Have a new baby and the landlord wants us out

TheChizler

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

It appears that the act says that it's OK for nine year old children to be sharing a bedroom with their parents!

Or, you know, that 9 year-old brothers and sisters can sleep in the same room out of necessity.

Madness :rolleyes:

The_Conductor

OSI wrote: »

Can a child even legally be named in a lease agreement when they're not old enough to enter such?

Legally, to the best of my knowledge, they have to be at least 12.
It has, remarkably, come up in this forum before.
I'll try to find the thread for you.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

kceire wrote: »

No idea what your crapping on about here. I’m in the OP’s side ????

I don't particularly care who's "side" you are on really. The issue is with the line I quoted, go back and read it

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

It's not adequate to have a two or three year old forced to share a bedroom with its parents, or to have either of them regularly sleeping in the living area.

Just cos some people are doing it doesn't make it ok.

Strawman...

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Anyone who's lived with small children knows how difficult it is to manage unless you have one private sleeping space for each adult couple, and one for children (of each gender). It can be do-able for the first six-ish months (depending on you views about bed-sharing and room-sharing), but you really do need private spaces to teach children good sleep habits.

Anyone who's worked in social housing knows that this is the minimum required for a house to be considered suitable for a family.

Another strawman, no mention of social housing here. What debate are you in at all?

Also, your initial part about good sleeping habit (aka nonsense), a room for each child is a ridiculous expectation. Your opinions on parenting are exactly that, opinions.

Macha wrote: »

All of the things you talk about needing private spaces should be entirely none of the landlord's business. Belgian landlords don't waste their time thinking about these ridiculous things.

Unfortunately, Ireland is incredibly backwards when it comes to renting. We need to look to mainland Europe to see how it's done correctly. You can't adapt everything overnight, but there's a lot to be learned yet.


I'd like to see how you get on OP, can you keep us posted?

bucketybuck

Kalani Little Planetarium wrote: »

Unfortunately, Ireland is incredibly backwards when it comes to renting.

When I see quotes like this I just wonder what the alternative is? Should Ireland be ok with overcrowded houses? Should we be encouraging people to start a family when renting a one bed apartment in Dublin?

Don't people lament the state of the housing market when they hear about entire families living on top of each other in shoeboxes, wasn't there an outcry regarding overcrowding after some RTE programme recently?

I have sympathy for the OP, but I have sympathy for the landlords in these cases as well, he is renting a little one bedroom flat and now there is a full family living there, thats a complication that no sane landlord wants a part off.

awec

To give the other side of the coin here I actually informed my landlord (one of the huge property companies) last week that we were having a baby and asked what we needed to do.

They just said congratulations but they don't care, makes no difference from their point of view.

pwurple

awec wrote: »

To give the other side of the coin here I actually informed my landlord (one of the huge property companies) last week that we were having a baby and asked what we needed to do.

They just said congratulations but they don't care, makes no difference from their point of view.

Well there you go, doing the right thing, keeping everyone informed. Well done. 
OP, you are, and have been, sticking your head in the sand here. You don't seem to know what's in your lease. Dig it out and read it.
My advice is the same as several others, communicate. Come up with a plan to move to suitable accommodation, and a timeline to do so. Inform landlord.

Arevaci

pwurple wrote: »

Well there you go, doing the right thing, keeping everyone informed. Well done. 
OP, you are, and have been, sticking your head in the sand here. You don't seem to know what's in your lease. Dig it out and read it.
My advice is the same as several others, communicate. Come up with a plan to move to suitable accommodation, and a timeline to do so. Inform landlord.

It seems like landlords are projecting their sense of guilt (evicting a tenant with a newborn for the purposes of making extra profit) onto the tenant. It has been implied that the tenant has engaged in poor family planning, not providing suitable accommodation for their child, burying their head in the sand etc. I couldn’t imagine it’s the most intuitive thing in the world to pre-empt eviction because you have a baby. If this was common there’d be a lot more news stories and a Claire Byrne special.

My only advice to the OP would be to seek more balanced and trusted opinions in the real world before making any decisions.

Graham

Arevaci wrote: »

It seems like landlords are projecting their sense of guilt (evicting a tenant with a newborn for the purposes of making extra profit) onto the tenant.

Mod Note: let's not do the 'all landlords'/'all tenants' thing. It adds nothing to the discussion and it's not accurate.

The_Conductor

Arevaci wrote: »

It seems like landlords are projecting their sense of guilt (evicting a tenant with a newborn for the purposes of making extra profit) onto the tenant. It has been implied that the tenant has engaged in poor family planning, not providing suitable accommodation for their child, burying their head in the sand etc. I couldn’t imagine it’s the most intuitive thing in the world to pre-empt eviction because you have a baby. If this was common there’d be a lot more news stories and a Claire Byrne special.

My only advice to the OP would be to seek more balanced and trusted opinions in the real world before making any decisions.

The property is in a RPZ- the landlord cannot increase the rent to market rates with a new tenant- your argument that the tenant has to move so the landlord can hike the rent- holds no water- wholly regardless of the fact that the property is 400-500 below the going market rate for the building.

KellyXX

Thanks for all your views.
Heres an update.
My other half contacted some of the charities and agencies mentioned here for advice today and they advised us that the landlord can indeed do this.
They told us that we could stall the whole process by a year or possibly two if we took a case, but we would lose in the end, but at least it would buy us over a year.
Also they gave us the number of a journalist and told us to call them and that would soften the landlords cough,, probably enough that he just backed down. They said play up the baby angle big time. Basically we were advised to dig our heels in and ignore any attempts by the landlord to evict us as the wheels would turn so slowly he would probably just give up.
More meetings arranged for Thursday.

Lumen

Congratulations! On the baby. Not the "no room at the inn" problem which is awful.

There is an argument for moving as soon as possible in order to fix your rent.

If you hang on for a year through RTB disputes then get a new tenancy, that new tenancy will likely be at market rates which will probably be higher than now. And you're unlikely to get a landlord reference, although given the nature of the eviction (baby + Christmas) you might find a human being who is sympathetic.

The Student

KellyXX wrote: »

Thanks for all your views.
Heres an update.
My other half contacted some of the charities and agencies mentioned here for advice today and they advised us that the landlord can indeed do this.
They told us that we could stall the whole process by a year or possibly two if we took a case, but we would lose in the end, but at least it would buy us over a year.
Also they gave us the number of a journalist and told us to call them and that would soften the landlords cough,, probably enough that he just backed down. They said play up the baby angle big time. Basically we were advised to dig our heels in and ignore any attempts by the landlord to evict us as the wheels would turn so slowly he would probably just give up.
More meetings arranged for Thursday.

Typical charities and agencies and people wonder why the rental market is the way it is. The decent thing to do would have been to approach the landlord and come to some agreement.

My advise is dont use a journalist otherwise you will never get a property to rent.

The_Conductor

Honestly- I'd put time and effort into finding somewhere new.
Overholding cases are now prioritised at the RTB- with initial hearings within 6-8 weeks- you can go to adjudication- and you can appeal the findings- but one way or the other, you are simply prolonging the inevitable.

There are a plethora of reasons- legal and otherwise- why the landlord may be constrained from having more than a certain number of people in the property (including the simple that it may be specified in his leasehold- and it may have implications for building insurance etc).

I think the key thing to do now is to try and manage the situation so it causes you the least amount of stress possible- and while it is your prerogative to go to the media and put yourself on a pedestal if you so choose- while it might boot the problem down the road a few months- its not going to solve anything.

KellyXX

The Student wrote: »

Typical charities and agencies and people wonder why the rental market is the way it is. The decent thing to do would have been to approach the landlord and come to some agreement.

My advise is dont use a journalist otherwise you will never get a property to rent.

The advice from the charity was to tell the landlord nothing. Just to go to the RTB and then they can help us to drag it out for a couple of years. I dont fancy having my picture in the paper though.

Gatling

KellyXX wrote: »

The advice from the charity was to tell the landlord nothing. Just to go to the RTB and then they can help us to drag it out for a couple of years. I dont fancy having my picture in the paper though.

Drag it out years ,

Sorry I find that hard to believe

KellyXX

The_Conductor wrote: »

Honestly- I'd put time and effort into finding somewhere new.
Overholding cases are now prioritised at the RTB- with initial hearings within 6-8 weeks- you can go to adjudication- and you can appeal the findings- but one way or the other, you are simply prolonging the inevitable.

There are a plethora of reasons- legal and otherwise- why the landlord may be constrained from having more than a certain number of people in the property (including the simple that it may be specified in his leasehold- and it may have implications for building insurance etc).

I think the key thing to do now is to try and manage the situation so it causes you the least amount of stress possible- and while it is your prerogative to go to the media and put yourself on a pedestal if you so choose- while it might boot the problem down the road a few months- its not going to solve anything.

They said even if its prioritized they can drag it out for close to two years.
Thats two years saving €400 pm on rent. Thats a very attractive proposition. The first the landlord will know of it is close to the time we are supposed to leave too, so we add that time to it too.
I dont know, i dont like doing it but the benefit is there.
Definitely something to think about.

The Student

KellyXX wrote: »

The advice from the charity was to tell the landlord nothing. Just to go to the RTB and then they can help us to drag it out for a couple of years. I dont fancy having my picture in the paper though.

I am a landlord and I check potential tenants against the rtb. I suspect others do too. If you take a case and lose which you have been advised you will expect to find it difficult to get a property to rent in the future.

The_Conductor

KellyXX wrote: »

They said even if its prioritized they can drag it out for close to two years.
Thats two years saving €400 pm on rent. Thats a very attractive proposition. The first the landlord will know of it is close to the time we are supposed to leave too, so we add that time to it too.

The RTB automatically prioritise overholding cases- and undertake to hold initial hearings for overholding cases within 8 weeks (its in their annual report).

If its actually prioritised- it can, depending on circumstances, be heard within 4 weeks.

If you are looking at dragging it out- you're looking at full hearings, appeals and eventually court- and if you wait it out long enough- the sheriff.

The RTB can bring cases to court on behalf of landlords (as per their annual report)- however, typically landlords bring the cases themselves, as its faster.

I'm not clear why the charity suggest not keeping an open channel of communication with the landlord- the obvious thing to do is to try and find some common ground- where you'd have a bit of breathing space to find alternate accommodation- without the stress and hassle of hearings, tribunals, court etc.

From your perspective- the best case scenario is you boot this down the road perhaps 16-18 months- at which point you're back where you are now..........

Have you spoken to the local authority about HAP or other schemes that might assist you in getting a suitable property (or indeed- have you looked at what your money will buy you elsewhere)?

The Student

KellyXX wrote: »

My OH asked about that as given given 100% certainty that we would lose in the end, I was worried about it and he was told that names dont have to appear on that and can effectively be removed before they even go up, and you can use middle names and maiden name, spelling mistakes etc.
They said is quite easily done.
Its a choice between creating a drama and paying €400 per month min extra for an extra two years

Names do appear on the rtb site.

KellyXX

The_Conductor wrote: »

The RTB automatically prioritise overholding cases- and undertake to hold initial hearings for overholding cases within 8 weeks (its in their annual report).

If its actually prioritised- it can, depending on circumstances, be heard within 4 weeks.

If you are looking at dragging it out- you're looking at full hearings, appeals and eventually court- and if you wait it out long enough- the sheriff.

The RTB can bring cases to court on behalf of landlords (as per their annual report)- however, typically landlords bring the cases themselves, as its faster.

I'm not clear why the charity suggest not keeping an open channel of communication with the landlord- the obvious thing to do is to try and find some common ground- where you'd have a bit of breathing space to find alternate accommodation- without the stress and hassle of hearings, tribunals, court etc.

From your perspective- the best case scenario is you boot this down the road perhaps 16-18 months- at which point you're back where you are now..........

Have you spoken to the local authority about HAP or other schemes that might assist you in getting a suitable property (or indeed- have you looked at what your money will buy you elsewhere)?

But thats 16 - 18 time €400 or more in my pocket?
And it seems they are pretty confident that this can be done easily.
I'm going in myself on Thursday so i'll ask some more questions.

KellyXX

The Student wrote: »

Names do appear on the rtb site.

Apparently thats easily fixed though. I need to find out more though.

The_Conductor

KellyXX wrote: »

But thats 16 - 18 time €400 or more in my pocket?
And it seems they are pretty confident that this can be done easily.
I'm going in myself on Thursday so i'll ask some more questions.

Good luck with that........
And good luck with playing mindgames with the RTB re: misspellings of names etc- presumably the landlord has registered the tenancy in good faith- and will be taking the case on the basis of the details he/she has lodged with the RTB (regardless of whether you lodge a spurious case against the landlord he/she will be lodging a case for overholding against you).

You have many possible courses of action open to you- other than playing mindgames with the RTB, the media and whoever else you might get to champion your case.

As we are expressly prohibited from discussing actions which are in breach of legislation or facilitating discussion on similar- I am unfortunately going to have to close this thread.