Time to lodge dispute notification re rent review

tuisginideach

So if I give my good tenant, whose rent has not been reviewed since he moved in 3.5 years ago, 90 days notice today of an increase in rent to bring it up to current market level, am I right in interpreting the RTB statement that he can lodge a dispute right up to the 15 March 2017 [i.e. not pay the increase which will be due then]:
1. Any dispute in relation to the setting of a rent pursuant to a review of the rent under a tenancy must be referred to the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) under Part 6 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 before-
(i) 15 March 2017
or
(ii) the expiry of 28 days from the receipt by you of this notice,
whichever is the later.


Why would anyone bother lodging it within 28 days?

davindub

Where did you get the above from, is it a draft template for giving notice?

The date is not ringing a bell with me, but obviously as you get closer to 15th March, then the 28 days becomes relevant.

Michael D Not Higgins

15 March would be the date the rent increases. OP, this is something they never bothered to update in the legislation when they increased the notice period to 90 days.

tuisginideach

So that should really read 90 days not 28 days?????????

axcel

No not for disputes, it's still 28 days. PRTB also state that tenants should continue to pay rent, and if dispute is made in favour of landlord they may have to pay backdated increase. You need to have put that warning in the notice or it isn't valid

tuisginideach

Thanks, I know they should pay rent but those lines in the RTB template are senseless, I think - you may lodge your dispute in c90 days or in 28 days, whichever is the later?????????

Michael D Not Higgins

tuisginideach wrote: »

Thanks, I know they should pay rent but those lines in the RTB template are senseless, I think - you may lodge your dispute in c90 days or in 28 days, whichever is the later?????????

It's probably to stop landlords saying the notice was delivered then sending one the week before the rent increase. The tenant then still has 28 days to lodge a dispute.

tuisginideach

Ah, I see. Thanks

tuisginideach

And back to my tenant who will soon be 4 years in the property. I issued him with a valid rent review in early December (first review in 4 years). Am I right in thinking that his tenancy is not affected by the extension of the Part IV legislation
Extending the period of a Part 4 tenancy from 4 years to 6 years - for tenancies created from 24 December 2016
i.e. that I can at any time during the first six months following his 4 years in the property I can give him a valid notice of termination without giving a reason?

Ms Doubtfire1

That would be my interpretation as well.

Michael D Not Higgins

tuisginideach wrote: »

And back to my tenant who will soon be 4 years in the property. I issued him with a valid rent review in early December (first review in 4 years). Am I right in thinking that his tenancy is not affected by the extension of the Part IV legislation
Extending the period of a Part 4 tenancy from 4 years to 6 years - for tenancies created from 24 December 2016
i.e. that I can at any time during the first six months following his 4 years in the property I can give him a valid notice of termination without giving a reason?

Since it is a tenancy already in existence, the 4 years still applies. However, the legislation was also updated so that you must provide a reason within the first 6 months of a further Part 4 tenancy. It is not clarified what is a valid reason during those 6 months nor if it is to be inferred to cross reference with the table of valid reasons for terminating a Part 4 tenancy.

tuisginideach

So, their tenancy isn't extended to the 6 year rule but I have to give a 'valid' reason - whatever that is. So surely the latter 'condition' makes it just like a 6 year tenancy - unless the 'valid reason' now acceptable is a completely different 'valid reason' e.g. 'I feel like meeting new people via Daft'.???


Edited to add: I see this under 'Security of Tenure' on the updated RTB site (I say 'updated' as it referes to tenancies coming into existence after 24th Dec 2016)
The legislation extends tenancies from 4 years to 6 year tenancies. This will apply to all new tenancies that come into operation after 24th December 2016 which includes a further Part 4 tenancy that come into existence after 24th December 2016. Landlords currently can terminate within the first six months of a tenancy without giving a reason. Once a Part 4 tenancy comes into existence it can only be terminated by using one of the grounds listed below.

If a landlord wishes to stop a Further Part 4 tenancy coming into existence they may serve a notice during the Part 4 tenancy with the notice period given to the tenant expiring on or after the end of the tenancy. A notice served in this way should provide a reason for termination but the reason does not need to be one of the grounds set out below. To ensure the notice is valid it is best practice for the notice period given to end during the first six months of the Further Part 4 tenancy.

If a landlord wishes to terminate during the first six months of the Further Part 4 tenancy they may serve a notice during the first six months without providing a reason or needing to rely on one of the grounds below. This method of termination will change soon and updates will be provided on our website.


So can I now serve valid notice on the tenant which - giving the 100+ days needed - will end after his 4th anniversary and does not require any of the listed reasons? It just says I have to give a reason - it doesn't even say it has to be a valid reason!

davindub

tuisginideach wrote: »

So, their tenancy isn't extended to the 6 year rule but I have to give a 'valid' reason - whatever that is. So surely the latter 'condition' makes it just like a 6 year tenancy - unless the 'valid reason' now acceptable is a completely different 'valid reason' e.g. 'I feel like meeting new people via Daft'.???

Section 42 has been repealed so it's debate able whether you can teminate like before.

GGTrek

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

tuisginideach wrote: »

And back to my tenant who will soon be 4 years in the property. I issued him with a valid rent review in early December (first review in 4 years). Am I right in thinking that his tenancy is not affected by the extension of the Part IV legislation
Extending the period of a Part 4 tenancy from 4 years to 6 years - for tenancies created from 24 December 2016
i.e. that I can at any time during the first six months following his 4 years in the property I can give him a valid notice of termination without giving a reason?

Since it is a tenancy already in existence, the 4 years still applies. However, the legislation was also updated so that you must provide a reason within the first 6 months of a further Part 4 tenancy. It is not clarified what is a valid reason during those 6 months nor if it is to be inferred to cross reference with the table of valid reasons for terminating a Part 4 tenancy.

This is a wrong interpretation of the law, legislation was not changed for old tenancies with respect to this type of termination. The main change happened with new case law at the High Court. Landlord cannot terminate anymore in the first 6 months of a further part 4 tenancy. Termination notice has to be served before the 4 years and termination date has to be on or after the 4 years. Very different than a section 42 no cause notice in the first 6 months that has been abolished.

tuisginideach

GGTrek wrote: »

This is a wrong interpretation of the law, legislation was not changed for old tenancies with respect to this type of termination. The main change happened with new case law at the High Court. Landlord cannot terminate anymore in the first 6 months of a further part 4 tenancy. Termination notice has to be served before the 4 years and termination date has to be on or after the 4 years. Very different than a section 42 no cause notice in the first 6 months that has been abolished.

So why hasn't this been updated on the RTB website then?

GGTrek

tuisginideach wrote: »

So, their tenancy isn't extended to the 6 year rule but I have to give a 'valid' reason - whatever that is. So surely the latter 'condition' makes it just like a 6 year tenancy - unless the 'valid reason' now acceptable is a completely different 'valid reason' e.g. 'I feel like meeting new people via Daft'.???


Edited to add: I see this under 'Security of Tenure' on the updated RTB site (I say 'updated' as it referes to tenancies coming into existence after 24th Dec 2016)
The legislation extends tenancies from 4 years to 6 year tenancies. This will apply to all new tenancies that come into operation after 24th December 2016 which includes a further Part 4 tenancy that come into existence after 24th December 2016. Landlords currently can terminate within the first six months of a tenancy without giving a reason. Once a Part 4 tenancy comes into existence it can only be terminated by using one of the grounds listed below.

If a landlord wishes to stop a Further Part 4 tenancy coming into existence they may serve a notice during the Part 4 tenancy with the notice period given to the tenant expiring on or after the end of the tenancy. A notice served in this way should provide a reason for termination but the reason does not need to be one of the grounds set out below. To ensure the notice is valid it is best practice for the notice period given to end during the first six months of the Further Part 4 tenancy.

If a landlord wishes to terminate during the first six months of the Further Part 4 tenancy they may serve a notice during the first six months without providing a reason or needing to rely on one of the grounds below. This method of termination will change soon and updates will be provided on our website.


So can I now serve valid notice on the tenant which - giving the 100+ days needed - will end after his 4th anniversary and does not require any of the listed reasons? It just says I have to give a reason - it doesn't even say it has to be a valid reason!

Read this thread (quite technical ) in the legal discussion:
https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057686033/2#102200568
you will understand that it is complex matter and, depending on RTB future attitude, all Irish tenancies might have already become indefinite.

GGTrek

tuisginideach wrote: »

GGTrek wrote: »

This is a wrong interpretation of the law, legislation was not changed for old tenancies with respect to this type of termination. The main change happened with new case law at the High Court. Landlord cannot terminate anymore in the first 6 months of a further part 4 tenancy. Termination notice has to be served before the 4 years and termination date has to be on or after the 4 years. Very different than a section 42 no cause notice in the first 6 months that has been abolished.

So why hasn't this been updated on the RTB website then?

Because they are slow 😊

tuisginideach

GGTrek wrote: »

Termination notice has to be served before the 4 years and termination date has to be on or after the 4 years. .

So I havd a very quick scan thru of your other thread .... this (above) sounds like what I read (and understood) on the 'updated' RTB site. Is this clearly and simply stated anywhere else????

GGTrek

tuisginideach wrote: »

GGTrek wrote: »

Termination notice has to be served before the 4 years and termination date has to be on or after the 4 years. .

So I havd a very quick scan thru of your other thread .... this (above) sounds like what I read (and understood) on the 'updated' RTB site. Is this clearly and simply stated anywhere else????

Nothing is clear and stated on this matter, courtesy of the Irish government that rushed through legislation without proper consideration to established case law.
Or maybe they did it on purpose.

The formal notice and the rules on the dates and period of the notice are clear: what is totally unknown is what kind of reasons the RTB adjudicators and ultimately the High Court will accept.

Read my examples in the other thread and you will understand.

rossmores

Is the rent increase notice after nov 2014 a 24 month review + the 90 days notice as some of my last reviews where in april 2015  they cannot be effected till July and are actually 27 month to include the 90 notice period

Michael D Not Higgins

rossmores wrote: »

Is the rent increase notice after nov 2014 a 24 month review + the 90 days notice as some of my last reviews where in april 2015  they cannot be effected till July and are actually 27 month to include the 90 notice period

The change for rent reviews came in December 2015. If a review was done in April 2015, it would effect a rent increase in May 2015 (or possibly April since the notice period was 28 days). The following review would be allowed on the same date in April 2017, with 90 days notice to come in in July 2017.