Rent increase megathread

crossmolinalad

Noelle Most Tang wrote: »

This is assuming the previous tenancy was registered and if it was that updated rent was provided to the RTB.

If a tenancy was a few years old its most likely the original rent that the RTB still have on record whereas the previous tenants could have had their rent increased a few times since this.

Every 4 years they have to reregister and that happened last month here also
they asked if it was changed but no it was not rent still the same

The_Conductor

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

are you in a RPZ?- question for the OP

The OP has 'Maynooth' down as his location- which is one of the three towns in Kildare which are currently RPZ'ed. Accordingly- its safest to assume they are indeed in an RPZ.

The lack of supply of rent information on the previous tenant- is the only fault that we know has been commited thus far- keep in mind- of the 44 claims of an improper rent increase in an RPZ in 2016 (and there were only 44)- 11 were found to have been fully compliant and legitimate rent levels/reviews.........

You cannot automatically assume- regardless of what the rent is- that it is a breach of the RPZ legislation- however, if you don't have the previous rent level- its damn hard to try and benchmark it.

Also- keep in mind- the 4% increase is per annum- with an initial increase of 4% over 24 months. The actual allowable increase- could be significantly above 4%- depending entirely on when the rent was last reviewed.

gizmo81

The_Conductor wrote: »

The OP has 'Maynooth' down as his location- which is one of the three towns in Kildare which are currently RPZ'ed. Accordingly- its safest to assume they are indeed in an RPZ.

The lack of supply of rent information on the previous tenant- is the only fault that we know has been commited thus far- keep in mind- of the 44 claims of an improper rent increase in an RPZ in 2016 (and there were only 44)- 11 were found to have been fully compliant and legitimate rent levels/reviews.........

You cannot automatically assume- regardless of what the rent is- that it is a breach of the RPZ legislation- however, if you don't have the previous rent level- its damn hard to try and benchmark it.

Also- keep in mind- the 4% increase is per annum- with an initial increase of 4% over 24 months. The actual allowable increase- could be significantly above 4%- depending entirely on when the rent was last reviewed.

And what date did the RPZ legislation come into effect?

The_Conductor

barry181091 wrote: »

Rented a new house recently. No previous tenant rental amount was supplied and I am pretty sure we are paying well over a 4% increase. I am in the house now, but would my best bet to wait until the end of the lease and put in an RTB complain to get back rent over the 4%? If I do it now we may be given the boot.

Barry- according to the RTB-

What do I do if I think I am being charged too much rent?

You should initially seek clarification from your landlord regarding the calculation of the rent. If this does not resolve the issue, you may contact the Residential Tenancies Board to seek further information. If you still think you are being charged more than you should in accordance with the law, then you may make a dispute application to the RTB.

Further information here


If you suspect you are paying the incorrect rent level- there is an expectation on the part of the RTB that you are going to query it- and only if after querying it, you're still not satisfied about the rent level- at that stage you would contact the RTB for assistance.

In theory- you could boot this down the road- under the legislation up to 6 years down the line- however, the RPZ legislation itself has a hardcoded shelf life of 3 years, and hasn't been legally challenged on the basis that its a temporary measure.

If you suspect you're paying the wrong rent- challenge it- waiting is only playing games. And if the landlord was stupid enough to try to subsequently evict you- unless it was for a legitimate reason- they'd be put through the wringer by the RTB.

4ensic15

gizmo81 wrote: »

And what date did the RPZ legislation come into effect?

24/12/2016

subrosa

Any landlord charging more than the permitted amount in a RPZ is leaving themselves open to challenge, and most likely a DO that they repay the overcharged amount. As other people have said, it's not possible to contract out of the provisions of the RTA. Any agreement to do so would be void (rather than voidable.) I'd imagine the nightmare scenario for a landlord would be that a tenant could know the lawful amount, sign a lease for the unlawful amount, and then after six months go to the RTB and have the rent reduced. The tenancy would be in place and any eviction would be likely regarded as retaliatory. The fact that the tenant acted in bad faith would not particularly matter. The best advice is to stick to what the RTB calculator says you can charge, even if a tenant offers to pay more.

barry181091

subrosa wrote: »

Any landlord charging more than the permitted amount in a RPZ is leaving themselves open to challenge, and most likely a DO that they repay the overcharged amount. As other people have said, it's not possible to contract out of the provisions of the RTA. Any agreement to do so would be void (rather than voidable.) I'd imagine the nightmare scenario for a landlord would be that a tenant could know the lawful amount, sign a lease for the unlawful amount, and then after six months go to the RTB and have the rent reduced. The tenancy would be in place and any eviction would be likely regarded as retaliatory. The fact that the tenant acted in bad faith would not particularly matter. The best advice is to stick to what the RTB calculator says you can charge, even if a tenant offers to pay more.

This is basically what I want to do. I am going to ask to be registered to the RTB and near the end of the tenancy do this. This way I can get back the rent and cause pain for the landlord. Too risky doing it now. Bad faith? Sure but it was bad faith to not follow the RPZ to get 200 euro more per month.

I would have done nothing had the landlord actually agreed to fix items on a snag list and been more cooperative, but alas.

The_Conductor

A snag list?
You're renting the place- not buying it- and if anything is broken that the landlord is supposed to be supplying (there is a nice list in the Residential Tenancies Act)- the property is non-compliant, and the landlord is looking for trouble..........

If the place is such that you have/need a snag list- you could simply suggest the local council do an inspection- the proposals are that every rented property nationally would be inspected at least once a year, for compliance with the RTA. Apparently the inspection rate at present is appallingly low.

karenalot

The_Conductor wrote: »

The OP has 'Maynooth' down as his location- which is one of the three towns in Kildare which are currently RPZ'ed. Accordingly- its safest to assume they are indeed in an RPZ.

On a side note, there are actually more than three towns/villages in Kildare which are RPZ'ed. Maynooth electoral area (not town) also encompasses Kilcock and Clane. I've dealt with a few tenants and landlords who had no idea they were part of a RPZ as it's only Maynooth, Celbridge and Leixlip that are ever mentioned.

I haven't looked into it but I wonder if there are more electoral areas on the RPZ list which people don't know they are part of.

Michael D Not Higgins

karenalot wrote: »

On a side note, there are actually more than three towns/villages in Kildare which are RPZ'ed. Maynooth electorial area (not town) also encompasses Kilcock and Clane. I've dealt with a few tenants and landlords who had no idea they were part of a RPZ as it's only Maynooth, Celbridge and Leixlip that are ever mentioned.

I haven't looked into it but I wonder if there are more electorial areas on the RPZ list which people don't know they are part of.

The RPZ calculator allows you to check whether a property is in an RPZ or not. Every landlord should check their properties before a rent review or new tenancy, as there could be new RPZs announced that they don't hear about in the interim.

mickc

Hi all,

What are my next steps regarding receiving an invalid notice?

It was by telephone call, not letter, 60 days notice instead of 90 and about 6 weeks before the 24 months time period from the last review.

Not in a RPZ and the increase is substantial, +40%.

Thanks

Browney7

mickc wrote: »

Hi all,

What are my next steps regarding receiving an invalid notice?

It was by telephone call, not letter, 60 days notice instead of 90 and about 6 weeks before the 24 months time period from the last review.

Not in a RPZ and the increase is substantial, +40%.

Thanks

I'd just keep paying what I was paying until I got a valid review to be honest

bazery

If the rtb decide my rent review is invalid and give me a market rent price, what happens next? Will the landlord be forced to give me a valid rent review to the value of the figure rtb deem to be market value?

emeldc

bazery wrote: »

If the rtb decide my rent review is invalid and give me a market rent price, what happens next? Will the landlord be forced to give me a valid rent review to the value of the figure rtb deem to be market value?

A bit of background info might help you to get proper answers. Why do you think the rent review was invalid.

bazery

emeldc wrote:

A bit of background info might help you to get proper answers. Why do you think the rent review was invalid.

Landlord compared our 2 bed apartment to 3 houses. Neighbour went to rtb for the same thing and they confirmed that the review was invalid. Wondering what happens next. My adjudication is in the next 2 weeks

emeldc

bazery wrote: »

Landlord compared our 2 bed apartment to 3 houses. Neighbour went to rtb for the same thing and they confirmed that the review was invalid. Wondering what happens next. My adjudication is in the next 2 weeks

Are you in a RPZ.

bazery

emeldc wrote:

Are you in a RPZ.

No unfortunately, rent increase was 60%

emeldc

…… and when was your last review.

bazery

Over 2 years ago

The_Conductor

If you are disputing the rent increase on the basis that the landlord is proposing to charge you above the market rent- and he/she has already provided examples in the immediate vicinity of the current market rent- its up to you- to provide alternate examples- in the immediate vicinity- to highlight the discrepancy.

It sounds like you don't agree that the examples the landlord has used are appropriate for setting a market rent for your property. Do you have examples to show this is the case (hint, hint- your neighbour who has already been to the RTB might be a very good starting point on this one..........)

mickc

mickc wrote: »

Hi all,

What are my next steps regarding receiving an invalid notice?

It was by telephone call, not letter, 60 days notice instead of 90 and about 6 weeks before the 24 months time period from the last review.

Not in a RPZ and the increase is substantial, +40%.

Thanks

Browney7 wrote: »

I'd just keep paying what I was paying until I got a valid review to be honest

Is this correct? When he contacts me again I can say he didn't notify me correctly, that I require it by mail with 90 days notice?

Giblet

Here's a good one.

Landlord: "I'm gonna do a refurb that's enough to be marked as substantial, new floors, bathroom and kitchen. I don't need to do this, but I want more rent and need to avoid giving notice via the RTB if that comes down the line, and this is the only way I can kick you out, so here's your notice. You can come back when I'm done, but it will cost you 500 extra, and of course, you have to live somewhere else for the 2 months this is going to take. Good luck moving with your wife and kid!"

I wonder is this a new strategy that landlords will take who are getting below market rate ( still paying out my hole, but South Dublin is so crazy, there is room for more increases! ). Welp, there goes any cadence I had to my savings, or a very large commute, or learn to drive and buy a car. Back to square one in any case!

The_Conductor

Giblet wrote: »

Here's a good one.

Landlord: "I'm gonna do a refurb that's enough to be marked as substantial, new floors, bathroom and kitchen. I don't need to do this, but I want more rent and need to avoid giving notice via the RTB if that comes down the line, and this is the only way I can kick you out, so here's your notice. You can come back when I'm done, but it will cost you 500 extra, and of course, you have to live somewhere else for the 2 months this is going to take. Good luck moving with your wife and kid!"

I wonder is this a new strategy that landlords will take who are getting below market rate ( still paying out my hole, but South Dublin is so crazy, there is room for more increases! ). Welp, there goes any cadence I had to my savings, or a very large commute, or learn to drive and buy a car. Back to square one in any case!

The refurb you've detailed- would not, in my opinion, qualify- were it disputed at the RTB. Unfortunately- its impossible to tie down what definitely qualifies, and what definitely does not- so there will always be a degree of interpretation going on............

Giblet

It would with a small child, pulling up the floors would make the place uninhabitable, and I couldn't really have all that dust around, and people coming in and out.

Graham

Giblet wrote: »

It would with a small child, pulling up the floors would make the place uninhabitable, and I couldn't really have all that dust around, and people coming in and out.

It's my understanding the presence of children is not part of the criteria for judging if a refurb is substantial.

Giblet

Graham wrote: »

It's my understanding the presence of children is not part of the criteria for judging if a refurb is substantial.

But its going to go ahead anyway, forcing the issue. I can hardly pull it through the RTB while chaos is ensuing in the background. They're slow at best regarding these issues, impotent at worst.

Fian

new floors, bathroom and kitchen

This easily constitutes substantial renovation imo. There is very little more you could actually do to renovate than replace floors kitchen and bathroom. Walls, ceilings, wiring i suppose.

TheChizler

Fian wrote: »

This easily constitutes substantial renovation imo. There is very little more you could actually do to renovate than replace floors kitchen and bathroom. Walls, ceilings, wiring i suppose.

Extension, change number of bedrooms, overhaul of central heating to name a few.

Unless the old floors, kitchen, and bathroom were out of the 60s or in poor condition new ones are unlikely to substantially change the properties of the place and justify an increase in rent. Something like adding another bedroom or doubling the size of the kitchen obviously would.

Mrs Shuttleworth

Did I hear the headline on 6pm news correctly?

Rent free zones being considered??!!

The_Conductor

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

Did I hear the headline on 6pm news correctly?

Rent free zones being considered??!!

Was listening on the way home- Drogheda and Greystones have been added to the list of areas included in the list of Rent Pressure Zones- and forthwith are subject to a maximum annual rent increase of 4%.