Advice on Lease Termination

davo10

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Have you a link to a case where an unregistered landlord was allowed prove he was the landlord with bank statements? There is a requirement for a rent book and in article does not supply a rent book may have difficulty proving he didn't get his rent, if the tenant insists the rent was paid.
Here is a link to a case on bank evidence
http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/B602AC4401C5590580257CA60039BF3A

The RTB is bound by the rules of evidence as it acts in a quasi-judicial manner.

I think pretty much every RTB case proves my point. The tenant is in dispute with his/her LL, and unless you can show me one that the RTB ruled that the LL was not the LL, we can take it that the RTB acknowledges the fact. It's been pointed out already, a LL who hasn't registered is not immune from censure just because he/she isn't registered, it doesn't mean the tenancy does not exist, it doesn't mean he/she is not a LL, a late registration fee can be paid and the case goes on. The case you link to rests on whether the banks collector could enter a statement, that does not mean all bank statements are hearsay. Every money launderer and fraudster in the country would be delighted if the State could not use bank accounts and their details because they are "hearsay". He'll even Revenue would be stumped if they couldn't use bank statements as proof of tax evasion "Sorry your honour but all that money they say I have in my bank account is inadmissible, it's hearsay, I have no money in my bank account". Have bank statements never been supeonad?

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/banks-now-keep-records-for-longer-1.277654?mode=amp

GM228

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Have you a link to a case where an unregistered landlord was allowed prove he was the landlord with bank statements? There is a requirement for a rent book and in article does not supply a rent book may have difficulty proving he didn't get his rent, if the tenant insists the rent was paid.
Here is a link to a case on bank evidence
http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/B602AC4401C5590580257CA60039BF3A

The RTB is bound by the rules of evidence as it acts in a quasi-judicial manner.

I'm surprised you have mentioned the Dermody case and are obviously unaware that the Court of Appeal in Ulster Bank vs Egan [2015] IECA 85 confirned that bank records are admissable as evidence with a supporting affidavit (an officer of the bank swears an affidavit to the effect that a bank statement was an entry in the ordinary books of the bank), this exemption to the hearsay rule is provided for in the Bankers Books Evidence Act 1879. The CA reapproved the position held as per the Moorview Developments vs First Active & Ors [2010] IEHC 275 case and specifically distinguished the Dermody judgment on its own facts.

The position held by the CA has recently been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the Ulster Bank vs O’Brien & Ors [2015] IESC 96 case. So to summarise, when an officer of the bank swears an affidavit to the effect that a bank statement was an entry in the ordinary books of the bank it is admissable.

athtrasna

There's a legal discussion forum if you wish to continue this discussion.

Mod

The_Conductor

I'm not going to put a further warning on this thread- next person who decides to discuss the intricacies of law- is going to have a little holiday from posting in this forum. If you want to discuss legalities- we have a legal discussion forum- use it. No further discussion here, period.

4ensic15

I was at an adjudication where the so called landlord was not accepted. Adjudication reports are not made available. At some other adjudications the point was going to be madeby the tenants, but a deal was done between the so-called landlords did a deal with the tenants.