an illegal rent increase and force the landlord to accept the lower level. I'm not saying it would happen, but if I were a landlord I'd rather not even take that risk.

It's posts like this which make landlords jack the rent up as high as they can from the start of the rent increase period. Why bother doing anything good for a tenant or being sympathetic to their financial situation when people think like this. If the rental increase notice says as emeldc's does that rent is X for two years but a discretionary discount will be given for a short period, that is unambiguous, the new rental rate is X = market rate.

In the op's case, if local rents are €2k per month, you would think that he/she would realise that an extra €2k in their bank account after 9 months is better than €2k less, maybe there is some stupidity involved.

Claw Hammer

davo10 wrote: »

It's posts like this which make landlords jack the rent up as high as they can from the start of the rent increase period. Why bother doing anything good for a tenant or being sympathetic to their financial situation when people think like this. If the rental increase notice says as emeldc's does that rent is X for two years but a discretionary discount will be given for a short period, that is unambiguous, the new rental rate is X = market rate.

In the op's case, if local rents are €2k per month, you would think that he/she would realise that an extra €2k in their bank account after 9 months is better than €2k less, maybe there is some stupidity involved.

A landlord can't review the rent more than once every two years. The RTB take an expansionary view of the word review. In every case it is against the landlord. It is not possible to contract out of the provisions of the RTA so a signed agreement means nothing. There is also the problem of market rent. If the landlord is willing to accept a lower figure that becomes the market rent.
Never give a sucker a break.

davo10

Claw Hammer wrote: »

A landlord can't review the rent more than once every two years. The RTB take an expansionary view of the word review. In every case it is against the landlord.
Never give a sucker a break.

Whether the timeframe for the increase is valid is another issue, the op hasn't confirmed if 24 months has elapsed since the last increase. If it hasn't, then any increase is invalid, if it has, then by your rationale the op would have to pay €2k from the start if that is the market rate set for the next 2 years. Of course the op then pays an extra €2k in the first 9 months, nice one.

spaceHopper

If your tenancy started in June 2011, then your first 4 year block of part 4 rights ended in June 2015 and you are about 18 months into your second, they is important. You have very strong rights. They can only ask you to leave for breaking your lease terms to sell up or for a immediate member of family to move in and you have to be given 16 weeks notices. So you don't have to sign a lease, but you do have to agree a rent.

The same goes for when you want to move out you have to give 16 weeks notice but that's hard to enforce.

I'd tell then you want to stay on part 4 terms. But you run the risk of them setting a 2000 rent now. However they can only charger the going rate for same type of house in the area.

Read up on part 4 rights on line first.

Claw Hammer

davo10 wrote: »

Whether the timeframe for the increase is valid is another issue, the op hasn't confirmed if 24 months has elapsed since the last increase. If it hasn't, then any increase is invalid, if it has, then by your rationale the op would have to pay €2k from the start if that is the market rate set for the next 2 years. Of course the op then pays an extra €2k in the first 9 months, nice one.

I am not talking about the last increase, I am talking about the next one.

April 73

OP says the rent wasn't raised last year as a result of raising it the year before. Sounds like the two year period is coming to an end & a review is due.
Regardless the correct notice needs to be given and three comparable properties quoted. If the average rent is €2000 then the LL is doing the tenant a favour. If the average rent is around €1800 that's a bad deal & shouldn't be agreed.

However if the rent had been €1675 for two years it's quite possible the average is now €2000.

Claw Hammer

davo10 wrote: »

The next one depends on when the last one was. The op hasn't posted when the last increase was, if it was less than 2 years ago then no increase is due now.

The notification the o/p got is not valid. When he contests it he will win. The attempted review will be deemed to be a review and it will be another 2 years and 3 months before the next one.

Whyner

davo10 wrote: »

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.

Last increase was Jan 2015 so we were expecting another increase starting next January. No correct notice has been given, like I said , just a phone call yesterday.

Yes, I had a look on daft and will investigate further tonight

davo10

Whyner wrote: »

Last increase was Jan 2015 so we were expecting another increase starting next January. No correct notice has been given, like I said , just a phone call yesterday.

Yes, I had a look on daft and will investigate further tonight

So rent review is due in January, play your cards right and if €2k is the market rate you could be paying that from May onward. Result, the landlord gains €2k extra over the first 9 months and you lose it. Stupid landlord.

Whyner

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The notification the o/p got is not valid. When he contests it he will win. The attempted review will be deemed to be a review and it will be another 2 years and 3 months before the next one.

I presume you're joking

Whyner

April 73 wrote: »

OP says the rent wasn't raised last year as a result of raising it the year before. Sounds like the two year period is coming to an end & a review is due.
Regardless the correct notice needs to be given and three comparable properties quoted. If the average rent is €2000 then the LL is doing the tenant a favour. If the average rent is around €1800 that's a bad deal & shouldn't be agreed.

However if the rent had been €1675 for two years it's quite possible the average is now €2000.

This sums it all up nicely. Yes, it may be best to accept it

Whyner

davo10 wrote: »

So rent review is due in January, play your cards right and if €2k is the market rate you could be paying that from May onward. Result, the landlord gains €2k extra over the first 9 months and you lose it. Stupid landlord.

You've lost me

mdebets

davo10 wrote: »

Based on the assumption that the market rate is €2k and the the letting agent will eventually issue a valid notice, this offer is favourable to you to the tune of €2k in the first 9 months. Have I found you?

But if the OP plays his hand right, he can save even more, and will only be paying 1837 per month for the last 1 year 9 months of the rent freeze.
If the current average rent is really 2000, then sign the contract and say nothing to the landlord. After 3 months, pay the increased rent of 1837 (you could check, if the rent increase is in the correct form and reject it if it isn't, but that could lead to the landlord issuing a correct rent review, you should decide this on calculating, what you can save by the delay, compared top the increased rent). When the second increase to 2000 is due, don't pay it, as it would be a second increase within the 2 year limit and the landlord can't enforce it, as it isn't legal. Continue to pay the 1837 per month.
If you complain now, the landlord could change the rent increase to the maximum allowed amount, if you don't, he can charge you a maximum of 1837 per month after the first 3 month of your contract.

Marcusm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

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.

Is it not that it can only be reviewed once every 24 months. Sounds like only a single review has been undertaken although there is some variation in the quantum of rent. If €1837 (the average) is an acceptable current rent for the dwelling, the OP has a potential advantage as if he leaves prior to the end of the 2 year period, he would have a discount on that amount.

Of course the idiotic EA/landlord is proposing the approach in the hope that €2000 stands as the base amount for any discussion in 2 years. Theoretically, the current rent is relevant to the future rent review.

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

Just ill informed. An invalid notice is just that, invalid, it doesn't apply. The LL will then present a valid one and the clock starts again from the date on the correct notice.

It is you who is ill informed.

http://www.rtb.ie/docs/default-source/tribunal-reports/tr0216-001600-dr1215-22832-report.pdf?sfvrsn=0

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

It is you who is ill informed.

http://www.rtb.ie/docs/default-source/tribunal-reports/tr0216-001600-dr1215-22832-report.pdf?sfvrsn=0

I stand corrected and informed. Thank you. Claw Hammer my apologies, your advice is absolutely right, mine is wrong. Even an invalid review is still a review, no further one can be presented for 2 years, 3 months, I had assumed the LL had the option to correct the notice and present again, they don't.

Whyner

mdebets wrote: »

But if the OP plays his hand right, he can save even more, and will only be paying 1837 per month for the last 1 year 9 months of the rent freeze.
If the current average rent is really 2000, then sign the contract and say nothing to the landlord. After 3 months, pay the increased rent of 1837 (you could check, if the rent increase is in the correct form and reject it if it isn't, but that could lead to the landlord issuing a correct rent review, you should decide this on calculating, what you can save by the delay, compared top the increased rent). When the second increase to 2000 is due, don't pay it, as it would be a second increase within the 2 year limit and the landlord can't enforce it, as it isn't legal. Continue to pay the 1837 per month.
If you complain now, the landlord could change the rent increase to the maximum allowed amount, if you don't, he can charge you a maximum of 1837 per month after the first 3 month of your contract.

What if the contract states that there will be 2 increases throughout the year and I've signed it?

Whyner

davo10 wrote: »

I stand corrected and informed. Thank you. Claw Hammer my apologies, your advice is absolutely right, mine is wrong. Even an invalid review is still a review, no further one can be presented for 2 years, 3 months, I had assumed the LL had the option to correct the notice and present again, they don't.

:eek::eek:

Put away your smoking guns davo :D

mdebets

Whyner wrote: »

What if the contract states that there will be 2 increases throughout the year and I've signed it?

IANL, but you can't sign away your rights in a contract.

Whyner

davo10 wrote: »

I stand corrected and informed. Thank you. Claw Hammer my apologies, your advice is absolutely right, mine is wrong. Even an invalid review is still a review, no further one can be presented for 2 years, 3 months, I had assumed the LL had the option to correct the notice and present again, they don't.

Hmm, they tried to increase the rent last year also, does that count as a review? We had to advise them of the 24 month rule

Claw Hammer

Whyner wrote: »

Hmm, they tried to increase the rent last year also, does that count as a review? We had to advise them of the 24 month rule

Yes. They can't go again for 24 months after that. You should have no problem sticking at the current rent for at least 2 more years at least.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Yes. They can't go again for 24 months after that. You should have no problem sticking at the current rent for at least 2 more years at least.

You would assume it was a verbal attempt so no chance of proving it.

Claw Hammer

Melany Clean Rust wrote: »

You would assume it was a verbal attempt so no chance of proving it.

Why not?