Rent increase for next year served this morning?

tradingwizz

laserlad2010 wrote: »

afaik he may only serve you notice of a rent review on the day when the 2 year period is up (either from the last rent increase or the commencement of the lease). On that day he may give you 90 days notice. Anything earlier is invalid and should be ignored.

Thats what I've gleaned from lurking on this forum! I am open to correction.

This is not true. There is a clear distinction between the first rental increase after commencement of the first tenancy and rental increase after the previous rental increase. In this case, where there was a new tenancy, then the first rental increase can be FROM the date of the first tenancy.This means that 90 days notice can be served on the tenant 90 days prior to the 2 year anniversary of the first tenancy.

Otherwise, it is 2 years from rent review to rent review.

pobber1

tradingwizz wrote: »

This is not true. There is a clear distinction between the first rental increase after commencement of the first tenancy and rental increase after the previous rental increase. In this case, where there was a new tenancy, then the first rental increase can be FROM the date of the first tenancy.This means that 90 days notice can be served on the tenant 90 days prior to the 2 year anniversary of the first tenancy.

Otherwise, it is 2 years from rent review to rent review.

Do you have a link that details the difference between a first tenancy and one that has already received a rent review? There is so much conflicting information on this topic.

Thanks.

davindub

tradingwizz wrote: »

This is not true. There is a clear distinction between the first rental increase after commencement of the first tenancy and rental increase after the previous rental increase. In this case, where there was a new tenancy, then the first rental increase can be FROM the date of the first tenancy.This means that 90 days notice can be served on the tenant 90 days prior to the 2 year anniversary of the first tenancy.

Otherwise, it is 2 years from rent review to rent review.

Source?

tradingwizz

davindub wrote: »

Source?

The source is the RTB itself, which has to be read very carefully. Please see:
http://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution/the-three-stages-of-a-tenancy/rent-reviews

davindub

tradingwizz wrote: »

The source is the RTB itself, which has to be read very carefully. Please see:
http://www.rtb.ie/dispute-resolution/dispute-resolution/the-three-stages-of-a-tenancy/rent-reviews

Do you think that's accurate enough for a ll to rely on? Who do you think wrote the copy?

BabySlam

davindub wrote: »

Do you think that's accurate enough for a ll to rely on? Who do you think wrote the copy?

Presumably a legal drafter.

tradingwizz

davindub wrote: »

Do you think that's accurate enough for a ll to rely on? Who do you think wrote the copy?

RTB is THE regulatory authority. I would probably stick with their interpretation of the law rather than inventing it myself.

pobber1

tradingwizz wrote: »

RTB is THE regulatory authority. I would probably stick with their interpretation of the law rather than inventing it myself.

Is this example you are referring to?

"Michael and Stephen, a couple renting a 2 bed house in Cork, signed a lease in March 2015, at a rate of €900 per month. Michael and Stephen were worried that their landlord would increase the rent in March 2016 to €1,000 per month. Now, Michael and Stephen do not need to worry about a rent increase until March 2017."

davindub

tradingwizz wrote: »

RTB is THE regulatory authority. I would probably stick with their interpretation of the law rather than inventing it myself.

THE RTB is not the regulatory authority.

What you are reading is information someone created to explain how the act affects some people. Wrong information has been left on the website in the past. What matters is the Act itself, the high court judgements and discussion of the act and then the tribunal reports.

But having read it now, in fairness to the website, it definitely does not claim anything like this:

"There is a clear distinction between the first rental increase after commencement of the first tenancy and rental increase after the previous rental increase. In this case, where there was a new tenancy, then the first rental increase can be FROM the date of the first tenancy.This means that 90 days notice can be served on the tenant 90 days prior to the 2 year anniversary of the first tenancy.

Otherwise, it is 2 years from rent review to rent review."

Michael D Not Higgins

davindub wrote: »

THE RTB is not the regulatory authority.

What you are reading is information someone created to explain how the act affects some people. Wrong information has been left on the website in the past. What matters is the Act itself, the high court judgements and discussion of the act and then the tribunal reports.

But having read it now, in fairness to the website, it definitely does not claim anything like this:

"There is a clear distinction between the first rental increase after commencement of the first tenancy and rental increase after the previous rental increase. In this case, where there was a new tenancy, then the first rental increase can be FROM the date of the first tenancy.This means that 90 days notice can be served on the tenant 90 days prior to the 2 year anniversary of the first tenancy.

Otherwise, it is 2 years from rent review to rent review."

Exactly, the layman text is sloppy and it should read "do not need to worry about a notice of rent increase until March 2017".

There are too many people trying to rely on this wording as their basis for their interpretation when the law is clear that the review is separate from the increase and cannot be done until 24 months have elapsed. The notice follows and is 90 days.

syndrome777

how close location vise do the comparable properties need to be from the one we are renting? for rent comparison

say if they(LL) compare Portobello and Rialto, those are not the same areas and should not expect same rent for the same size property.

am I right?

Michael D Not Higgins

syndrome777 wrote: »

how close location vise do the comparable properties need to be from the one we are renting? for rent comparison

say if they(LL) compare Portobello and Rialto, those are not the same areas and should not expect same rent for the same size property.

am I right?

It is intentionally vague to allow for interpretation. The phrasing is 'comparable area'. If the referenced area is not comparable it could be grounds for a dispute into the validity of the notice.

campingcarist

irlcncrk wrote: »

As legislation currently stands LLs can only increase rent every 24 months with a minimum review period of 90 days. I'm no legal eagle but that 90 days I believe are part of the 24 month period and not in addition too the 24 months.

There doesn't appear to be anywhere in the legislation that states the review period can't be longer than the 90 days but it strikes me as a little odd to have it so far out. They also must supply examples of other rentals in the area that are only 3 months old.

I'm sure you could take your case to the RTB and their arbitrator would probably say that examples should be within 3 months of the proposed new rental agreement date and not almost 12 months prior.

Did you ask why such an early rent review? How did LL serve notice? Did LL supply any local rental examples? Are you in full compliance with your existing lease eg fully paid rent, all utilities paid up, no noise complaints from neighbours etc then LL will have no genuine grounds to ask you to leave prior to the lease expiry. LL could take the "oh I'm selling" route or move in a family member but they'd loose more rent than they want you to pay as an increase. So unless LL isn't overly bright that won't happen.

I'd kick it into touch and simply say as its a lot of money you'll need to give it a lot of thought. If new legislation does come into affect for your area you'll be better off. If new legislation doesn't come into play do you're own research of the local rental market and negotiate with the LL "closer" to the lease expiry date.

As a caveat to all of the above: I'm a LL myself and I'm certainly not impressed by your LLs tactics. I would always be happy to negotiate with a good tenant rather than have them leave. Your LL has just upset a good tenant for something he may not get in almost 12 months time, what a fool!

Best of luck do let us know how you get on.

Yours an annoyed LL on you behalf.

From the 2015 Act:

In this section ‘amount of rent sought’ means the amount of rent specified for the letting of a dwelling in an advertisement the date of which falls within the period of 4 weeks immediately preceding the date on which the notice referred to in subsection (2) is served.”.

Now, the landlord may be losing by his early notification of the new rent. He doesn't know what the rent for similar properties will be in a number of months' time.

Ace2007

QQ, if your renting a house below market value (I.e from a relative), is the house rental capped at 4% on review, or can they increase it to market value, and then say 4% max on review?

Selik

Ace2007 wrote: »

QQ, if your renting a house below market value (I.e from a relative), is the house rental capped at 4% on review, or can they increase it to market value, and then say 4% max on review?

How would anybody know what rent the relative is paying apart from the relative and owner? In fact in a regular rental situation the same question could be asked... HOW are the PRTB going to know if the advertised rent is correct on newly rented properties in situations like for example when a tenant leaves of his/her own accord?

April 73

I don't think the RTB will know. The system is not that sophisticated.

Clampdown

Call me Al wrote: »

That's what he has done.. he's given Mrs whippy 9 months notice of a €500 increase w. e.f. 09/17.
So yes I think he is being extremely shrewd and trying to circumvent any new proposed 4% rent increase cap.

But he can't do that because it can only be raised to the market rate at the time of the review, which is impossible to predict 9 months in advance.

Which is why it's an invalid notice.

Lol, this is how Irish landlord's do 'shrewd'.

We're gonna need hard caps, these proposed rent measures are a joke.

Clampdown

davindub wrote: »

Good news is he has now carried out a review, an invalid one but he cannot review the rent again for 24 months. So you should be on the same rate until December 2018.

But appeal the notice to RTB immediately (RTB don't give advice, ask Threshold for advice if needed), its not something to negotiate with your LL about.

But what if market rates fall? OP is locked into the high rate. I know it's unlikely but that's the whole reason the review can't be done this early in relation to the increase coming into effect.

The 2nd part I agree with totally. File the dispute straight away. A 500 p/m increase is insane.

mrsWhippy

Clampdown wrote: »

File the dispute straight away. A 500 p/m increase is insane.

OP here again. Thanks all for the responses.

I agree, it is insane. But we are actually paying about 400 or 450 less than current (crazy) market rates. We were left alone for about 5 years for various reasons before our first rent review where rent went up 300 a month (Aug 15). That was giving us a 'good deal' as it was still a bit under market rates at that time.

Now the LL is facing the next 3 years or so getting a much lower rate and I guess that was the reason for the panic review.

Hypothetically speaking, could he ask us to meet him in the middle, or is he LEGALLY allowed ONLY charge us 4% on what we are paying now?

What would you do in our situation? Not that I have an extra 500 quid p/m but would you negotiate a rent sum somewhere in the middle given our history? Or would you just file a dispute?

GGTrek

mrsWhippy wrote: »

Clampdown wrote: »

File the dispute straight away. A 500 p/m increase is insane.

OP here again. Thanks all for the responses.

I agree, it is insane. But we are actually paying about 400 or 450 less than current (crazy) market rates. We were left alone for about 5 years for various reasons before our first rent review where rent went up 300 a month (Aug 15). That was giving us a 'good deal' as it was still a bit under market rates at that time.

Now the LL is facing the next 3 years or so getting a much lower rate and I guess that was the reason for the panic review.

Hypothetically speaking, could he ask us to meet him in the middle, or is he LEGALLY allowed ONLY charge us 4% on what we are paying now?

What would you do in our situation? Not that I have an extra 500 quid p/m but would you negotiate a rent sum somewhere in the middle given our history? Or would you just file a dispute?

My suggestion as a landlord. The RTB route should be your last resort, not the first as the RTB brigade is suggesting. The RTB brigade people on this forum have no skin in the game and they risk nothing with their advice, you do.
Taking your landlord to RTB without first discussing the issues and negotiating will be a sure way to p**s him off big time and a sure way to loose your tenancy within 12-18 months with a long a stressful legal battle.
You have been paying below market rent for many years now, this rent review is a natural reaction of the landlord to the latest joke of legislation from government. My suggestion is negotiate and explain you situation about the fact that you cannot pay the new rent, explain your current income minus expenses and show him that with a 500 increase you will have to leave. If he is a reasonable person and you have been a good tenant, it is in his interest to lower his demands.

beauf

It's possible the LL wants tenant to leave. New tenant won't know what the old rent was.

Tbh I don't think the LL can do anything. This new legislation removes all control from the LL other than to raise the rent 2℅ every year. He can't change it before the new legislation because it's under 2yr.

Clampdown

mrsWhippy wrote: »

OP here again. Thanks all for the responses.

I agree, it is insane. But we are actually paying about 400 or 450 less than current (crazy) market rates. We were left alone for about 5 years for various reasons before our first rent review where rent went up 300 a month (Aug 15). That was giving us a 'good deal' as it was still a bit under market rates at that time.

Now the LL is facing the next 3 years or so getting a much lower rate and I guess that was the reason for the panic review.

Hypothetically speaking, could he ask us to meet him in the middle, or is he LEGALLY allowed ONLY charge us 4% on what we are paying now?

What would you do in our situation? Not that I have an extra 500 quid p/m but would you negotiate a rent sum somewhere in the middle given our history? Or would you just file a dispute?

Well if you agree to an amount over the 4% but under the 500.00 I imagine you can do that. In theory that sounds reasonable, but is a LL who thinks tenants can magic up an extra 500 a month a reasonable person to negotiate with? I was renting an entire 2BR 2 bathroom house for 500.00 a month last year!

The fact that he tried to pull this cute hoor move would put me off negotiating with him. It sounds to me like if he was legally able to raise your rent by 500 per month right now, he would do it. And if you said you couldn't afford it, he'd shrug and say 'Not my fault the market rate is x amount, not my fault that the law allows me to raise it to that right now. Why shouldn't I maximize my profit?'

So my position would be 'Not my fault that the rent agreed is below what current rates have risen to, not my fault that you can't legally raise it to that now, and that by the time you can raise it you'll be limited to 4%. Why shouldn't I minimise my cost of living?'

He's trying to shove an illegal increase for an outrageous amount down your throat. I'd be shoving it right back up his hole by filing a dispute, let him do a bit of research and find that the notice is invalid. Also if you have filed the paperwork showing you got an invalid notice for a huge rent increase, any more cute moves he might try like trying to evict you under the guise of having a family member move in or selling up will be much more scrutinised. If he'll chance his arm with an invalid review he might chance an illegal eviction so I'd be starting a paper trail right off just in case.

It's very strange that he thinks he can predict that you will want to commit to another 12 month lease in 9 months and predict the market rate on top of that. I doubt someone who uses that type of logic is going to negotiate sensibly, he already thinks he's much more clever than he is because in his attempt to skirt the rules he issued a totally invalid notice.

exaisle

Clampdown wrote: »

The fact that he tried to pull this cute hoor move <snip>

He's trying to shove an illegal increase for an outrageous amount down your throat. I'd be shoving it right back up his hole <snip>

This is precisely the kind of outburst that will get you nowhere. Telling people to shove things tends not to be an effective method of conflict resolution....

The facts are, you are renting at well below the market rent. It's logical and fair that the landlord would expect to achieve the market rent for his property. It's also logical and fair that you might expect to pay a little below the market rent because you are a model tenant and because you won't be a source of bother to him every time a light bulb blows.

Regardless of the legislation, I'd suggest that you negotiate with him. If he's a reasonable person, the likelihood is that you'll reach a compromise maybe €150 or thereabouts the current market rent. Then everybody is happy...you're still paying well below the market rent and he's getting "close" to the market rent, but having trouble-free tenants in his property.

A landlord won't appreciate the value of a good tenant until he has a bad one....

Clampdown

GGTrek wrote: »

My suggestion as a landlord. The RTB route should be your last resort, not the first as the RTB brigade is suggesting. The RTB brigade people on this forum have no skin in the game and they risk nothing with their advice, you do.
Taking your landlord to RTB without first discussing the issues and negotiating will be a sure way to p**s him off big time and a sure way to loose your tenancy within 12-18 months with a long a stressful legal battle.
You have been paying below market rent for many years now, this rent review is a natural reaction of the landlord to the latest joke of legislation from government. My suggestion is negotiate and explain you situation about the fact that you cannot pay the new rent, explain your current income minus expenses and show him that with a 500 increase you will have to leave. If he is a reasonable person and you have been a good tenant, it is in his interest to lower his demands.

Both posters above, you're missing the point. Reasonable people don't think a person can afford an extra 500.00 per month in rent. The LL is just reading about how much other LLs are getting and he wants the same. He doesn't give a crap what OP can afford.

You sound like a reasonable landlord but there a lot of them out there just doing mad stuff like this and the only way to put manners on those type of LLs is through the official channels. They often just look at it that they have all the power and the tenant has none.

A 500.00 increase is pretty serious stuff and would seriously impact most people's lives. I wouldn't be in the mood to chat about what I can and can't afford. I'd say, sorry, you can't legally do that, end of so you'll have to make do with 4%.

What's the point of rent protection measures if tenants are expected to allow them be ignored for fear of ticking off the landlord?

exaisle

Clampdown wrote: »

Both posters above, you're missing the point. Reasonable people don't think a person can afford an extra 500.00 per month in rent. The LL is just reading about how much other LLs are getting and he wants the same. He doesn't give a crap what OP can afford.

<snip>
A 500.00 increase is pretty serious stuff and would seriously impact most people's lives. I wouldn't be in the mood to chat about what I can and can't afford. I'd say, sorry, you can't legally do that, end of so you'll have to make do with 4%.

I think that you're missing the point.

If the tenant can't afford to pay a fair rent for a property (market rent less a bit of discount for "good behaviour") then they shouldn't be living in that property, they should be living in a property where they can afford the rent, because otherwise, they're simply living beyond their means.

That's the concept of supply and demand. When supply dries up, prices increase until those who cannot afford market prices drop out of the market.

From the OP's posts, it seems that they are reasonable people who know that they've been on to a good thing for several years (for whatever reason) and during that time they have been happy to benefit from that situation.

Now that the landlord wants to increase the rent to (near) market rates, you cannot simply play the "cannot afford to pay" card. Hence my suggestion to negotiate now for a higher rent that they may be able to afford but which is still a bit less than market rent.

The amount of the increase (€500) is only an indication of how lucky the tenant has been in being able to rent at that much discount compared to the market. This kind of rent control will end at some at some point. The market must and will be allowed to find its own level, particularly when the supply of housing units improves. I think it might be better for tenants in a similar situation to the OP to take a long-term view.

I think that the difficulty in all of this is that the government has not done enough to remedy the shortage of housing units available. Certainly, a temporary shortening of the planning process and fines for the owners of vacant properties similar to those in other countries should be considered...

mrsWhippy

Landlord knows we will have to stay in the house 12-14 months as we are building. Realistically with 2 very young kids we are not going to be in a position to move again before the house is ready.

It still doesn't mean we have the monthly income to cover another 500 pm.

April 73

I think this is much more straightforward than the discussion would have you believe.
The OP should communicate with the LL to say that the recent rent review is invalid under the current legislation. The OP should say that they will be happy to discuss a rent review and an increase when a valid notification is issued. There's no need to involve the RTB at this point.

The next rent review will take place under the forthcoming legislation, assuming it gets signed into law. The new legislation is irrelevant at this point though, as the LL cannot issue his rent review at this point in time under the current laws.

The LL may be charging under the current market rate but that is not the tenants fault.

davindub

Clampdown wrote: »

But what if market rates fall? OP is locked into the high rate. I know it's unlikely but that's the whole reason the review can't be done this early in relation to the increase coming into effect.

The 2nd part I agree with totally. File the dispute straight away. A 500 p/m increase is insane.

Im saying the ll cannot increase the rent from an invalid review. So the tenants rent should not go up now at all

mrsWhippy

Just to update anyone who's interested, LL came back to us yesterday and told us his increase wasn't valid and that we are only going to get the 4% next year as per the law.

Maybe he's not so bad afterall

Thanks for all the advice!