Rent and RPZ

conormc1984

Hi all,

I will be soon renting my 2 bed apartment in a RPZ area. The apartment was previously rented 5 years ago in 2012, obviously before the RPZ caps came in.

I have a simple question, am i allowed charge the going rate for similar properties renting in my area ?

Lux23

Was it 2012 when you last rented the property? As in it hasn't been on the market since then.

conormc1984

Yes I have been living in it since

DubCount

conormc1984 wrote: »

Hi all,

I will be soon renting my 2 bed apartment in a RPZ area. The apartment was previously rented 5 years ago in 2012, obviously before the RPZ caps came in.

I have a simple question, am i allowed charge the going rate for similar properties renting in my area ?

No.

you can only increase using the formula outlined on the RTB website -

Thats E x (M/24) x 4%
Where E is the existing rent, and M is the number of months since the last rent review.

I know its nuts, I know its unfair, but it is what it is.

hawkelady

You can charge what you like ... remember that the rpz is here to stay so charge wisely

hawkelady

DubCount wrote: »

conormc1984 wrote: »

Hi all,

I will be soon renting my 2 bed apartment in a RPZ area. The apartment was previously rented 5 years ago in 2012, obviously before the RPZ caps came in.

I have a simple question, am i allowed charge the going rate for similar properties renting in my area ?

No.

you can only increase using the formula outlined on the RTB website -

Thats E x (M/24) x 4%
Where E is the existing rent, and M is the number of months since the last rent review.

I know its nuts, I know its unfair, but it is what it is.

It's been idle for nearly 6 years. He can't be tied into what he was charging in 2012!!

DubCount

conormc1984 wrote: »

Yes I have been living in it since

That makes all the difference. If it hasnt been rented for the last 2 years, you can charge market rate.

MOH

DubCount wrote: »

No.

you can only increase using the formula outlined on the RTB website -

Thats E x (M/24) x 4%
Where E is the existing rent, and M is the number of months since the last rent review.

I know its nuts, I know its unfair, but it is what it is.

The RTB site states "Not all rental properties are covered by the 4% annual rental restriction. Properties that are new to the rental market and have not been let at any time in the previous two years and properties which have undergone a substantial change can be exempted from the measure."

I'd read that as saying it wouldn't apply in the OPs case, although the "can be" makes it a bit ambiguous, as well as "new to the market" and "not let in the last two years" sounding like two separate conditions, though I think it's just one condition badly phrased. The FAQ is a bit less ambiguous on the second point.

Claw Hammer

MOH wrote: »

The RTB site states "Not all rental properties are covered by the 4% annual rental restriction. Properties that are new to the rental market and have not been let at any time in the previous two years and properties which have undergone a substantial change can be exempted from the measure."

I'd read that as saying it wouldn't apply in the OPs case, although the "can be" makes it a bit ambiguous, as well as "new to the market" and "not let in the last two years" sounding like two separate conditions, though I think it's just one condition badly phrased. The FAQ is a bit less ambiguous on the second point.

With the RTB you should look at the primary legislation. A lot of the FAq's are done up at an early stage and are not always 100% accurate. They also have a disclaimer.

conormc1984

Great. Thank you all for your time and help

Claw Hammer

MOH wrote: »

The RTB site states "Not all rental properties are covered by the 4% annual rental restriction. Properties that are new to the rental market and have not been let at any time in the previous two years and properties which have undergone a substantial change can be exempted from the measure."

I'd read that as saying it wouldn't apply in the OPs case, although the "can be" makes it a bit ambiguous, as well as "new to the market" and "not let in the last two years" sounding like two separate conditions, though I think it's just one condition badly phrased. The FAQ is a bit less ambiguous on the second point.

The legislation itself is clear.

5) Subsection (4) does not apply—

(a) where a dwelling has not at any time been the subject of a tenancy during the period of 2 years prior to the date the area is prescribed under section 24A as a rent pressure zone or deemed to be so prescribed;