Evicting a lodger

Cristianc

Hi. I've rented a two bedroom house and after a while I decided to rent the unused bedroom. After gaining permission from the landlord, I took in a lodger and actually signed with her an agreement which was a slightly edited version of the tenancy agreement I had with the landlord.
Now, in the second month, the lodger doesn't want to pay the rent and her share of the bills and uses a raised voice all the time - she's older than me.

Because I signed with her a "tenancy agreement" instead of a lodger agreeement and it makes reference to the Residential Tenancy Act 2004 (14 day warning notice, 28 days eviction notice etc), how should I ask her to leave?

D3V!L

There's no "asking" here. Tell her to leave, if she doesn't then put her stuff outside and change the locks.

Cristianc

D3V!L wrote: »

There's no "asking" here. Tell her to leave, if she doesn't then put her stuff outside and change the locks.

I'm concerned that having wrongfully signed a tenancy agreement with a lodger, I'll have to treat her as a tenant.

D3V!L

Cristianc wrote: »

I'm concerned that having wrongfully signed a tenancy agreement with a lodger, I'll have to treat her as a tenant.

No because you're not the landlord.

sunshinew

Does she pay you the rent directly or to the landlord? Are you definitely sub-letting where you are the sole name on the lease renting from the landlord and her agreement is with you only? In that case, you can ask her to leave and you don't even have to give her notice. It's similar to an owner renting out a room in their own home.
If her tenancy agreement that you had her sign mentions the landlords name though I think you are in a greyer area and she may have tenant rights. How on earth she thinks she can just not pay rent while living with you.... Where do these people come from!

Cristianc

sunshinew wrote: »

Does she pay you the rent directly or to the landlord? Are you definitely sub-letting where you are the sole name on the lease renting from the landlord and her agreement is with you only? In that case, you can ask her to leave and you don't even have to give her notice. It's similar to an owner renting out a room in their own home.
If her tenancy agreement that you had her sign mentions the landlords name though I think you are in a greyer area and she may have tenant rights. How on earth she thinks she can just not pay rent while living with you.... Where do these people come from!

I am the single person that has signed an agreement with the landlord - I'm the only tenant. The lodger has signed an edited version of my tenancy agreement where my name shows as landlord - so she has nothing to do with the landlord I've rented the entire house from. She was supposed to pay the rent to my bank account, according to the agreement.

But at that time I didn't know there was a legal difference between tenants and lodgers - so with the lodger I signed a tenancy agreement that mentioned RTA2004, only later to discover the lodgers do not fall under the specifications of this act.

So, should I understand that although all this, I don't have to give a 14 day warning notice and then another 28 day eviction notice?
How much notice should I give? She was supposed to pay the rent monthly.

sunshinew

Well my understanding of it then is she's a lodger and it doesn't matter what you made her sign as you didn't have the power to sign a tenancy agreement with her as it's not your property. Legally it's your "home" as you have the agreement with the landlord. I would see it as similar to an owner occupier arrangment then (which I have), which means the lodger has very little rights. You can kick them out with no notice (I charge less rent due to this). It could get quite messy for you though. Perhaps Google some docs around sub-letting and lodger rights so you can show her them. The woman is obviously a difficult person. I would have somebody with you when you tell her to leave.

Wheety

Sorry I can't help with the legalities just wondering what she has said when you asked her for the rent?

randomrb

How long has she been in place and was there a fixed period in the tenancy agreement?

bcklschaps

OP I'm surprised the Landlord allowed you to sub let. But this has turned into a right old disaster. The lodger correctly spotted that you might be on dodgey ground and has taken advantage of the situation. I think you need legal advice and for them to carefully review your tenancy aggreement..... for instance what does it say about termination of the aggreement?

There's plenty of horror stories doing the rounds of tennants living in rented accomodation for free and Landlords at their wits end trying to evict the feckers

endacl

Not a tenant.

splinter65

Cristianc wrote: »

Hi. I've rented a two bedroom house and after a while I decided to rent the unused bedroom. After gaining permission from the landlord, I took in a lodger and actually signed with her an agreement which was a slightly edited version of the tenancy agreement I had with the landlord.
Now, in the second month, the lodger doesn't want to pay the rent and her share of the bills and uses a raised voice all the time - she's older than me.

Because I signed with her a "tenancy agreement" instead of a lodger agreeement and it makes reference to the Residential Tenancy Act 2004 (14 day warning notice, 28 days eviction notice etc), how should I ask her to leave?

Read carefully to the end, it’s not long, print it out and hand it to her.

https://www.threshold.ie/advice/seeking-private-rented-accommodation/sharing-with-your-landlordrenting-from-a-tenant/

Cristianc

randomrb wrote: »

How long has she been in place and was there a fixed period in the tenancy agreement?

The tenancy agreement between me and the lodger was supposed to last 6 months, still way to go.
However my confusion appeared because I'm a tenant that has signed a tenancy agreement with the actual landlord, and the lodger has signed a similar tenancy agreement with me as landlord, instead of a lodger agreement.

endacl

Cristianc wrote: »

The tenancy agreement between me and the lodger was supposed to last 6 months, still way to go.
However my confusion appeared because I'm a tenant that has signed a tenancy agreement with the actual landlord, and the lodger has signed a similar tenancy agreement with me as landlord, instead of a lodger agreement.

No she hasn’t. It’s not your property. You’re not a landlord.

Cristianc

endacl wrote: »

No she hasn’t. It’s not your property. You’re not a landlord.

I see now. And yes, I had permission from the actual landlord to bring someone in, to occupy the second bedroom.

So if I'm not the actual landlord and she's not an actual tenant, but a lodger, this means the agreement between us, wrongfully entitled tenancy agreement (with all rights and obligations - such as 28 day notice), is not valid?

The Nal

Why has she stopped paying the rent?

randomrb

Cristianc wrote: »

The tenancy agreement between me and the lodger was supposed to last 6 months, still way to go.
However my confusion appeared because I'm a tenant that has signed a tenancy agreement with the actual landlord, and the lodger has signed a similar tenancy agreement with me as landlord, instead of a lodger agreement.

I don't agree with what the others have said. It seems that you have sub-let part of the property which could give them the rights of a tenant, however because it is within the first 6 months you can serve a notice with no reason attached to it

sunshinew

The threshold link splinter sent above covers it. She's a licensee with no rights for the first 6 months. Give her notice now. While you have an agreement about notice periods, you also had an agreement about paying rent. She's broken the agreement first. Do you have any texts, emails asking her for the rent saying it's late etc.? Might be useful to keep them. However, you actually want rid of her now. You don't want her to pay up and be stuck with her. Did she pay you a deposit? She may end up saying that's her rent.

listermint

randomrb wrote: »

I don't agree with what the others have said. It seems that you have sub-let part of the property which could give them the rights of a tenant, however because it is within the first 6 months you can serve a notice with no reason attached to it

He is not the owner of the property.


this person is a lodger

this person can be removed, she doesnt have a leg to stand on. Put her stuff on the kerb. She has no agreement with the landlord the landlords name is not on any documentation. The landlord signed nothing. It doesnt matter if there was verbal permission of a sublet. There is nothing written down.


She can be treated as a lodger because she is.

randomrb

listermint wrote: »

He is not the owner of the property.


this person is a lodger

this person can be removed, she doesnt have a leg to stand on. Put her stuff on the kerb. She has no agreement with the landlord the landlords name is not on any documentation. The landlord signed nothing. It doesnt matter if there was verbal permission of a sublet. There is nothing written down.


She can be treated as a lodger because she is.

I know he is not the owner, a tenant can with the permission of the landlord sublet the property. It is more common with the whole property but can be done with a part of it as well. The RTB are very protective of tenants and in this circumstance it is no harm to do it correctly.
https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/beginning-a-tenancy/types-of-tenancies-and-agreements/subletting-and-assignment/

punisher5112

Op it's quite simple, you tell her she has 24 hours to leave.

If she doesn't leave then you wait till she goes out, change the locks only if LL gives you permission or at the very least give them the replacement key.

Pack all belongings up, text her to say the property will be available to collect.

Take photos and even a video so she doesn't say you robbed property etc.

She has no right to stay if you have asked her to leave.

Larbre34

Yer, but, the tenant is in situ, so not a sublet. And the person isn't entitled to enter into a tenancy agreement in that scenario, so whatever was drawn up isn't worth the paper it was written on.

If she's a serial squatter type (and we all know mad yokes like them) then put her out and change the locks, lesson learned for next time.

EmptyTree

punisher5112 wrote: »

If she doesn't leave then you wait till she goes out, change the locks only if LL gives you permission or at the very least give them the replacement key.

This. Get permission from your landlord OP, don't end up on the wrong side of them to add to your troubles.

Cristianc

EmptyTree wrote: »

This. Get permission from your landlord OP, don't end up on the wrong side of them to add to your troubles.

I won't change the locks since I don't have the landlord's permission to do so. If she refuses to leave how can she be forced? With the Gardai?

CharlieCroker

Cristianc wrote: »

I won't change the locks since I don't have the landlord's permission to do so. If she refuses to leave how can she be forced? With the Gardai?

Nothing to do with the guards, it's not a criminal matter. You brought her into the house, up to you to get her out.

Del2005

sunshinew wrote: »

The threshold link splinter sent above covers it. She's a licensee with no rights for the first 6 months. Give her notice now. While you have an agreement about notice periods, you also had an agreement about paying rent. She's broken the agreement first. Do you have any texts, emails asking her for the rent saying it's late etc.? Might be useful to keep them. However, you actually want rid of her now. You don't want her to pay up and be stuck with her. Did she pay you a deposit? She may end up saying that's her rent.

While you cannot enter a contract that impacts your rights negatively you can most certainly enter a contract that improves your rights. You can't sign away your tenancy rights if you are a tenant but you can most definitely sign rights to be a tenant when you are in fact a licencee.

OP you need to get in contact with the RTB to see what they think as they are the ones that the person you rented to will go.

TheChizler

They're not a tenant in the eyes of the RTA but the fact of the matter is you have both signed a contract that gives rights and responsibilities to both parties, that may effectively be the same as a tenancy situation. If the contract says she has to pay rent by a certain date, as I imagine it has, then she's after breaking that clause. If the contract doesn't say anything about 14 days notice or things like that then you don't have to provide them. If it does you do. Only the contract applies here, not the, RTA, so check what it says.

Cristianc

Talked to the RTB, they said she's a licensee and as far as they know, I can't sign away legal rights.
From this I understand if I declare myself as landlord and her as a tenant to fall under the RTA2004, it doesn't mean we actually are.

Del2005

Cristianc wrote: »

Talked to the RTB, they said she's a licensee and as far as they know, I can't sign away legal rights.
From this I understand if I declare myself as landlord and her as a tenant to fall under the RTA2004, it doesn't mean we actually are.

I'd be getting that in writing

punisher5112

Cristianc wrote: »

I won't change the locks since I don't have the landlord's permission to do so. If she refuses to leave how can she be forced? With the Gardai?

Why not?
If you get permission or tell the LL the lock broke and you replaced like for like and furnish them with a key I can't see an issue.

It may well be your only option as she will have you for assault or something if you try and walk her out.

If she's not paying you need to get her out.

Did you take a deposit?

Samuel T. Cogley

Just for future generations, this is why you don't give lodgers anything in writing other than a list of house rules. Even licensees are afforded reasonable notice. That said for sanity's sake you might be better off just kicking her out and hoping it doesn't come back to bite you. The other issue is after six months sub-tenants can apply for Part IV rights and become co-tenants if I'm not mistaken.

dennyk

Legally speaking, this person is a lodger, not a tenant, and would not have the statutory tenant's rights which are granted by the Residential Tenancies Act, regardless of what any agreement she signed says about her legal status. However, if you have signed an agreement with her regarding her right to live in the property, she can generally hold you to the terms of that agreement, provided they don't conflict with any applicable laws. An agreement cannot make her a legally defined "tenant" covered by the RTA, but if your agreement has explicitly granted her rights such as a fixed term of six months and specific notice periods required for correcting a breach of terms such as non-payment of rent, then that agreement will govern your contractual relationship with her and you'll have to abide by the agreed terms. If you don't, while she wouldn't be able to go to the RTB to file a complaint against you (as she'd have no standing, being a licensee in fact rather than a covered tenant), she could sue you in court for breach of contract and potentially win a judgement for damages against you there.

The other potential issue you have is that after she has been in the property for six months, she can apply to the landlord to become a tenant of the property in fact, and the landlord cannot unreasonably deny her request. You'd have no say in the matter at that point, I'm afraid; your permission isn't required for your licensee to become a tenant after living there for at least six months, only the landlord's. Unless your agreement explicitly provides an option for you to terminate her stay before the fixed six-month term ends, or she remains in arrears long enough for you to actually issue the 28-day notice to vacate as per the terms of your agreement, you may be stuck with her as a housemate for the foreseeable future.

davindub

dennyk wrote: »

Legally speaking, this person is a lodger, not a tenant, and would not have the statutory tenant's rights which are granted by the Residential Tenancies Act, regardless of what any agreement she signed says about her legal status. However, if you have signed an agreement with her regarding her right to live in the property, she can generally hold you to the terms of that agreement, provided they don't conflict with any applicable laws. An agreement cannot make her a legally defined "tenant" covered by the RTA, but if your agreement has explicitly granted her rights such as a fixed term of six months and specific notice periods required for correcting a breach of terms such as non-payment of rent, then that agreement will govern your contractual relationship with her and you'll have to abide by the agreed terms. If you don't, while she wouldn't be able to go to the RTB to file a complaint against you (as she'd have no standing, being a licensee in fact rather than a covered tenant), she could sue you in court for breach of contract and potentially win a judgement for damages against you there.

The other potential issue you have is that after she has been in the property for six months, she can apply to the landlord to become a tenant of the property in fact, and the landlord cannot unreasonably deny her request. You'd have no say in the matter at that point, I'm afraid; your permission isn't required for your licensee to become a tenant after living there for at least six months, only the landlord's. Unless your agreement explicitly provides an option for you to terminate her stay before the fixed six-month term ends, or she remains in arrears long enough for you to actually issue the 28-day notice to vacate as per the terms of your agreement, you may be stuck with her as a housemate for the foreseeable future.

I would say this is a fairly accurate answer.

Just one thing from memory, the district court never did enforce contract durations on either party when dealing with license's, just reasonable notice to be given.

I would second the view that "no rights" under the RTA acts does not mean no legal remedies if the contract were terminated by the landlord without reasonable notice.

However, given that rent has not been paid and other details, I couldn't see any issue with asking her to leave within a few days unless rent is paid.

Marcusm

listermint wrote: »

He is not the owner of the property.


this person is a lodger

this person can be removed, she doesnt have a leg to stand on. Put her stuff on the kerb. She has no agreement with the landlord the landlords name is not on any documentation. The landlord signed nothing. It doesnt matter if there was verbal permission of a sublet. There is nothing written down.


She can be treated as a lodger because she is.

She doesn’t have any entitlements under RTA but is likely entitled to enforce whatever rights he (inadvisably) included in the “tenancy” agreement!

80j2lc5y7u6qs9

Marcusm wrote: »

She doesn’t have any entitlements under RTA but is likely entitled to enforce whatever rights he (inadvisably) included in the “tenancy” agreement!

I disagree. The OP could not contract anything as landlord as he is not the landlord. The whole agreement is invalid including that which would give any contract rights. How could the OP contract as a landlord when he is not and invoking the legislation which appies to landlords?

endacl

Marcusm wrote: »

She doesn’t have any entitlements under RTA but is likely entitled to enforce whatever rights he (inadvisably) included in the “tenancy” agreement!

She doesn’t have any. The agreement has no more standing than one I could type up agreeing to let Mickey Mouse live in your gaff.

Marcusm

Cesar Fresh Cannabis wrote: »

I disagree. The OP could not contract anything as landlord as he is not the landlord. The whole agreement is invalid including that which would give any contract rights. How could the OP contract as a landlord when he is not and invoking the legislation which appies to landlords?

endacl wrote: »

She doesn’t have any. The agreement has no more standing than one I could type up agreeing to let Mickey Mouse live in your gaff.

The tenant can be bound against the sub tenant under the written terms agreed between them irrespective of the rights against the actual landlord. Breach of these might give rise to monetary compensation (damages) rather than continued occupation (specific performance).

The issue is that the tenant, acting with the agreement of the landlord it seeems, has given the “lodger” more rights than would naturally accrue.

Larbre34

Fair point, they may well have.

But I would still put her out and let her take on the burden of pursuing it through the system. If she hasn't been paying her rent, then she knows she's on a hiding to nothing. And frankly I doubt this is her first rodeo.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9

Marcusm wrote: »

The tenant can be bound against the sub tenant under the written terms agreed between them irrespective of the rights against the actual landlord. Breach of these might give rise to monetary compensation (damages) rather than continued occupation (specific performance).

The issue is that the tenant, acting with the agreement of the landlord it seeems, has given the “lodger” more rights than would naturally accrue.

The agreement is worthless the op is not the landlord so could not contract as the landlord

Samuel T. Cogley

Cesar Fresh Cannabis wrote: »

The agreement is worthless the op is not the landlord so could not contract as the landlord

No it's not as was explained.

Caranica

OP hasn't been back on in almost a week. Hope it's sorted by now!

punisher5112

Caranica wrote: »

OP hasn't been back on in almost a week. Hope it's sorted by now!

The lodger turfed the op out ???