Landlord deceased. RAS tenant received eviction notice from widow

Totallycrazy

My friend has been in same ras house about 7 years. About 2 months ago she got a letter from landlords wife to say she had to be out by end of March.

The landlord has died and will is currently in probate so wife isn't owner of property. Nor has house been put on market.

This was only letter recieved on the matter or correspondence from the wife.

My friend has been onto council, councillors, housing, estate agents etc. trying to find new accommodation. However in our area there nothing available she has also tried towns close by also.

The council are hoping to buy the house and let her stay by no word on thus even though she has been I contact with them nearly daily.

She's starting to panic has 11 days to be out but no where to go what are her options.

Letter she received was very amature, no solicitor etc involved in it just written by deceased landlord wife

Paulw

Read - http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html

The notice period must be 28 weeks (196 days) and must be properly served.

Your friend should lodge a dispute with the RTB.

satguy

Yep,, plenty of time,, but do give the RTB a call.

Totallycrazy

Thanks for replies. I will get her to ring them.

Letter states that there's no minimum notice period.

athtrasna

Totallycrazy wrote: »

Thanks for replies. I will get her to ring them.

Letter states that there's no minimum notice period.

Letter is wrong

Graces7

Dreadful situation all round, for the widow, for the tenant. While some slate RTB it is good that we have the laws and them in times like this.

pilly

Are you sure she's not there 8 years? Others are more knowledgeable than me on this but 8 years might mean she's at the end of the second Part 4?

Mr McBoatface

As the widow is not the landlord what can the RTB do ?

The rental agreement was between Landlord and tennent.

Graces7

Mr McBoatface wrote: »

As the widow is not the landlord what can the RTB do ?

The rental agreement was between Landlord and tennent.

Surely cannot be the first time that this has happened and there is a wiil presumably?

Baby01032012

pilly wrote: »

Are you sure she's not there 8 years? Others are more knowledgeable than me on this but 8 years might mean she's at the end of the second Part 4?

I think pilly has hit nail on the head. If at end of part 4 it can be terminated without reason once the minimum notice is given and notice ends on or after the end of the part IV. Must follow template set down by rtb. If widow is the executor of the will she has rights to act on behalf of the deceased estate, it doesn't have to be from solicitor.

4ensic15

A dispute about a notice of termination must be lodged within 28 days. Looks like this tenant wasn't getting great advice from all the councillors she contacted. How does the o/p know that the house wasn't jointly owned by the husband and wife (now widow)? Why didn't the tenant get proper advice in the first place?

Totallycrazy

Thanks for replies they are living in house 7 years and 1 month.
The houses was only in the deceased nAme and was never in wife's name.

Councillors are telling her to sit tight and not move that they will sort it.

Can't see how they will sort it before end of March.

She has tried to contact the wife and see what is going on but only getting ill get back to you.

4ensic15

Totallycrazy wrote: »

Thanks for replies they are living in house 7 years and 1 month.

Was that at the time she got the notice or now?

Totallycrazy wrote: »

The houses was only in the deceased nAme and was never in wife's name.

How do you know that? have you checked the title?

Totallycrazy

4ensic15 wrote: »

Was that at the time she got the notice or now?

How do you know that? have you checked the title?

As of today that's length f time in house.

Definitely only in deceased name

4ensic15

Totallycrazy wrote: »

As of today that's length f time in house.

So only between 6 and 7 years at the time of the notice, meaning she was only entitled to 24 weeks notice.

Totallycrazy wrote: »

Definitely only in deceased name

How do you know?

pilly

4ensic15 wrote:

So only between 6 and 7 years at the time of the notice, meaning she was only entitled to 24 weeks notice.

Still a lot longer than 2 months.

Spanish Eyes

Surely if a property is being probated and is left to beneficiaries, then notice must be given to the tenants in order to vest the property in the new owner, or sell it and divide the proceeds. Depends on the will.

The executor takes the place of the deceased landlord surely?

It would appear that the proper notice is the problem here. Sorry if that is obvious!

Lumen

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Surely if a property is being probated and is left to beneficiaries, then notice must be given to the tenants in order to vest the property in the new owner, or sell it and divide the proceeds. Depends on the will.

I would say no and yes. Transfer of title doesn't require vacancy, surely.

In any case it isn't necessary to terminate a tenancy in order to sell a property, it's just an allowable reason to terminate.

Ms.Sunshine

even if her name wasn't originally on the house it could be now if it was passed through to the wife from the Will.

It is then up to her to decide what to do with the house - she has the right to do what she is doing. as technically it seem's to be hers from the date her husband passed away .

Spanish Eyes

Lumen wrote: »

I would say no and yes. Transfer of title doesn't require vacancy, surely.

In any case it isn't necessary to terminate a tenancy in order to sell a property, it's just an allowable reason to terminate.

Beneficiary might want it vacant to live in it. A sale is much easier with vacant possession too.

Once the executor gives proper notice under the act I don't see the issue.

Lumen

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Beneficiary might want it vacant to live in it. A sale is much easier with vacant possession too.

Once the executor gives proper notice under the act I don't see the issue.

The issue was your use of the word "must".

Spanish Eyes

Lumen wrote: »

The issue was your use of the word "must".

OK. but you get the drift I'm sure.

The_Conductor

Ms.Sunshine wrote: »

even if her name wasn't originally on the house it could be now if it was passed through to the wife from the Will.

It is then up to her to decide what to do with the house - she has the right to do what she is doing. as technically it seem's to be hers from the date her husband passed away .

It is hers from the date the will (if it exists) is probated (presuming it hasn't been bequeated to another party).

Death of either the landlord or the tenant- either party- does not terminate the lease.

The OP should dig out their original lease- it continues to be in effect- until such time as it is properly terminated by the new owner of the property.

Totallycrazy

Original forms signed have been pulled out. 10 year contract signed.
House is in probate. Not in wife's name and she's not an Executor of will.

It's the shortness of notice to leave that has my friend worried. She has been doing everything to try get a new house but nothing suitable available. She doesn't drive and public transport is a joke in the area.

Back to councillor again in morning. So hopefully good news. But he told her today to prepare to be housed in b&b

Mrs OBumble

The_Conductor wrote: »

...their original lease- it continues to be in effect- until such time as it is properly terminated by the new owner of the property.

I presume the executor could also terminate the lease - for example if the will says that the property is to be sold?

People have been making assumptions about the wife getting it, but unless you see the will, you don't know that's the case. Sometimes wills can say unexpected things :cool:

4ensic15

Totallycrazy wrote: »

House is in probate. Not in wife's name and she's not an Executor of will.

How do you know?

The_Conductor

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I presume the executor could also terminate the lease - for example if the will says that the property is to be sold?

People have been making assumptions about the wife getting it, but unless you see the will, you don't know that's the case. Sometimes wills can say unexpected things :cool:

Yes- proposed sale of the property is one of the listed reasons for terminating the lease under the Act (correct notice still has to be given though- which has not happened in this context- from what the OP has imparted to us).

By the way- to the other poster- the wife is not the executor of the will- and not the listed owner of the property- this means precisely nothing. The default position in Irish law is the wife is automatically the major beneficiary of her spouse's will- and unless specific assets are bequeathed to other tier one recipients (children)- the asset goes to her. That she did not own it previously is moot.

4ensic15

The_Conductor wrote: »

Yes- proposed sale of the property is one of the listed reasons for terminating the lease under the Act (correct notice still has to be given though- which has not happened in this context- from what the OP has imparted to us).

By the way- to the other poster- the wife is not the executor of the will- and not the listed owner of the property- this means precisely nothing. The default position in Irish law is the wife is automatically the major beneficiary of her spouse's will- and unless specific assets are bequeathed to other tier one recipients (children)- the asset goes to her. That she did not own it previously is moot.

The fact that the wife is not the executor of the will is highly relevant. In theory, The wife may never get the house. It may have to be sold to pay the debts of the estate. The only person with power to deal with the house is the executor as the personal representative of the deceased. That continues to be the case until the executor hands the house over to the person entitled. In Irish law the wife has a legal right share to a portion of the estate but does not automatically acquire any asset.

Michael D Not Higgins

The_Conductor wrote: »

It is hers from the date the will (if it exists) is probated (presuming it hasn't been bequeated to another party).

Death of either the landlord or the tenant- either party- does not terminate the lease.

The OP should dig out their original lease- it continues to be in effect- until such time as it is properly terminated by the new owner of the property.

Part 4 tenancy is automatically terminated by death of the tenant as per Section 39 of the RTA 2004, subject to the conditions therein.

In the case of death of the landlord, the landlord's representative is entitled to continue to collect rent and may pursue arrears through RTB as per Section 23. Who that representative is is up for question.

The_Conductor

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Part 4 tenancy is automatically terminated by death of the tenant as per Section 39 of the RTA 2004, subject to the conditions therein.

In the case of death of the landlord, the landlord's representative is entitled to continue to collect rent and may pursue arrears through RTB as per Section 23. Who that representative is is up for question.

She also has a 10 year lease however, with a little over 3 years still to run on it? I know enforcement of it is a civil matter- however, it confers rights on her, over and above those of a Part IV tenancy- enforcing these rights may be difficult though. She isn't solely relying on her Part IV tenancy.

Michael D Not Higgins

The_Conductor wrote: »

She also has a 10 year lease however, with a little over 3 years still to run on it? I know enforcement of it is a civil matter- however, it confers rights on her, over and above those of a Part IV tenancy- enforcing these rights may be difficult though. She isn't solely relying on her Part IV tenancy.

As far as I understand, the RAS scheme is a contract between the landlord and the local authority. I don't know the full details of how these work but the long term lease isn't with the tenant. The tenant would be protected by Part 4 though.