Accidental Landlord - tenant has over stayed

BrokenArrows

To avoid this sort of scenario is it possible to be an owner occupied property without actually living there?

Say you had a three bedroom house. You rent the house out with rights to only two rooms as licensees making it clear the landlord still has the right to come and stay in the 3rd room or uses the 3rd room for storage.

Would this work if the landlord never actually stayed there?

Samuel T. Cogley

BrokenArrows wrote: »

To avoid this sort of scenario is it possible to be an owner occupied property without actually living there?

Say you had a three bedroom house. You rent the house out with rights to only two rooms as licensees making it clear the landlord still has the right to come and stay in the 3rd room or uses the 3rd room for storage.

Would this work if the landlord never actually stayed there?

The actual situation is looked at rather than what's written in the agreement.

1874

BrokenArrows wrote: »

To avoid this sort of scenario is it possible to be an owner occupied property without actually living there?

Say you had a three bedroom house. You rent the house out with rights to only two rooms as licensees making it clear the landlord still has the right to come and stay in the 3rd room or uses the 3rd room for storage.

Would this work if the landlord never actually stayed there?

Possibly, if for example you worked elsewhere and had alternate temporary accomodation, otherwise it could easily be seen as a means to skirt the law,
so if never lived there or just storage, very likely no, but if someone was legitimately back and forth even if not regularily then I believe possibly, especially if they could prove the situation.

BrokenArrows

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

The actual situation is looked at rather than what's written in the agreement.

So would the 3rd room being used as storage and turning up one every month or two to mess about in the room be enough?

Samuel T. Cogley

BrokenArrows wrote: »

So would the 3rd room being used as storage and turning up one every month or two to mess about in the room be enough?

I doubt it but one could find out from RTB cases on point.

arleitiss

Do big management companies deal with same **** as well? or is it just small-time landlords that have to deal with these tenants?

How do (for example) I-RES deal with these situations? I mean they are managing hundreds of apartments, surely - one or two will be like this?

Samuel T. Cogley

arleitiss wrote: »

Do big management companies deal with same **** as well? or is it just small-time landlords that have to deal with these tenants?

How do (for example) I-RES deal with these situations? I mean they are managing hundreds of apartments, surely - one or two will be like this?

Yes they have to go through the same process, however they are generally better at vetting their tenants and owing to the premium rents they charge are unlikely to end up with 'complicated' cases. That said you can guarantee they are better prepared to issue the correct notices and will likely be better represented if it gets to court.

bingbong500

BrokenArrows wrote: »

To avoid this sort of scenario is it possible to be an owner occupied property without actually living there?

Say you had a three bedroom house. You rent the house out with rights to only two rooms as licensees making it clear the landlord still has the right to come and stay in the 3rd room or uses the 3rd room for storage.

Would this work if the landlord never actually stayed there?

No. It would be fraud and would not work in any dispute

BrokenArrows

arleitiss wrote: »

Do big management companies deal with same **** as well? or is it just small-time landlords that have to deal with these tenants?

How do (for example) I-RES deal with these situations? I mean they are managing hundreds of apartments, surely - one or two will be like this?

They do, but because they are managing hundreds of properties, the few that end up in this situation dont impact them as much and they likely have lawyers working for them anyway, so its not that big a deal.

A single landlord with one property can be wiped out by this situation.

beauf

bingbong500 wrote: »

No. It would be fraud and would not work in any dispute

There may be tax implications also.

Bigmac1euro

Followed a while ago.
Assumed this had been wrapped up months ago.
I can actually feel myself getting stressed reading this. There’s some bad, bad people out there.

kravmaga

Lizzie71 wrote: »

Need some advice, I am an accidental landlord I bough a house in one of the commuter towns in the boom after nearly 5yrs decided to move back to Dublin, the house was in negative equity so decided to rent the house out until a time we could sell it. We went all legit paid tax the whole lot so house is not making money its costing us money.
So we had the same tenant in the house the whole time never had much issue with her, she had to be reminded sometimes to pay. We reduced rent when she said she was struggling then when everyone else was changing 300 to 400 more for the same house we kept the rent the same as tenants that don't give you hassle are hard to come by.
WE let our tenant know we were selling the house got a solicitor to draw up a letter to give notice so it was all above boar. We gave her the legal required notice of 32wks, on the day she was to move out I got a text telling me she wasn't moving out as she had nowhere to go with her kids, I forgot to say she is "separated" which I know is not true but none of my business as long as she is paying the rent so she is claiming to be a lone parent with 2 kids one of which was born after they broke up.
so she refuses to move out and will not give me a date when she will, she said she has something sorted but had no date and when she gets one I will. But we cant go on like this indefinitely, also she has not paid the rent so she has over stayed and not paying her rent.
I have logged a complaint with the RTB but feel like there should be something else I have to be able to do.
There is no protection for landlords like myself, I cannot go into the property unless she agrees, she is breaking the law but I cant do anything???? How is this fair in the meantime my wife and I have to pay 2 mortgages which will not be easy.
Anyone got any advice I am so stressed and worried.

Take a look at section 34b of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004.
Im sure you can get her out on this section if she is there 6 yrs or more, ask your solicitor to clarify same.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0508/1048117-tenancies-bill/

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2004/act/27/section/34/enacted/en/html

4ensic15

BrokenArrows wrote: »

To avoid this sort of scenario is it possible to be an owner occupied property without actually living there?

Say you had a three bedroom house. You rent the house out with rights to only two rooms as licensees making it clear the landlord still has the right to come and stay in the 3rd room or uses the 3rd room for storage.

Would this work if the landlord never actually stayed there?

The RTB look at the situation as it is on the ground. In Zhang v Holohan "Tribunal did go on to briefly address that point. In doing so, it recorded its finding, as a matter of fact, that the landlord stayed in the dwelling for only three nights during the 16 month duration of the tenancy at issue. By reference to that finding, the Tribunal expressly rejected the landlord’s claim that he also resided in the dwelling and that, in consequence, the tenant’s claim fell outside the scope of the Act."


If the RTB go with the tenants, a room will have been left idle needlessly and the rent foregone.

Claw Hammer

I heard of a new one yesterday. The lease is deemed to have been made in England and it provides that the governing law is the law of England and Wales!

Lizzie71

The RTB are as useful as a choclate teapot, they dont really have any enforcement power on the tenant as mine showed the just ignore them. It should not take this long to get someone out of your home when they are legally in the wrong. Today is a bad day and the stress of it is really getting to me.

CountingCrows

Your patience is exemplary. Most would have thrown them out and paid the consequences.

Seth Brundle

CountingCrows wrote: »

Your patience is exemplary. Most would have thrown them out and paid the consequences.

...one of those consequences would be the tenants back in there with the protection of a court.

CPTM

Howdy Lizzie71, any update on your situation and the court date you mentioned? I'm following this thread closely since I'm considering renting out a house I have, but I don't know if there's enough protection for landlords yet. Yours sounds like a particularly awful case. Hope all is ok.

godtabh

CPTM wrote: »

Howdy Lizzie71, any update on your situation and the court date you mentioned? I'm following this thread closely since I'm considering renting out a house I have, but I don't know if there's enough protection for landlords yet. Yours sounds like a particularly awful case. Hope all is ok.

Sell it and save yourself the hassle.

Busterie

Correct sell it . The RTB are blatantly anti landlord. If not rent it privately Threshold are now encouraging their clients to make false compo claims.

Seth Brundle

Busterie wrote: »

Threshold are now encouraging their clients to make false compo claims.

Really?

average_runner

Lizzie71 wrote: »

Need some advice, I am an accidental landlord I bough a house in one of the commuter towns in the boom after nearly 5yrs decided to move back to Dublin, the house was in negative equity so decided to rent the house out until a time we could sell it. We went all legit paid tax the whole lot so house is not making money its costing us money.
So we had the same tenant in the house the whole time never had much issue with her, she had to be reminded sometimes to pay. We reduced rent when she said she was struggling then when everyone else was changing 300 to 400 more for the same house we kept the rent the same as tenants that don't give you hassle are hard to come by.
WE let our tenant know we were selling the house got a solicitor to draw up a letter to give notice so it was all above boar. We gave her the legal required notice of 32wks, on the day she was to move out I got a text telling me she wasn't moving out as she had nowhere to go with her kids, I forgot to say she is "separated" which I know is not true but none of my business as long as she is paying the rent so she is claiming to be a lone parent with 2 kids one of which was born after they broke up.
so she refuses to move out and will not give me a date when she will, she said she has something sorted but had no date and when she gets one I will. But we cant go on like this indefinitely, also she has not paid the rent so she has over stayed and not paying her rent.
I have logged a complaint with the RTB but feel like there should be something else I have to be able to do.
There is no protection for landlords like myself, I cannot go into the property unless she agrees, she is breaking the law but I cant do anything???? How is this fair in the meantime my wife and I have to pay 2 mortgages which will not be easy.
Anyone got any advice I am so stressed and worried.

We should have a system like the UK, where you can go straight to court and have a sheriff to evict them asap. One of the reasons we got out of the market. Good landlords get screwed in this country

Utter Consternation

Busterie wrote: »

Correct sell it . The RTB are blatantly anti landlord. If not rent it privately Threshold are now encouraging their clients to make false compo claims.

False claims?????

duskyjoe

i’d close to 15 apartments at one stage- down to my last 3. It’s a mugs game and i was in the private letting game for close to 30years . There is zero respite for the landlord, the govt believe they have a sense of entitlement and ownership of you, the landlord is deemed an evil ulcer on society and tenants now look at the RTB as their anchor to screw the landlord...... me and my like are gone who were decent landlords , kept the rent as keen as possible and looked after any issues. This means less units on the market and the corporate landlords are letting in house. It’s all wrong but the govt have a massive amount of responsibility here. They have basically ran the ordinary landlord out of the market between red tape and taxes. The tax bill just got out of hand and with tenants with their hands out like chicks in a nest - good luck and adios

Claw Hammer

Busterie wrote: »

Correct sell it . The RTB are blatantly anti landlord. If not rent it privately Threshold are now encouraging their clients to make false compo claims.

How do you rent privately?

Busterie

Businesses are taking steps to stop bogus compo claims, so the Free Legal Aid/Compo lawyers are looking for other soft targets.
Private landlords are the obvious choice. Threshold and other left wing organisations are happy to cooperate in order to force private landlords out of the market.

Seth Brundle

Busterie wrote: »

Threshold and other left wing organisations are happy to cooperate in order to force private landlords out of the market.

Hang on. You've watered down your allegation. You said:

Busterie wrote: »

Threshold are now encouraging their clients to make false compo claims.

Have you proof of them encouraging their clients to make bogus claims?

CPTM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Have you proof of them encouraging their clients to make bogus claims?

I can answer that!

Busterie

Yes

nuac

Mod
This is wandering off topic. Could we get back to the topic pls?

Graces7

Busterie wrote: »

Correct sell it . The RTB are blatantly anti landlord. If not rent it privately Threshold are now encouraging their clients to make false compo claims.

Proof please? I know Threshold well and they do not do this, or tell renters ( who are not clients btw as there are no charges) to overhold . Nor are RTB anti landlord; they are pro law ... it is the other way round!

garhjw

Graces7 wrote: »

Proof please? I know Threshold well and they do not do this, or tell renters ( who are not clients btw as there are no charges) to overhold . Nor are RTB anti landlord; they are pro law ... it is the other way round!

You're talking nonsense. Once I have my properties back in my possession I will share my experience of dealing with threshold and the tactics employed by them at the RTB.

To suggest the RTB is not pro tenant is laughable.

rightmove

Any update on how all this went?

CPTM

This thread still stands out in my memory any time I hear of landlord difficulties. Would love to know how the story ended...

Claw Hammer

CPTM wrote: »

This thread still stands out in my memory any time I hear of landlord difficulties. Would love to know how the story ended...

What makes you think it has ended?

CPTM

Claw Hammer wrote: »

What makes you think it has ended?

I suppose the passage of so much time - but you're right, it could still be ongoing. It would definitely be worthy of media attention if it's still ongoing though.

Claw Hammer

CPTM wrote: »

I suppose the passage of so much time - but you're right, it could still be ongoing. It would definitely be worthy of media attention if it's still ongoing though.

By the standards of some cases, it has only started.

martinr5232

CPTM wrote:

I suppose the passage of so much time - but you're right, it could still be ongoing. It would definitely be worthy of media attention if it's still ongoing though.

This is a regular occurance so hardly newsworthy doesnt fit the agenda of the landlord bashing brigade either.

CPTM

Claw Hammer wrote: »

By the standards of some cases, it has only started.

I thought the max amount of time this can happen is 2 years? After that the tenant can be physically removed no?

Edit - or locks changed *

beauf

CPTM wrote: »

I thought the max amount of time this can happen is 2 years? After that the tenant can be physically removed no?

Edit - or locks changed *

I'm curious where you got that. Can you link to your source or did you just make it up.

CPTM

beauf wrote: »

I'm curious where you got that. Can you link to your source or did you just make it up.

You want me to source something I myself am questioning.. Best of luck with that! Fair enough if I were debating or advising someone, not when I'm asking!

beauf

I just asking why you think its 2yrs. So its just a guess on your part?

https://www.galwaydaily.com/legal-advice/dealing-with-a-rogue-tenant/

Takes as long as the legal process takes. Which is how long is a piece of string...

Claw Hammer

CPTM wrote: »

You want me to source something I myself am questioning.. Best of luck with that! Fair enough if I were debating or advising someone, not when I'm asking!

saying that you thought it was 2 years gives the impression that you had some knowledge of the matter and had come across the figure of 2 years at some point. If you are seeking information it would be more logical to say "is there any maximum time limit"very on how long the procedure can take.

CPTM

Ok well I don't know where I read it, but I didn't just pluck a number out of the sky and 'guess' like a moron. It's perfectly reasonable for a person to have something in the back of their mind, a distant bell ringing, that they question with someone during a chat about something. What's also normal is for someone else to respond with "No actually, if you check out this link you can see XYZ", instead of whatever's going on here. Thanks for clarifying anyways.

Claw Hammer

CPTM wrote: »

Ok well I don't know where I read it, but I didn't just pluck a number out of the sky and 'guess' like a moron. It's perfectly reasonable for a person to have something in the back of their mind, a distant bell ringing, that they question with someone during a chat about something. What's also normal is for someone else to respond with "No actually, if you check out this link you can see XYZ", instead of whatever's going on here. Thanks for clarifying anyways.

This is a legal discussion. The assumption is that when someone mentions a figure, they can say where it comes from so other people can check it.

CPTM

Wish I hadn't revived the thread. Hope you get/got sorted OP. Unfollowed.