Short term lease agreement - help needed

782378

I am a reluctant landlord and currently rent out my house, size wise it is not suitable for my family.



The house was built with a defective material in the foundation and is currently unsellable, I have been involved in a 6 year battle with the insurance company to remediate the property and I am expecting to finally have the issue resolved within the next 6 months as result of my Ombudsman complaint



A couple moved in last year and I explained that all I could offer was a short term lease, as the house may need to go through a 3 month repair process some time in the future. They were happy to take the house despite the uncertainty and we agreed that I would give them 3 months notice to find a new place if the house needs to be remediated. They get the house at a good market rate and there is regular communication in relation to my progress with the insurance company



Last year when we signed a short term lease I verbally explained the circumstances. The short tem lease has now expired and I do not know the best way to formalise our agreement. What is the best way to proceed with this couple in relation to formalising our situation so that there will be no issues if I need them to move out in 6/12 months time



I don't want to have went though a 6 year battle with the insurance company only to find that when I ask the tenants to leave so that the house can be remediated, that they can refuse due to some technicality with the agreement.



Any advise would be gratefully welcome

LuckyLloyd

The lease is irrelevant. They have Chapter IV Rights once they've been living there six months. All the information you need is here:

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/types_of_tenancy.html#lef263

There are now a limited number of reasons for which you can terminate the tenancy and fixed notice periods for that termination apply depending on how long your tenants are renting from you when you come around to issuing the notice.

You should be fine as I imagine any "remediation" work in this case will qualify as substantial renovations.

Ms Doubtfire1

I would agree with prior poster. The remediation work you require will be substantial - you will have no issues terminating the lease with the appropriate notice. make sure they are aware as they could over hold. Even the best tenants can turn desperate if they can't find a new place.Give them more than enough time.

spaceHopper

If they play fair I don't think you have a problem with their lease as said they have part 4 right. I would leave things as they are. You don't need a new rental agreement.

Are you worried they won't leave? My concern would be that they over hold and building rates are going up so you get stung on costs. Before you settle with the insurance get a QS to check what it will cost today to get done. Or have a builder arranged ready to start in 3 months with a fixed price deal.

782378

Appreciate your responses,
Is it best to sign a year long lease with a clause, that the lease can be broken (with three months notice) if the house needs to be repaired, or given the circumstances can I legally offer continuous short term leases which need to be renewed every 3 months.

Claw Hammer

782378 wrote: »

Appreciate your responses,
Is it best to sign a year long lease with a clause, that the lease can be broken (with three months notice) if the house needs to be repaired, or given the circumstances can I legally offer continuous short term leases which need to be renewed every 3 months.

Makes no difference. You would have to give leases of less than 6 months and put out the tenant with notice of termination before 6 months tenancy have been completed and do this repeatedly so that no tenant would ever acquire part 4 rights. Now that your tenant has acquired part 4 rights, you can only remove the grounds of substantial refurbishment. There is no point of entering into a new lease. You will need specialist advice when you attempt to terminate the current arrangement. Making mistakes in your notice could be costly and time consuming.

LuckyLloyd

782378 wrote: »

Appreciate your responses,
Is it best to sign a year long lease with a clause, that the lease can be broken (with three months notice) if the house needs to be repaired, or given the circumstances can I legally offer continuous short term leases which need to be renewed every 3 months.

A lease won't improve your situation, as it can only confer additional rights over and above Part IV rights. You cannot draft any agreement with your tenants that could detract from their rights, or your obligations under tenancy legislation.

But honestly I wouldn't sweat too much, as the work you need to perform is ample grounds for termination and the notice periods involved should be agreeable for your tenants.

Claw Hammer

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But honestly I wouldn't sweat too much, as the work you need to perform is ample grounds for termination and the notice periods involved should be agreeable for your tenants.

I would never trust a tenant. They are all very fine when living in your house on the cheap. As soon as you give the notice they can cut very nasty. Be prepared for the RTB adjudication and Tribunal. Expect a serious battle. If all your ducks aren't lined up you will lose and its back to scratch.

LuckyLloyd

Claw Hammer wrote: »

I would never trust a tenant. They are all very fine when living in your house on the cheap. As soon as you give the notice they can cut very nasty. Be prepared for the RTB adjudication and Tribunal. Expect a serious battle. If all your ducks aren't lined up you will lose and its back to scratch.

I think that's an incredibly cynical view. However, it doesn't add anything to the core question from the original poster. If his tenants decide to overhold and force him down the legal route, the presence or absence of a lease agreement will make no difference. He will be legally entitled to issue a termination notice on grounds of substantial renovation work to the property, and hopefully he will have no delays receiving his property back to commence the necessary work.

Claw Hammer

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I think that's an incredibly cynical view. However, it doesn't add anything to the core question from the original poster. If his tenants decide to overhold and force him down the legal route, the presence or absence of a lease agreement will make no difference. He will be legally entitled to issue a termination notice on grounds of substantial renovation work to the property, and hopefully he will have no delays receiving his property back to commence the necessary work.

A lease is of no use. The o/p has through ignorance or stupidity allowed the tenants gain rights. When he issues his notice of termination he should be prepared for the worst. He has made a mess of it so far. Saying "hopefully he will have no delays receiving his property back to commence the necessary work." is naive. He should rely on preparation not hope. Ask any Junior Cert student who got their results today which was the more reliable means of success; hope or preparation?

LuckyLloyd

Claw Hammer wrote: »

A lease is of no use. The o/p has through ignorance or stupidity allowed the tenants gain rights. When he issues his notice of termination he should be prepared for the worst. He has made a mess of it so far. Saying "hopefully he will have no delays receiving his property back to commence the necessary work." is naive. He should rely on preparation not hope. Ask any Junior Cert student who got their results today which was the more reliable means of success; hope or preparation?

There is a vitriolic tone towards tenants in general in this post. The vast majority of tenants respect the properties they rent and are inclined to play ball. This couple made a verbal agreement in line with their tenancy rights, so there is nothing to assume (from what the OP posted) that they will over hold. Not everyone is versed in tenancy law, and the OP noted that he was a reluctant landlord.

Further back and forth on this side line of conversation are counter productive anyway. I believe the OP has received the information that is required, and hopefully he will receive a resolution to what sounds like a long standing issue over the next year or so.

GGTrek

Claw Hammer wrote: »

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But honestly I wouldn't sweat too much, as the work you need to perform is ample grounds for termination and the notice periods involved should be agreeable for your tenants.

I would never trust a tenant. They are all very fine when living in your house on the cheap. As soon as you give the notice they can cut very nasty. Be prepared for the RTB adjudication and Tribunal. Expect a serious battle. If all your ducks aren't lined up you will lose and its back to scratch.

I could not agree more. Overholding has become very common. In my experience 1 out of 3 tenants at the moment will try everything to avoid the eviction either by challenging the termination notice right away (the stupid ones) or by simply overholding (even more beneficial for the tenant given current legislation). They know that out there the real market for new tenancies is very tough. Of course the will easily forget any favour done or the fact that they paid cheap rent for years and behaved badly safe in the knowledge that the law was on their side until they reached the point of no return.

GGTrek

I do have a suggestion for the OP. Collect as much solid independent evidence as possible (builders, insurance) about the additional costs caused by overholding. If the tenants overhold take the evidence to RTB and request payment of these damages to the tenants. I did this with a particular nasty tenant I had at the second adjudication through a counterclaim (I was very naive in the first adjudication, in the second one I was brutal). This focused his mind massively since he knew he had to pay and I would pursue him to the end just for the satisfaction of it (for bad faith people and liars money goes out of the equation) and quickly agreed to get out fast to avoid paying damages. Hopefully the OP will not need this, but hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
Lately I have improved my strategy with a tenant who said she could not find alternative accommodation during the 5 months notice period (again just taking the piss she did not even try) I provided her a warning notice that should she decided to overhold legal action will be swift and I listed all the damages and breaks of lease and penalties awarded for her breaks with the total at the end of the notice. This focused her mind quickly and lately she has asked for a reference (first signal she has started looking for alternative accommodation). Again these strategies only work with tenants who have jobs and something to loose.
Again written references if asked should be just: stayed since date, rent is up to date, please feel free to call for more info. Nothing more or it can be used against the landlord during legal proceedings.

Claw Hammer

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There is a vitriolic tone towards tenants in general in this post. The vast majority of tenants respect the properties they rent and are inclined to play ball. This couple made a verbal agreement in line with their tenancy rights, so there is nothing to assume (from what the OP posted) that they will over hold. Not everyone is versed in tenancy law, and the OP noted that he was a reluctant landlord.

Further back and forth on this side line of conversation are counter productive anyway. I believe the OP has received the information that is required, and hopefully he will receive a resolution to what sounds like a long standing issue over the next year or so.

How does the o/p know he is dealing with one of your vast majority? If the o/ps tenants act up is is 100% of his tenants are troublesome. That is all he cares about. If every other tenant in the universe is decent it is of no use to him. When a landlord goes to the RTB it is trench warfare. No tenant can be relied on when the chips are down.

LuckyLloyd

GGTrek wrote: »

I could not agree more. Overholding has become very common. In my experience 1 out of 3 tenants at the moment will try everything to avoid the eviction either by challenging the termination notice right away (the stupid ones) or by simply overholding (even more beneficial for the tenant given current legislation). They know that out there the real market for new tenancies is very tough. Of course the will easily forget any favour done or the fact that they paid cheap rent for years and behaved badly safe in the knowledge that the law was on their side until they reached the point of no return.

GGTrek, as much as I think you are an excellent contributor to this forum (in particular your posts that focus on legal precedents and correct interpretations of tenancy legislation), I can't accept the suggestion that over holding is anywhere near as common as you suggest. As much as you may have had a negative personal experience with your properties / tenants, you more than anyone on this forum will be aware that the available stats / indications do not support the assertion that the issue is so widespread.

That's not to say the issue shouldn't be addressed via legislation, or isn't hugely problematic for landlords in incidents where it does occur.