Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Viewings on my current rental property

Options
1235

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,624 ✭✭✭Fol20


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Don't know where you're getting that info from but it's 100% incorrect. It is definitely against the law to discriminate, but you can pick and choose who you want at a viewing as you see fit. Open viewings are pretty much the norm, but not because it's mandatory.

    Your quoting me out of context. Take a look at my response in relation to someone else talking about open viewings. It isnt mandatory to do open viewings. I have never done open viewings myself as i prefer 1:1 discussions with the new tenants..

    Yea you can pick and choose who you want for viewings however you need to be extremely careful then ifnyou reject them for a viewing.I prefer to do viewings. Allow x ppl view it and then pick them from there. From the get go of talking to someone for less than a minute, i will more than likely know they are not rentable material for me and then its a matter of weeding out the good from the best.


  • Options
    #123
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    voluntary wrote: »
    One person's inconvenience is another person's horror. I personally, would likely need to disinfect my baby's room after such event, clean the bathroom, wash bedclothes - you never know who was touching it or what happened in there while you weren't watching.

    It's not an office or factory we're talking here. It's somebody's home.

    Eh - hysterical overreaction much?

    You would need to disinfect a childs room because someone WALKED into it?

    Really?

    How do you survive in the world, walking around, near people?


  • Options
    #124
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    ....... wrote: »
    Eh - hysterical overreaction much?

    You would need to disinfect a childs room because someone WALKED into it?

    Really?

    How do you survive in the world, walking around, near people?

    Perfectly reasonable of the poster.


  • Options
    #125
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Graces7 wrote: »
    Perfectly reasonable of the poster.

    God help them when the child goes to school.

    Will they be disinfecting the entire school daily?


  • Options
    #126
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    ....... wrote: »
    God help them when the child goes to school.

    Will they be disinfecting the entire school daily?

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    ....... wrote: »
    Eh - hysterical overreaction much?

    You would need to disinfect a childs room because someone WALKED into it?

    Really?

    How do you survive in the world, walking around, near people?

    What's the point of asking these questions?


  • Options
    #128
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    voluntary wrote: »
    What's the point of asking these questions?

    You are claiming that a poster here should refuse viewings and one of your supporting reasons is that you would need to disinfect a childs room if someone walked into it.

    I contend that if you are hysterical enough to want to disinfect a childs room because someone WALKS into it then you will have a lot of trouble existing in the world.

    Its nonsensical.


  • Options
    #129
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Fol20 wrote: »
    Your quoting me out of context. Take a look at my response in relation to someone else talking about open viewings. It isnt mandatory to do open viewings. I have never done open viewings myself as i prefer 1:1 discussions with the new tenants..

    Yea you can pick and choose who you want for viewings however you need to be extremely careful then ifnyou reject them for a viewing.I prefer to do viewings. Allow x ppl view it and then pick them from there. From the get go of talking to someone for less than a minute, i will more than likely know they are not rentable material for me and then its a matter of weeding out the good from the best.

    I'll have to take your word for it, but I really don't see how "You can pick and choose who you want for viewings" is in any way equivalent to "you have to do open viewings and allow everyone in to view it"


  • Options
    #130
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    ....... wrote: »
    You are claiming that a poster here should refuse viewings and one of your supporting reasons is that you would need to disinfect a childs room if someone walked into it.

    I contend that if you are hysterical enough to want to disinfect a childs room because someone WALKS into it then you will have a lot of trouble existing in the world.

    Its nonsensical.

    The OP doesn't want a viewing to take place. Hence the advice. Some people would be comfortable with it, some don't. It's not for anyone to judge the motivations behind. My motivation may sound crazy to you, but it should not be your concern or business. The OP is within his rights not to allow viewings while he's still living there. If he/she doesn't like it then I advice not to have one. Simple.


  • Options
    #131
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    voluntary wrote: »
    The OP doesn't want a viewing to take place. Hence the advice. Some people would be comfortable with it, some don't. It's not for anyone to judge the motivations behind. My motivation may sound crazy to you, but it should not be your concern or business. The OP is within his rights not to allow viewings while he's still living there. If he/she doesn't like it then I advice not to have one. Simple.

    It really just undermines the OPs position to advise them to come up with such a ridiculous reason not to allow a viewing.

    Makes it sound like they are just being a fool tbh.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Nic_Col
    Closed Accounts Posts: 97 ✭✭Nic_Col


    voluntary wrote: »
    The OP doesn't want a viewing to take place. Hence the advice. Some people would be comfortable with it, some don't. It's not for anyone to judge the motivations behind. My motivation may sound crazy to you, but it should not be your concern or business. The OP is within his rights not to allow viewings while he's still living there. If he/she doesn't like it then I advice not to have one. Simple.

    Just curious on your thoughts with regard to the owners right to sell their house and how that can at all be achieved if prospective buyers aren't allowed view the property?


  • Options
    #133
    Browney7
    Registered Users Posts: 3,100 ✭✭✭Browney7


    Nic_Col wrote: »
    Just curious on your thoughts with regard to the owners right to sell their house and how that can at all be achieved if prospective buyers aren't allowed view the property?

    The property gets put on the market after the tenant leaves the property. I'd expect most LLs would prefer to sell with the tenant gone as it removes any question marks buyers might have about speed of closing a sale if a tenant is still in situ


  • Options
    #134
    Nic_Col
    Closed Accounts Posts: 97 ✭✭Nic_Col


    Browney7 wrote: »
    The property gets put on the market after the tenant leaves the property. I'd expect most LLs would prefer to sell with the tenant gone as it removes any question marks buyers might have about speed of closing a sale if a tenant is still in situ

    Oh right; so the tenant has indicated they will be moving out of the property soon, thus enabling the ea/owner to facilitate viewings?

    Fair enough if that's the case, I haven't read the entire thread so missed that part.


  • Options
    #135
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Nic_Col wrote: »
    Oh right; so the tenant has indicated they will be moving out of the property soon, thus enabling the ea/owner to facilitate viewings?

    Fair enough if that's the case, I haven't read the entire thread so missed that part.

    Yes, that is the case. The OP's landlord wants to organize viewings before the OP moves out from his property, so he's able to find new tenants quicker and move them in the following day.

    And some LL here think it's basically LL's right to do so.
    Some suggestions were that LL can treaten tenant with giving bad references for his next home. A disgrace really.


  • Options
    #136
    Nic_Col
    Closed Accounts Posts: 97 ✭✭Nic_Col


    voluntary wrote: »
    Yes, that is the case. The OP's landlord wants to organize viewings before the OP moves out from his property, so he's able to find new tenants quicker and move them in the following day.

    And some LL here think it's basically LL's right to do so.
    Some suggestions were that LL can treaten tenant with giving bad references for his next home. A disgrace really.

    In that case, my apologies for posing the original question to you despite not having read the full thread!


  • Options
    #137
    Bluefoam
    Registered Users Posts: 7,739 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    voluntary wrote: »
    A disgrace really.

    lols.

    Imagine trying to make some money from an investment. And all the tenant gets is a bill for disinefectant. BTW, I remember the dicussion saying the landlord had the right to give a negative reference (you are ll about rights), don't remember anyone saying he should.

    Anyway voluntary doesn't value truth, only his own point of view... therefore:

    I don't believe a word of it


  • Options
    #138
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    Anyway voluntary doesn't value truth, only his own point of view... therefore:

    I don't believe a word of it

    Legislation is a fact. Tenant's right to refuse viewings during his tenancy is a fact. Anything else is a point of view.


  • Options
    #139
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    voluntary wrote: »
    A disgrace really.

    LOL - you are joking right?

    You advocate a tenant preventing a LL from showing HIS property to the prospective next tenant on the basis that a child will be infected with some unknown pathogen from someone WALKING around indoors but its a disgrace to you that an LL might consider giving a bad reference on the back of that?

    Are you actually plugged into reality here?


  • Options
    #140
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    voluntary wrote: »
    Legislation is a fact. Tenant's right to refuse viewings during his tenancy is a fact. Anything else is a point of view.

    The ability to give a bad reference to a bad tenant is also a fact.


  • Options
    #141
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    ....... wrote: »
    The ability to give a bad reference to a bad tenant is also a fact.

    Who is that bad tenant in your view? Can you elaborate on that?
    Is someone who does want to stay within his legal rights to privacy in his home is a BAD tenant?

    There's basically ZERO space for bad references in such case, as the tenant just executes his rights. You're actually describing a BAD LANDLORD here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Subutai
    Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭Subutai


    ....... wrote: »
    The ability to give a bad reference to a bad tenant is also a fact.

    That's a dangerous business, you would want both to be extremely careful about what you say, and have a huge level of trust between yourself and the landlord you were giving a reference to.

    There's a reason employers (or ones with legal teams at least) don't give bad references.


  • Options
    #143
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Subutai wrote: »
    That's a dangerous business, you would want both to be extremely careful about what you say, and have a huge level of trust between yourself and the landlord you were giving a reference to.

    There's a reason employers (or ones with legal teams at least) don't give bad references.

    Perhaps I should rephrase - an honest reference.

    Simply say that the tenant occupied tenancy from this date to that date, paid the rent on time during tenancy but refused viewings for prospective tenants at the end of the tenancy.

    Keep documentation of such refusal and your ass is covered legally.


  • Options
    #144
    Subutai
    Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭Subutai


    ....... wrote: »
    Perhaps I should rephrase - an honest reference.

    Simply say that the tenant occupied tenancy from this date to that date, paid the rent on time during tenancy but refused viewings for prospective tenants at the end of the tenancy.

    Keep documentation of such refusal and your ass is covered legally.

    I'd be wary of that form of words, which could lead a reader to believe that there was a breach of an agreement to allow viewings. Damaging a person's reputation by implication due to insufficient context is just as dangerous.

    Businesses don't do it because the risk is simply not worth it. Being a landlord is a business.


  • Options
    #145
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,813 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    lols.

    Imagine trying to make some money from an investment. And all the tenant gets is a bill for disinefectant. BTW, I remember the dicussion saying the landlord had the right to give a negative reference (you are ll about rights), don't remember anyone saying he should.

    Anyway voluntary doesn't value truth, only his own point of view... therefore:

    I don't believe a word of it

    Not sure why any LL would not wait until the current tenant had moved out before showing the property to a new potential tenant.

    Surely it would be better to have the place cleaned & refreshed, repainted etc. as in any other service. It's not the tenants responsibility to help a LL make money from his investment.

    i can see how a LL would want new tenants asap but as others have said it is the tenants home until the last day of their tenancy.


  • Options
    #146
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ....... wrote: »
    What is the purpose of denying access for viewings?

    Im not clear what the issue is?

    Theft would be the prime reason, for me.
    I have been to viewings where tenants are in place and been allowed to wander around alone, or be part of a group of viewers where the agent can not keep track of everyone.

    Also been to viewings where the agent meets you at the door, hands a brochure, and they never leave the entrance.

    Very easy for property to go missing.


  • Options
    #147
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Subutai wrote: »
    I'd be wary of that form of words, which could lead a reader to believe that there was a breach of an agreement to allow viewings. Damaging a person's reputation by implication due to insufficient context is just as dangerous.

    Businesses don't do it because the risk is simply not worth it. Being a landlord is a business.

    I disagree - the words used state the situation, anything extra the reader chooses to believe is not backed by the words used.

    An honest review of an actual situation. Backed by documentation showing the refusal.

    Even better if its in the lease as an agreement - but either way its fine.


  • Options
    #148
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    pc7 wrote: »
    To all those opposed to viewings, have you ever bought or sold a house? This is pretty normal, it isn't some tinfoil hat conspiracy for weirdos to sniff your jocks. Its how the housing market works for buying, selling and usually renting.

    That is you making the decision to open your house to potential purchasers, totally on you.
    LL trying to enforce this on a tenant is not the tenant's decision. I've never blocked it myself but I can see why some would.
    I HAVE taken away any small items, of value, though.


  • Options
    #149
    Subutai
    Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭Subutai


    ....... wrote: »
    I disagree - the words used state the situation, anything extra the reader chooses to believe is not backed by the words used.

    An honest review of an actual situation. Backed by documentation showing the refusal.

    Even better if its in the lease as an agreement - but either way its fine.

    I wouldn't like to be defending a defamation action on those grounds, or at all tbh. Particularly when there's no reward for the risk taken and the damage will be so readily apparent.

    If it's in a lease agreement you have no problem.


  • Options
    #150
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Subutai wrote: »
    I wouldn't like to be defending a defamation action on those grounds, or at all tbh. Particularly when there's no reward for the risk taken and the damage will be so readily apparent.

    If it's in a lease agreement you have no problem.

    Defamation action is one posibility, opening yourself to a retaliation is just another posibility.

    + Such clause in the tenancy agreement wouldn't be valid anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,624 ✭✭✭Fol20


    A much easier way to give a “bad” reference is to play it like the OP playbook. Simply decline to give a reference or keep making excuses everytime the tenant calls for one. This can be very telling especially if they have a renting gap of a few years. The ll also covers themself. If i get a call about a bad tenant. Do the same. Just decline to comment. People can read between the lines and figure it out themself.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement