False references

lightspeed

Stop being greed and return their deposit. They likely only gave a false reference as probably only shared a room in house previously and couldnt afford to rent a whole apartment.

Your not holding onto their deposit for some just moral reason, it just because you want to keep their deposit.

I recently turned 30 and ive worked in low wage jobs paying for college and helping my folks with the mortgage. Ive never moved out of my familiy home but recently got a better paying job and mortgage has just been cleared on family home.

So now im looking to move out soon but not sure how that going to be possible given that most landlords require a reference from a previous landlord.

If i cant rent anywhere I reckon ill just have to save for a few years and try get a mortgage of my own or move abroad.

Graham

I can't help think you're projecting your own issues onto the OP here.

OP asked what he should do with the deposit and suggested he is out of pocket because of the fraudulent misrepresentations of his (almost) tenants.

martingriff

Sorry OP but you should give back the deposit the ONLY reason you are out of pocket is because you did not do your due diligence before you took there deposit and got them to sign the lease. Why did you decide after getting them to signing the lease and take the deposit did you then decide to check the references?????. Take some personal responsibility (I know to some its an alien concept for some people) here for your own mistake.

LuckyLloyd

If you're going to try and hold onto the deposit be sure of your customers in this case. I'm not saying it's at all right, but there's plenty out there who'll make sure to come and take it off you whether you like it or not.

You know damn well you should return their money in full.

Claw Hammer

martingriff wrote: »

Sorry OP but you should give back the deposit the ONLY reason you are out of pocket is because you did not do your due diligence before you took there deposit and got them to sign the lease. Why did you decide after getting them to signing the lease and take the deposit did you then decide to check the references?????. Take some personal responsibility (I know to some its an alien concept for some people) here for your own mistake.

Rubbish. The reason he is out of pocke is because he was lied to. If people commit crime, they can't expect mercy. If you steal froma shop, you can't just give back the item when you are caught. It is a ludicrous proposition to say that a person can tell lies and it it up to the person they lie to to catch them.
Lying thieving tenants like that should be given the elephant treatment.

Baby01032012

As a landlord myself...wow what is with the attitude from some posters towards the tenants.

It's not a case of ah yeah teach the tenant a lesson by keeping his money. The VERY most that landlord can do make every effort to relet as soon as possible and then take a portion equal to the couple of days lost rent. References should have been checked immediately prior to agreeing the tenancy.

I let an apartment took deposit and signed lease only to discover the tenant could not move as they were tied to a longer notice to their current landlord...so I gave them back their full deposit.

quadrifoglio verde

lightspeed wrote: »

Stop being a greedy pig and return their deposit. They likely only gave a false reference as probably only shared a room in house previously and couldnt afford to rent a whole apartment.

Your not holding onto their deposit for some just moral reason, it just because you want to rob them of their deposit. The greed in this country is disgusting.

I recently turned 30 and ive worked in low wage jobs paying for college and helping my folks with the mortgage. Ive never moved out of my familiy home but recently got a better paying job and mortgage has just been cleared on family home.

So now im looking to move out soon but not sure how that going to be possible given that most landlords require a reference from a previous landlord.

If i cant rent anywhere I reckon ill just have to save for a few years and try get a mortgage of my own or move abroad.

Thing is the landlord is out of pocket for letting costs and an unknown number of days rent as a result of false documents being provided. He deserves to be compensated for this.
Unless the anti landlord brigade of boards.ie accommodation and property want to do a whip around for him, this compensation comes from a deposit.

As for your own situation, my advice would be to dress well, go armed with work references and explain that the reason why you can't provide a previous landlord reference was due to you living at home helping with your parents mortgage.

Honesty gets you quite far in life

martingriff

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Rubbish. The reason he is out of pocke is because he was lied to. If people commit crime, they can't expect mercy. If you steal froma shop, you can't just give back the item when you are caught. It is a ludicrous proposition to say that a person can tell lies and it it up to the person they lie to to catch them.
Lying thieving tenants like that should be given the elephant treatment.

Bullcrap if he had done what he was supposed to have done and checked the references before he took the deposit. That is why he is out of pocket. Of course it is up to him to make sure he is selling a service (a place to rent) If he cant be assed checking references I hate to see how he is if something had to be fixed. You shop example is out there. They stole nothing

martingriff

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Thing is the landlord is out of pocket for letting costs and an unknown number of days rent as a result of false documents being provided. He deserves to be compensated for this.
Unless the anti landlord brigade of boards.ie accommodation and property want to do a whip around for him, this compensation comes from a deposit.

As for your own situation, my advice would be to dress well, go armed with work references and explain that the reason why you can't provide a previous landlord reference was due to you living at home helping with your parents mortgage.

Honesty gets you quite far in life

He is out of pocket has the OP never did his job and checked there reference pure and simple.

Strong Life in Dublin

Wait so you didn't even rent it to them but you still wanna keep the deposit? what a greedy little sh*t

NinetyTwoTeam

If they go to the PRTB with a signed lease and proof that they gave you a deposit and you kept it and wouldn't let them move in, you'll be done for illegal eviction, which we'll carry a five figure fine, plus the deposit amount, and could affect your ability to continue renting.

Just return it.

martingriff

Strong Life in Dublin wrote: »

Wait so you didn't even rent it to them but you still wanna keep the deposit? what a greedy little sh*t

Has the OP ever explained why he let them sign the lease take the deposit and only then check the references.

lightspeed

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Thing is the landlord is out of pocket for letting costs and an unknown number of days rent as a result of false documents being provided. He deserves to be compensated for this.
Unless the anti landlord brigade of boards.ie accommodation and property want to do a whip around for him, this compensation comes from a deposit.

As for your own situation, my advice would be to dress well, go armed with work references and explain that the reason why you can't provide a previous landlord reference was due to you living at home helping with your parents mortgage.

Honesty gets you quite far in life

Honesty wont make much difference as most landlords wont want to take the risk and wont need to with rental demand so high. For each letting i apply to, there willl a queue of others behind me who probably can provide a reference from previous landlord.

Ill hopefully be able to rent a room somewhere, save enough for a deposit to get a mortgage or move abroad.


I was not trying to vent based on my own situation but im merely pointing out that not everyone who provides a false reference or no reference is a poor tenant.

As others have pointed out, he should have checked the references before taking the deposit. clearly he didnt feel he needed to do that as was just going to keep the deposit if references didnt check out.

Tell me what costs he incurred that he could deduct from the deposit? Is it the cost of a phone call i assumed he made to check the references?

The tenants who lied are probably desperate to find somewhere affordable to rent like many and he has now stolen their deposit. Spin it how you like but that is a scummy thing to do.

Also in contract law there must be consideration from both parties. The deposit was consideration which he accepted so tell me what the tenants got for their consideration?

Nothing which means he is liable for breach of contract. So both from a moral and legal position, he owes the tenants their deposit back.

.

Graham

lightspeed wrote: »

Also in contract law there must be consideration from both parties. The deposit was consideration which he accepted so tell me what the tenants got for their consideration?

Nothing which means he is liable for breach of contract. So both from a moral and legal position, he owes the tenants their deposit back.

That would be the contract issued on the basis of fraudulent misrepresentation would it?

4ensic15

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

If they go to the PRTB with a signed lease and proof that they gave you a deposit and you kept it and wouldn't let them move in, you'll be done for illegal eviction, which we'll carry a five figure fine, plus the deposit amount, and could affect your ability to continue renting.

Just return it.

The lease was only signed as a result of the fraudulent documentation the tenants presented. They can't rely on it if the o/p avoids the lease which he is entitled to do. As a result there is no tenancy. There is no question of a five figure sum, or any sum. In some Arab countries those tenants would find their hands hanging around their necks by now. Getting a deposit back would be the least of their worries.

rossmores

If this op is to be believed he should use an agent,1 week to check prospective tenants is to long, lease should only be presented after refs check.
A full deposit should not be paid before tenant selection process
Why so many here assume your over charging and provide less than standard is indicative of the attitude towards all landlords
I select 2 parties after 24hours 1 gets offered the place both pay €50 the best suited gets the place the other gets ref and €50 retainer back the viewing time is most important to access prospect and always check passports

CeilingFly

pilly wrote: »

Banks do not ask for a work reference ever, you're just making that up now to make a point. Any LL with half a brain will not leave themselves open to being accused of discrimination.

Yes they do. I employ 12 staff and had to provide details for one of them to the bank as they were going for mortgage approval. (length of service, likelihood of continuance, promotional prospects and timeline)

Banks may also check on the financial health of the company you work for too.

These check are made especially where its borderline for acceptance.

CeilingFly

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

If they go to the PRTB with a signed lease and proof that they gave you a deposit and you kept it and wouldn't let them move in, you'll be done for illegal eviction, which we'll carry a five figure fine, plus the deposit amount, and could affect your ability to continue renting.

Just return it.

sorry, but that is the biggest load of utter bull I have read on boards for a long long time.

absolute complete and utter bullcrap

dubrov

CeilingFly wrote:

sorry, but that is the biggest load of utter bull I have read on boards for a long long time.

Totally made up of course.

Contract signed based on false representation = No contact.

I'd still suggest giving the deposit back in full as it is just not worth the hassle

Browney7

Wonder if the op has sorted this yet. He got pretty much the same advice on the Legal Discussion forum aswell

martingriff

martingriff wrote: »

Sorry OP but you should give back the deposit the ONLY reason you are out of pocket is because you did not do your due diligence before you took there deposit and got them to sign the lease. Why did you decide after getting them to signing the lease and take the deposit did you then decide to check the references?????. Take some personal responsibility (I know to some its an alien concept for some people) here for your own mistake.

Absolute and utter nonsense from start to finish.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

If you're going to try and hold onto the deposit be sure of your customers in this case. I'm not saying it's at all right, but there's plenty out there who'll make sure to come and take it off you whether you like it or not.

You know damn well you should return their money in full.

Oh if I kept a deposit the ideal scenario is them showing up to "take it back" you can't beat a good fight, I'd look forward to it!!

As for knowing "damn well he should return it" no he shouldn't be should keep an amount to cover the rent he lost and the costs of looking for someone else. The bias against LL by some here is sickening, this person needs to be taught a lesson.

Strong Life in Dublin wrote: »

Wait so you didn't even rent it to them but you still wanna keep the deposit? what a greedy little sh*t

What a stupid post!

testaccount123

Treasure Thundering Loft wrote: »

Let them try and sue me I would look forward to seeing them pay my costs after I win on top of keeping the portion of the deposit I was entitled to.

What do you mean 'let them try and sue me?', you are not a landlord you are a licencee in a houseshare. Give the walter mitty routine a rest

Rave.ef

Treasure Thundering Loft wrote: »

Its everything that's wrong alright, with slimy tenants. He is fully entitled to deduct for the time wasting of these chancers.

I would return nothing until I had tenants moved in and then deduct for everyday of lost rent caused by the previous "tenants" and for any additional rental costs.



The tenants are totally in the wrong and you are defending them, the poor dodgy tenants deserve to be held up looking for another place I hope the next LL and the next LL doesn't fall for their stunt. As for "If it was my deposit you wouldn't still have it in your pocket" :rolleyes: good luck with that.

Your clearly a LL who loves the idea that your better than your tennents. Whit your rolleyes good luck with that craic will bite you in the a$$ one day. E.g tennents have you sussed out as a l@##er who won't be returning deposit so when the time to move on is getting closer they stop taking care of the place youd be surprised what a few weeks neglect can cos more than likely more then deposit.

testaccount123

testaccount123 wrote: »

What do you mean 'let them try and sue me?', you are not a landlord you are a licencee in a houseshare. Give the walter mitty routine a rest

You are so wrong it's funny.

testaccount123

Rave.ef wrote: »

Your clearly a LL who loves the idea that your better than your tennents

Hes not a landlord, hes a fantasist who lives in the middle of nowhere and doesnt even have a proper lease but who likes to come on the internet and lecture people who deal with renting in one of the most difficult markets in the world about how he'll do things when he grows up and realises his fantasy of becoming a landlord.

He'd be an appalling landlord, he has no understanding or regard for the either the spirit or the letter of Irish tenancy law and lacks the basic intelligence or empathy required to maintain a simple business relationship.

Bargain_Hound

I don't understand why the PRTB advised to seek legal advice and could not offer advice on what you should do.

I feel for both parties involved here. There is no doubt the rental market is tough for tenants, especially those entering the market as new tenants. One thing is providing false previous tenancy references but the bit that worries me more would be providing false work references. To me this indicates the possibility that the tenants may not be currently working or previously not worked or made unemployed.

Either way, I feel the right thing to do is return the deposit and move on if you have decided the new tenants are not suitable. The way things are, depending where the OP's rented property is, its not like it will be difficult to get new tenants in. The demand vs supply is definitely on the landlords side at the moment.

Our current landlord took us as on into a new build property, as very fresh tenants into the rental market. We get on very well with him and have developed a good relationship. Rent is paid on time every month and with children, I can see he took a risk with us but no doubt I am sure he now feels he made the right choice as he has come as seen how we look after the house and garden.

LuckyLloyd

Treasure Thundering Loft wrote: »

Oh if I kept a deposit the ideal scenario is them showing up to "take it back" you can't beat a good fight, I'd look forward to it!!

As for knowing "damn well he should return it" no he shouldn't be should keep an amount to cover the rent he lost and the costs of looking for someone else. The bias against LL by some here is sickening, this person needs to be taught a lesson!

Good for you, though it would give me pause to withhold cash on a technicality (at best) for no service in return when the people who own the cash know my name and presumably what I look like. That's just common sense.

Browney7

Bargain_Hound wrote: »

I don't understand why the PRTB advised to seek legal advice and could not offer advice on what you should do.

I feel for both parties involved here. There is no doubt the rental market is tough for tenants, especially those entering the market as new tenants. One thing is providing false previous tenancy references but the bit that worries me more would be providing false work references. To me this indicates the possibility that the tenants may not be currently working or previously not worked or made unemployed.

Either way, I feel the right thing to do is return the deposit and move on if you have decided the new tenants are not suitable. The way things are, depending where the OP's rented property is, its not like it will be difficult to get new tenants in. The demand vs supply is definitely on the landlords side at the moment.

Our current landlord took us as on into a new build property, as very fresh tenants into the rental market. We get on very well with him and have developed a good relationship. Rent is paid on time every month and with children, I can see he took a risk with us but no doubt I am sure he now feels he made the right choice as he has come as seen how we look after the house and garden.

One of the them actually did work in the company provided (it's in the legal forum). The number on the letter was wrong apparently and the manager's name didn't match.

Great posts on show in here - be glad it's not Saudi Arabia and having hands chopped off. Jesus wept.

Lux23

Whatever about the fraud - the OP has no legal basis to retain any of the deposit. He could and probably will get away with it but it could bite him in the bum down the line.

TheChizler

Browney7 wrote: »

One of the them actually did work in the company provided (it's in the legal forum). The number on the letter was wrong apparently and the manager's name didn't match.

Is it possible the references are completely genuine and the OP is making an assumption based on a typo and maybe the person he checked with making a mistake? If this is in any way likely the last thing they should do is refuse to rent to them after accepting the deposit and lease.