Landlord asked us to leave - Claims to be moving in.

gambler12

My landlord recently informed me that he intends to move into my apartment, and so he will end the tenancy. He said he will post the official notice soon. I know that the notice has to give a notice period depending on how long I've been here, and a statutory declaration, signed by a solicitor, of their intention to move in.
But I'm extremely suspicious of his intention to move in. I'm convinced he just wants to get rid of me so that he can move new tenants in, with a much higher rate, which he cannot give to me due to the 4% rule.
What other steps can I take to get proof that he actually moved in himself?
If I find out afterwards that it was rented out to other tenants, what can I do??

Fian

You are not really entitled to demand proof he moved in himself.

however if he advertises it or rents it shortly after you leave you would be entitled to complain to the RTB and could be awarded compensation. You could consider telling your landlord you will be monitoring the situation afterwards and complaining if it transpires he is not living there, if you want to try to deter him. Would probably be wise to do nothing until you receive notice. there is nothing to stop you from calling to the place after you leave to see who answers the doorbell/buzzer, or from monitoring daft.ie.

Paulw

Even if you leave, he cannot legally increase the rent more than 4% for new tenants.

budhabob

We were in this position a few years ago. had little opportunity but to move out, but in our response we put in a little kicker. We're pretty sure the house lay vacant for 6 months as a result.

We note that the justification for the termination of the lease is in accordance with section 34, table sub-point (4) of the RTA. However, we note the onus on the landlord to inform us should the new tenants vacate the property within 6 months (i.e. the landlord), and subsequently offer us the tenancy. We would appreciate if you fulfil this requirement as we have enjoyed our time in both the house and estate.

direstraits

If the property is in a RPZ and currently 1,400e, if tenants move out, how much can the LL charge the new tenants?

dudara

Depends on when the rent was last set. Have a look at the rent increase calculator on the RTB website

CIARAN_BOYLE

direstraits wrote: »

If the property is in a RPZ and currently 1,400e, if tenants move out, how much can the LL charge the new tenants?

same rules as old tennants only difference is that the new tennants don't know ehat the old tennants paid.

Claw Hammer

Open a dispute with the RTB for invalid notice. A notice of termination must be in writing. IF you win the landlord will be snookered for two years.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Open a dispute with the RTB for invalid notice. A notice of termination must be in writing. IF you win the landlord will be snookered for two years.

landlord hasn't given notice yet. why would you win a case in this situation?

BrokenArrows

They really should have a website where the rent charged can be looked up based on the address.

Its kinda stupid to say new tenants cannot pay more than a 4% increase when there is no way for the new tenants to know how much the old paid.

budhabob

budhabob wrote: »

We were in this position a few years ago. had little opportunity but to move out, but in our response we put in a little kicker. We're pretty sure the house lay vacant for 6 months as a result.

We note that the justification for the termination of the lease is in accordance with section 34, table sub-point (4) of the RTA. However, we note the onus on the landlord to inform us should the new tenants vacate the property within 6 months (i.e. the landlord), and subsequently offer us the tenancy. We would appreciate if you fulfil this requirement as we have enjoyed our time in both the house and estate.

They likely found new tenants by word of mouth as they knew you were watching daft.

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Open a dispute with the RTB for invalid notice. A notice of termination must be in writing. IF you win the landlord will be snookered for two years.

They gave a heads up not a notice, its vexatious nonsense like this that's clogging up the RTB.

gambler12

Yea that's the thing. I know that the landlord can only charge new tenants 4% more. In fact my rent only went up by the 4% last month, and it was just after that I was informed of the landlord's intentions to move in himself.

But new tenants will have no idea what my rent was, unless I go knocking on their door after they move in ask to compare our rates!

The timing of the 2 year freeze in rent increase followed by the 4% limit in RPZs really worked in my favour, as the same apartments in the same complex are being rented out for €400 - €500 a month more than what I am currently playing.

So I'm sure his excuse that he is moving in is bulls**t...

BrokenArrows

gambler12 wrote: »

Yea that's the thing. I know that the landlord can only charge new tenants 4% more. In fact my rent only went up by the 4% last month, and it was just after that I was informed of the landlord's intentions to move in himself.

But new tenants will have no idea what my rent was, unless I go knocking on their door after they move in ask to compare our rates!

The timing of the 2 year freeze in rent increase followed by the 4% limit in RPZs really worked in my favour, as the same apartments in the same complex are being rented out for €400 - €500 a month more than what I am currently playing.

So I'm sure his excuse that he is moving in is bulls**t...

You can call around to the apartment after you move out to "check for any letters". If another tenant answers then you know you have been screwed.

BrokenArrows

BrokenArrows wrote: »

You can call around to the apartment after you move out to "check for any letters". If another tenant answers then you know you have been screwed.

But in saying that i think prevention is better than the cure.
Mention to the landlord about the rules about new tenants. If thats what he was planning he might just go ahead and cancel his plans.

elperello

I'm not so sure that calling around is going to prove anything.

You call someone answers the door, how do you know its not a member of LL's family, his partner, a house guest etc.
Are you going to start questioning them?

maximoose

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Its kinda stupid to say new tenants cannot pay more than a 4% increase when there is no way for the new tenants to know how much the old paid.

The RTB will though, no? Assuming everything has been registered

I thought I read recently that they would be monitoring new leases

daithiK1

gambler12 wrote: »

The timing of the 2 year freeze in rent increase followed by the 4% limit in RPZs really worked in my favour, as the same apartments in the same complex are being rented out for €400 - €500 a month more than what I am currently playing.

Clearly the timing of the regulation changes or even the regulation changes period, have not worked out for you if your origional assumption re. Landlord is correct, as your getting kicked out of property 1 and potentialy going to be on the other side of the rules ie. seeking a new let or refurbished let paying 500+ more to obtain property 2.

There is an argument that the current complex prices would not have jumped up so much without the regulatory meddling and their presence obstructs the landlord from charging you more than 4 percent but still agreeable to you.

_Kaiser_

I got a letter this week from the estate agent saying my LL wants to move back in at the start of January and giving me until then to vacate. I've never met the guy myself - am here 2.5 years, never any issues.. in fact the last inspection by the EA (funnily enough a fortnight ago) complimented me on how good condition the place is in. It's also not in Dublin so not impacted by the 4% restriction.

Like mentioned above there's talk in the letter of offering it back to me should they vacate within 6 months, but what's this about a solicitor's declaration? I just have a 1 page letter (with atrocious typos) from the EA.

I'm guessing that in reality there's very little I can do anyway, but house-hunting 7 weeks before Christmas is crap all the same.

gambler12

daithiK1 wrote: »

Clearly the timing of the regulation changes or even the regulation changes period, have not worked out for you if your origional assumption re. Landlord is correct, as your getting kicked out of property 1 and potentialy going to be on the other side of the rules ie. seeking a new let or refurbished let paying 500+ more to obtain property 2.

There is an argument that the current complex prices would not have jumped up so much without the regulatory meddling and their presence obstructs the landlord from charging you more than 4 percent but still agreeable to you.

The new regulations are fine, and would work out great for me if they can be properly enforced.
The problem is it's difficult to enforce when the landlord dubiously claims to be moving into the property, when it's almost impossible to prove otherwise.

gambler12

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I got a letter this week from the estate agent saying my LL wants to move back in at the start of January and giving me until then to vacate. I've never met the guy myself - am here 2.5 years, never any issues.. in fact the last inspection by the EA (funnily enough a fortnight ago) complimented me on how good condition the place is in. It's also not in Dublin so not impacted by the 4% restriction.

Like mentioned above there's talk in the letter of offering it back to me should they vacate within 6 months, but what's this about a solicitor's declaration? I just have a 1 page letter (with atrocious typos) from the EA.

I'm guessing that in reality there's very little I can do anyway, but house-hunting 7 weeks before Christmas is crap all the same.

Yes the part about offering it back to you if they vacate is required for it to be a valid notice.
But the notice should also include a statutory declaration. If this is not included in the notice that you received, then this is not a valid notice!

You can refer this to the RTB within 28 days of receipt of the notice if you think it is not valid.

See http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html and the section on If the landlord needs the property for their own use. There's also a sample notice there for landlord moving in which will give you an idea on whether the notice you received is valid.

murphaph

gambler12 wrote: »

Yea that's the thing. I know that the landlord can only charge new tenants 4% more. In fact my rent only went up by the 4% last month, and it was just after that I was informed of the landlord's intentions to move in himself.

But new tenants will have no idea what my rent was, unless I go knocking on their door after they move in ask to compare our rates!

The timing of the 2 year freeze in rent increase followed by the 4% limit in RPZs really worked in my favour, as the same apartments in the same complex are being rented out for €400 - €500 a month more than what I am currently playing.

So I'm sure his excuse that he is moving in is bulls**t...

Not necessarily.

If he lives in a comparable property and wouldn't mind living in your current flat then he can rent that other flat out at full market rate and then swap again in a couple of years, expunging the rpz limitations on your flat and renting it out at full market rate. I'm not aware of any rule prohibiting this indefinitely.

Claw Hammer

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

landlord hasn't given notice yet. why would you win a case in this situation?

It is arguable that the landlord has given notice. He has told the o/p that the landlord is moving and and the o/p will have to vacate. That is a verbal notice to quit.

hawkelady

Claw Hammer wrote: »

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

landlord hasn't given notice yet. why would you win a case in this situation?

It is arguable that the landlord has given notice. He has told the o/p that the landlord is moving and and the o/p will have to vacate. That is a verbal notice to quit.

Jesus , a landlord is giving his tenant a heads up before he actually gives them the letter and you want to accuse him of giving an illegal notice to quit !! The mind boggles .. as another poster said no wonder the rtb in inundated !!!

davo10

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It is arguable that the landlord has given notice. He has told the o/p that the landlord is moving and and the o/p will have to vacate. That is a verbal notice to quit.

Which means nothing, as notice must be in writing.


In relation to the new let at more than 4% above old rent, if anyone saw the Brendan Courtney programme on Tuesday night, you'd realise that people looking for a rental property don't give 2 s**ts about what the previous tenant was paying and would most likely tell you to take a hike if you knocked on their door and asked them what they are paying.

It was depressing watching those two brothers travel the city looking for a rental property, lines of people at viewings, viewers offering hundreds above asking rent and when they did find a small cottage, €3.5k deposit plus €1700 pm rent, that is mad. Every person in rented property should make every effort to avoid being the ones looking for a new property, that might mean you have to suck up a higher than legally allowed increase, the people on here advising default "take an RTB case" don't understand the difficulty in house hunting, and the importance of a reference, the EA on the programme said without a reference you haven't a snowballs chance in hell of getting a rental.

Op, offer the LL more if you want to stay there, if he does want to move back in and you dispute it, you are going to be joining the line without a reference.

murphaph

Cue legislation compelling landlords to provide references...

Claw Hammer

davo10 wrote: »

Which means nothing, as notice must be in writing.

It means everything. It is an invalid notice, not being in writing. It can be challenged.

Guffy

Claw Hammer wrote: »

It means everything. It is an invalid notice, not being in writing. It can be challenged.

Its not notice though... its notice of notice. Chill

Claw Hammer

hawkelady wrote: »

Jesus , a landlord is giving his tenant a heads up before he actually gives them the letter and you want to accuse him of giving an illegal notice to quit !! The mind boggles .. as another poster said no wonder the rtb in inundated !!!

An invalid notice of termination is not an illegal notice to quit. The RTB is innudated because of poor legislation and bad landlords and tenants.

Claw Hammer

Guffy wrote: »

Its not notice though... its notice of notice. Chill

It is entirely arguable. Only the RTB and the Courts can be the ultimate arbiter.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Claw Hammer

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The o/p has been told he is going to have to move out. That is notice. If a landlord stands at the door and tells a tenant to be gone by the following Monday, is that notice or not. Just because a piece of paper hasn't arrived with Notice written on it does not mean notice hasn't been given. It is not the o/ps fault the RTB is clogged up, so why should he abstain from it?