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

.......

This post has been deleted.

pwurple

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.

That certainly did NOT work in your favour then. The landlord is effectively forced into evicting you, living in it himself and re-entering the market in order to reset the rate. 
Have you proposed a rate increase with him if you want to stay there?

Claw Hammer

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

He has been told he will have to go, with written confirmation to follow. That is notice. It will be a matter for the adjudicator to make a call on it.

SeanHarty

elperello wrote: »

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?

you could ask to talk to the landlord "John" for arguments sake. if they say john doesn't live there then you know you've been screwed....

.......

This post has been deleted.

Claw Hammer

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I have simply said it is arguable. Without the exact words spoken it is impossible to say how it would fall. If the o/p won on it, it would get him out of a lot of trouble.

_Kaiser_

gambler12 wrote: »

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.

Interesting.. per this example then, the letter I got would more or less match the first page - but the statutory declaration isn't there at all.

So I could probably appeal it.. but let's be realistic here. Despite all the complaints from some LL's here about tenant rights, in a scenario like this a decent tenant is still at a disadvantage.. even if I "won", I can imagine being tortured in other ways until they got what they wanted.

Vojera

maximoose wrote: »

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

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

Part of the problem is that loads of tenancies are unregistered and people in unregistered tenancies are afraid to ask their landlords about it because they don't want to be seen as "troublemakers" and are worried about having to find a new place.

gambler12

Claw Hammer wrote: »

I have simply said it is arguable. Without the exact words spoken it is impossible to say how it would fall. If the o/p won on it, it would get him out of a lot of trouble.

Maybe you have a point Claw, but personally I have no problem with the landlord for just giving me a heads up on the situation, and telling me to expect an official written notice in the post soon. At least I know what's coming.

If the official written notice does not meet the legal requirements to make it a legal notice, then I can go to the RTB.

gambler12

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Interesting.. per this example then, the letter I got would more or less match the first page - but the statutory declaration isn't there at all.

So I could probably appeal it.. but let's be realistic here. Despite all the complaints from some LL's here about tenant rights, in a scenario like this a decent tenant is still at a disadvantage.. even if I "won", I can imagine being tortured in other ways until they got what they wanted.

The fact that it was an estate agent who sent the letter, they should really know what is required to be included in the notice.

If you I was you, and if you have only received the notice in the last few days, I would go to your estate agent informing them that you did not receive a statutory declaration, just to give them a chance to send it if it was an honest mistake on their part.

If they don't send one then it might be the case that they are not being honest about the landlord moving in, and do not want to sign a legal declaration for this reason.
In that case if you still don't receive the declaration after letting them know about it, then I would go to the RTB.
Remember that you must appeal to the RTB within 28 days of receiving the initial notice.

Graham

Mod Note: Folks, we're straying into some fairly unique interpretations of what constitutes notice here. Interpretations that I suspect most posters are not qualified to make. Let's leave it there.

gambler12, by all means talk to the RTB and ask if advanced warning of notice is the same as an invalid notice.

daithiK1

gambler12 wrote: »

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.

I think you missed my point, anyway no probs I try to reiterate, I was making the argument that the rules have forced the landlords hand and let's assume legally where without them he wouldn't be moving in and more importantly for you when you go looking what you will be paying in a 'new let' will quickly surpass the savings you have made over this last year, I reckon directly due to the rules there is a significant loading on 'new lets'

gambler12

pwurple wrote: »

That certainly did NOT work in your favour then. The landlord is effectively forced into evicting you, living in it himself and re-entering the market in order to reset the rate. 
Have you proposed a rate increase with him if you want to stay there?

Then maybe the current laws need to be tightened up to prevent landlords from jumping from place to place just to reset rates.

Anyways I'll be doing no negotiating on the rate. What I am paying now is the limit of what I can afford, and in my opinion paying 500 or more above what I'm currently paying for a small 2 bed flat is absolutely crazy. I wouldn't pay that even if I could afford to.

Graham

gambler12 wrote: »

Then maybe the current laws need to be tightened up to prevent landlords from jumping from place to place just to reset rates.

In a RPZ, a new tenancy does not reset rates.

direstraits

The LL beside me is renting his 3 bed home to 6 foreign students at 350e per tenant, 2 of them sleep in the living room.

That's 2,100 cash in hand every month.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

I have simply said it is arguable. Without the exact words spoken it is impossible to say how it would fall. If the o/p won on it, it would get him out of a lot of trouble.

I know this discussion was not supposed to continue but I think there is one very valid point that needs be made (and I should have had it in my post yesterday).

You are mixing up the rules surrounding an invalid notice of termination and an invalid notice of rent increase. It is true that winning a case on an invalid notice of rent increases can freeze the rent (for one year in an RPZ not two).

However an invalid termination notice does no such thing, winning a case with the RTB will just result in a valid notice being issued immediately. Even if it was an invalid notice (which it wasn't as it wasn't notice) it would gain the op a few months at the absolute most and cause a large amount of tension between him and his LL.

gambler12

Graham wrote: »

In a RPZ, a new tenancy does not reset rates.

That's correct if the law is being adhered to. But in many cases the landlord is making a bogus claim about moving themselves into the property when in reality they are just moving new tenants in at whatever rate they please, helped by the fact that there is no public database of what rate of rent was being payed at the property previously, which goes back to the whole point of my original post.

daithiK1

gambler12 wrote: »

That's correct if the law is being adhered to. But in many cases the landlord is making a bogus claim about moving themselves into the property when in reality they are just moving new tenants in at whatever rate they please, helped by the fact that there is no public database of what rate of rent was being payed at the property previously, which goes back to the whole point of my original post.

If the landlord lives there for two years he can then legally charge market rate. There is nothing dubious with that. The new rules might have incentivised him to do just that, 500 a month or the decreased value for potential future sale are potentially big enough reasons

Graham

gambler12 wrote: »

That's correct if the law is being adhered to. But in many cases the landlord is making a bogus claim about moving themselves into the property when in reality they are just moving new tenants in at whatever rate they please, helped by the fact that there is no public database of what rate of rent was being payed at the property previously, which goes back to the whole point of my original post.

RTB Tenancy Registration now includes the rent being paid. I don't see that it would be necessary for the rent to be public for you to report a suspected rent increase beyond the permitted limits.

direstraits

Graham wrote: »

RTB Tenancy Registration now includes the rent being paid. I don't see that it would be necessary for the rent to be public for you to report a suspected rent increase beyond the permitted limits.

What if the LL rents to students (who may not be bothered about registering with PRTB) there is always a way around the legislation.

elperello

direstraits wrote: »

The LL beside me is renting his 3 bed home to 6 foreign students at 350e per tenant, 2 of them sleep in the living room.

That's 2,100 cash in hand every month.

Does LL live in the house?

direstraits

elperello wrote: »

Does LL live in the house?

Nope, arrives end of the month to collect his winnings!

Graham

direstraits wrote: »

What if the LL rents to students (who may not be bothered about registering with PRTB) there is always a way around the legislation.

There are no legal ways to avoid registering a tenancy. A landlord that thinks renting to students is a good work around could also find him/herself on the receiving end of fine/court summons/criminal conviction and or 6 months imprisonment.

Given that the public are becoming more familiar with their own rights and their landlords responsibilities, you'd have to be a fairly dumb landlord to take the risk.

elperello

direstraits wrote: »

Nope, arrives end of the month to collect his winnings!

So what is the problem?
Six in a three bedroom sounds ok.
As to what room they sleep in I suppose that's their business.

wirelessdude01

direstraits wrote:

The LL beside me is renting his 3 bed home to 6 foreign students at 350e per tenant, 2 of them sleep in the living room.

So does that mean two of the bed rooms only have one person in them. Bedroom A 1 person, bedroom B 1 person, bedroom C 2 people and the living room 2 people makes up 6.

The ones that have their own room at the same rate as the ones sharing rooms have a great deal 😀ðŸ˜

direstraits

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

So does that mean two of the bed rooms only have one person in them. Bedroom A 1 person, bedroom B 1 person, bedroom C 2 people and the living room 2 people makes up 6.

The ones that have their own room at the same rate as the ones sharing rooms have a great deal ��ðŸ˜

Yes they do, not being able to access the living room and paying 350.00 a month is great deal

350 x 6 = 2,100e way above the market rate, currently the area is in a RPZ and rents are 1,500 average.

wirelessdude01

direstraits wrote:

350 x 6 = 2,100e way above the market rate, currently the area is in a RPZ and rents are 1,500 average.

direstraits wrote:

Yes they do, not being able to access the living room and paying 350.00 a month is great deal

Doubt the ones with their own rooms care. Own room in Dublin for €350pm is a bloody steal.

Anyway how do you know all this?

El Weirdo

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Anyway how do you know all this?

Exactly.

And what has it got to do with the OP?

direstraits

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Doubt the ones with their own rooms care. Own room in Dublin for €350pm is a bloody steal.

Anyway how do you know all this?

What does it matter how I know? Does it make a difference to the point I am making? LL overcharging tenants who may not know their full rights?

wirelessdude01

direstraits wrote:

What does it matter how I know? Does it make a difference to the point I am making? LL overcharging tenants who may not know their full rights?

What business is it of yours?

€350 for your own room is hardly overcharging.