Family member rule / termination of tenancy

Dav010

BaZmO* wrote: »

If it’s a “business arrangement” why didn’t the landlord have the tenant registered originally, or have a rent book, or have records of formal agreements, or carry out repairs in a professional manner rather than a nod and a wink that it would get done? You can’t have it both ways.

The issue here is that they pretty much had an informal agreement and the landlord ended it with a d1ckish move with the solicitor’s letter. It’s sh1t, but unfortunately that’s life.

Landlords are allowed to register tenants at any time after the tenancy commenced by paying a late registration fee, my understanding from the ops posts is that the LL is compliant with the RTA.

Records of formal agreements are not required, surprisingly, a written tenancy agreement is not even required, but is recommended.

If I am reading the ops posts correctly, most of the repairs/upgrades undertaken by the op were for the ops own comfort rather than by necessity.

The LL ended the tenancy in compliance with the RTA and guidance given by the RTB. A statutory declaration signed by a solicitor and delivered as recommended. Termination notices are invalid if delivered verbally. It would be more ”d1ckish”, and illegal, if the LL tried to evict on foot of an invalid notice.

I’m trying to figure out, is the op’s gripe against being evicted legally and by legal notice, or just the fact that the LL didn’t come and speak to him/her first?

Firefork

Dav010 wrote: »

Landlords are allowed to register tenants at any time after the tenancy commenced by paying a late registration fee, my understanding from the ops posts is that the LL is compliant with the RTA.

Records of formal agreements are not required, surprisingly, a written tenancy agreement is not even required, but is recommended.

If I am reading the ops posts correctly, most of the repairs/upgrades undertaken by the op were for the ops own comfort rather than by necessity.

The LL ended the tenancy in compliance with the RTA and guidance given by the RTB. A statutory declaration signed by a solicitor and delivered as recommended. Termination notices are invalid if delivered verbally. It would be more ”d1ckish”, and illegal, if the LL tried to evict on foot of an invalid notice.

I’m trying to figure out, is the op’s gripe against being evicted legally and by legal notice, or just the fact that the LL didn’t come and speak to him/her first?

The latter statement
We had a very friendly relationship
Up
Till now
Last interaction he assured me as the house was now paid for I could rent the property as long as I needed
I
Gave him a time frame of 2 -5 years
As I had plans in progress

Firefork

Firefork wrote: »

The latter statement
We had a very friendly relationship
Up
Till now
Last interaction he assured me as the house was now paid for I could rent the property as long as I needed
I
Gave him a time frame of 2 -5 years
As I had plans in progress

Also
The notice is not from a solicitor or signed by one

Dav010

Firefork wrote: »

The latter statement
We had a very friendly relationship
Up
Till now
Last interaction he assured me as the house was now paid for I could rent the property as long as I needed
I
Gave him a time frame of 2 -5 years
As I had plans in progress

2-5 years is hardly a definitive time frame, also, you would have to admit that if your plans progressed faster than you envisioned, you would not have felt obligated to stay for longer than you wanted just because you had a chat about staying 2-5 years. Would you have signed a term contract legally locking you in for 5 years?

BaZmO*

Dav010 wrote: »

Landlords are allowed to register tenants at any time after the tenancy commenced by paying a late registration fee, my understanding from the ops posts is that the LL is compliant with the RTA.

Only took him 9 years!

Dav010 wrote: »

The LL ended the tenancy in compliance with the RTA and guidance given by the RTB. A statutory declaration signed by a solicitor and delivered as recommended. Termination notices are invalid if delivered verbally. It would be more ”d1ckish”, and illegal, if the LL tried to evict on foot of an invalid notice.

Nothing wrong in doing both. I've been a Landlord (by accident) and I had the decency to meet with the tenants when I was terminating the contract. I was moving back in myself.

Dav010 wrote: »

I’m trying to figure out, is the op’s gripe against being evicted legally and by legal notice, or just the fact that the LL didn’t come and speak to him/her first?

From the thread it's quite obvious it's the latter.

ted1

AulWan wrote: »

14 years of a no hassle tenant who has probably paid the equivalent of the mortgage off for him, as well as improved the house, with decorating, floors, landscaping, fencing and a patio

And a letter shoved through the door without so much as a conversation is the thanks the tenant got..

Maybe he should have ripped up the house and destroyed it, the way landlords claim so many tenants do.

In fairness at the end of the day it is a business transaction. A conversation would just add unnecessary emotions. And the bottom line will be the same.

BaZmO*

Firefork wrote: »

I
Gave him a time frame of 2 -5 years
As I had plans in progress

In fairness, that's your biggest problem right there. You should've put a proper agreement in place at that time with a definitive date. 2-5 is a bit wishy washy. How much notice would you have given?

Dav010

BaZmO* wrote: »

Only took him 9 years!



Nothing wrong in doing both. I've been a Landlord (by accident) and I had the decency to meet with the tenants when I was terminating the contract. I was moving back in myself.



From the thread it's quite obvious it's the latter.

Doesn’t matter if it’s 9 hours or 9 years, you just pay the later registration fee and it is done. The ops LL is now compliant with the RTA so I don’t see what baring that has on the op’s complaint.

You might say it is the decent thing to do, that does not mean the LL has done anything wrong. In fact, taking what the op has posted into account, the LL has acted exactly as required by the RTA/RTB.

Yes, the op has confirmed this, but the op needs to accept that when it comes to the tenancy, the relationship is a business one.

Dav010

BaZmO* wrote: »

In fairness, that's your biggest problem right there. You should've put a proper agreement in place at that time with a definitive date. 2-5 is a bit wishy washy. How much notice would you have given?

It is not up to the op to put a proper agreement in place. The op has a proper agreement, it is a Part 4 tenancy. The LL is terminating the tenancy in accordance with Part 4 legislation.

1874

AulWan wrote: »

After 14 years of a no hassle tenancy, the landlord could have had the common decency to knock on the door, and hand his tenant the termination notice in person, face to face, with the explanation that he needs the house for his son (if that is even the truth, which its probably not).

Doing it the way he did, just shoving it through the door, was cowardly - especially as not to long ago he seemed ok with the OP saying he wanted to stay for at least another 5 years.

So yep, still an asshole. IMO. For the way he did it.

ted1 wrote: »

Could you ask that if another of his properties becomes available you can have it or his son takes that ?

No obligation, that property may suit their sons requirements or there may be other considerations with other tenants or he may just be rolling up landlording, can see from this its damned if you do or dont.

Firefork wrote: »

The latter statement
We had a very friendly relationship
Up
Till now
Last interaction he assured me as the house was now paid for I could rent the property as long as I needed
I
Gave him a time frame of 2 -5 years
As I had plans in progress

Circumstances change, do you expect him to rent to you for those 5 years if his circumstances have changed? would you stay put any longer than the legal requirement if your circumstances changed?

Firefork wrote: »

Also
The notice is not from a solicitor or signed by one

Doesnt need to be


This really sounds like very sour grapes, and why no landlord should make favourable arrangements with tenants regarding not putting the rent up or dealing with tenants in any other way than as a business and as customers, no rent increases for eons and then things change, worst landlord ever.

Firefork

BaZmO* wrote: »

In fairness, that's your biggest problem right there. You should've put a proper agreement in place at that time with a definitive date. 2-5 is a bit wishy washy. How much notice would you have given?

Well no

After the landlord was forced to register me as a Tennant “ outside forces “
His wife rang me
Who obviously does his accounts

Said she had to register me as a Tennant
And the rent would be increased by 100€
To match area prices
I’d be given a rent book
And a lease contract for a set period
She asked how about yearly
I said I’d planned on staying a while and would a two year lease be ok
She said yes no problem

That was roughly 9 months ago

Neither was supplied

Oddly
She did say In passing that I was there 4 years
I said no I’m fairly certain it’s a lot longer than that
It seemed a very odd thing to say

Ray Palmer

AulWan wrote: »

14 years of a no hassle tenant who has probably paid the equivalent of the mortgage off for him, as well as improved the house, with decorating, floors, landscaping, fencing and a patio

And a letter shoved through the door without so much as a conversation is the thanks the tenant got..

Maybe he should have ripped up the house and destroyed it, the way landlords claim so many tenants do.

Majes absolutely no difference if the tenant paying for a service results in the landlord paying for the mortgage. You don't go into a shop you used for years and expect them to give you stuff for free because they made a profit.

The tenant decided to do make changes to the property. I haven't heard the OP say they got agreement to do any of these things. Had tenants do stuff and cause damage and expecting me to pay for what they did even though I didn't want it done.

Of course you think the landlord to be punished by destroying the property because you have expressed your dislike of all landlords in principle.

A solicitor will often advise landlords not to engage with the tenants if ending tenancies. Some people hate landlords and threaten and attack them when giving notice. Given the landlord knows the OP maybe he knew to be safe. He certainly seems angry about it and looking for revenge of some sort.

I personally would have phoned in normal situation but for some tenants I wouldn't

BaZmO*

BaZmO* wrote: »

Nothing wrong in doing both. I've been a Landlord (by accident) and I had the decency to meet with the tenants when I was terminating the contract. I was moving back in myself.

Would you expect any other business to call out and speak to you, I'm sure you wouldn't so why would you expect a LL to?

PhoenixParker

Emery Rapping Ringleader wrote: »

Would you expect any other business to call out and speak to you, I'm sure you wouldn't so why would you expect a LL to?

Yes.

I've worked for a small business and medium sized businesses.

If for some reason we decided to stop working with a long standing customer we talked to them personally about it before sending a formal email. Similarly when our long standing customer decided to move to a competitor they talked to us.

This is normal business practice and important to the maintenance of the businesses reputation.

Firefork

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Majes absolutely no difference if the tenant paying for a service results in the landlord paying for the mortgage. You don't go into a shop you used for years and expect them to give you stuff for free because they made a profit.

The tenant decided to do make changes to the property. I haven't heard the OP say they got agreement to do any of these things. Had tenants do stuff and cause damage and expecting me to pay for what they did even though I didn't want it done.

Of course you think the landlord to be punished by destroying the property because you have expressed your dislike of all landlords in principle.

A solicitor will often advise landlords not to engage with the tenants if ending tenancies. Some people hate landlords and threaten and attack them when giving notice. Given the landlord knows the OP maybe he knew to be safe. He certainly seems angry about it and looking for revenge of some sort.

I personally would have phoned in normal situation but for some tenants I wouldn't

Yes a courtesy call would be expected

I’m assuming you provide a rent book

BaZmO*

Emery Rapping Ringleader wrote: »

Would you expect any other business to call out and speak to you, I'm sure you wouldn't so why would you expect a LL to?

Going around in circles here. I don't expect anything, my point was that given the relatively amicable nature of the the OP's & LL's relationship, and also subject to how things were done up to that point, a phone call or meeting wouldn't have been beyond the realms of imagination.

The last two times I was renting both LL's met me to tell me they were terminating the contract. One to sell, and one to move back in. Both were followed up with a formal letter. Just common courtesy imo. But hey, business is business in this dog eat dog world!

Firefork

BaZmO* wrote: »

Going around in circles here. I don't expect anything, my point was that given the relatively amicable nature of the the OP's & LL's relationship, and also subject to how things were done up to that point, a phone call or meeting wouldn't have been beyond the realms of imagination.

The last two times I was renting both LL's met me to tell me they were terminating the contract. One to sell, and one to move back in. Both were followed up with a formal letter. Just common courtesy imo. But hey, business is business in this dog eat dog world!

Very true

Dav010

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Yes.

I've worked for a small business and medium sized businesses.

If for some reason we decided to stop working with a long standing customer we talked to them personally about it before sending a formal email. Similarly when our long standing customer decided to move to a competitor they talked to us.

This is normal business practice and important to the maintenance of the businesses reputation.

There is no legislation covering how you end a business relationship outside of whatever is covered by the terms of the contract between you. There is very clear legislation on a landlords obligations when ending a tenancy, I suspect I am not the only one wondering what the LL has done wrong here when complying with the legislation.

Many times posters have said they want LLs to act professionally, in this case, the LL seems to have acted exactly as required.

davindub

Firefork wrote: »

Also
The notice is not from a solicitor or signed by one

Who signed it? There needs to be a statutory declaration signed by a solicitor or notary to be valid.

Ray Palmer

Firefork wrote: »

Yes a courtesy call would be expected

I’m assuming you provide a rent book

As I said a solicitor would advise against it. If your landlord decide not to give you a courtesy call he is well within his rights. He obviously felt it was not a good idea and he knows you.

You can assume anything you like it has no relevance to your situation and what you are complaining about.

He gave you correct notice. As you have expressed you will remove "improvements" you better make sure you don't create problems. Like removing the fence where one existed you will still have to put other fencing back. Sounds like revenge to me and also indicates why a courtesy call would be a bad idea. Sounds like you would start going on about the work you did and being paid for it.

Are you suggesting you would not act this way if you got a call beforehand

Firefork

Ray Palmer wrote: »

As I said a solicitor would advise against it. If your landlord decide not to give you a courtesy call he is well within his rights. He obviously felt it was not a good idea and he knows you.

You can assume anything you like it has no relevance to your situation and what you are complaining about.

He gave you correct notice. As you have expressed you will remove "improvements" you better make sure you don't create problems. Like removing the fence where one existed you will still have to put other fencing back. Sounds like revenge to me and also indicates why a courtesy call would be a bad idea. Sounds like you would start going on about the work you did and being paid for it.

Are you suggesting you would not act this way if you got a call beforehand

Well if you want to post your opinion that’s fine

Please don’t confuse something you assume as fact


I’m fully aware of the facts now and liabilities for me and my landlord

Thank you

AulWan

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Of course you think the landlord to be punished by destroying the property because you have expressed your dislike of all landlords in principle.

I never said anything of the sort.

And I don't dislike landlords in principle. I dislike assholes.

I also dislike property owners (landlords or otherwise) who place more value on bricks and mortar then they do on other human beings.

The OP does not come across as angry at all, there is more upset then anger in his posts - though he actually has good reason to be furious, seeing the ****ty way his landlord has treated him, after such a long time.

But there is always karma.

Firefork

AulWan wrote: »

I never said anything of the sort.

And I don't dislike landlords in principle. I dislike assholes.

I also dislike property owners (landlords or otherwise) who place more value on bricks and mortar then they do on other human beings.

The OP does not come across as angry at all, there is more upset then anger in his posts - though he actually has good reason to be furious, seeing the ****ty way his landlord has treated him, after such a long time.

But there is always karma.

Indeed
I’ve no problem moving
I’m fact I’ve already sorted out something

My issue is being led to believe I had another two year tenancy agreed

And my contract plus the non existent rent would be supplied as agreed

AulWan

Best of luck with your move, Firefork.

But keep an eye on the property after your leave. If the landlord's son does not move in, or he tries to re-let it, you have rights.

Firefork

Firefork wrote: »

Indeed
I’ve no problem moving
I’m fact I’ve already sorted out something

My issue is being led to believe I had another two year tenancy agreed

But things change, situations change etc and the LL very wisely did not give you a written contract as he would then be tied where as if you signed it and things changed you could move without issue.

Firefork

Emery Rapping Ringleader wrote: »

But things change, situations change etc and the LL very wisely did not give you a written contract as he would then be tied where as if you signed it and things changed you could move without issue.

One question for you

As a Tennant was I
Entitled to a rent book
?????

Ray Palmer

Firefork wrote: »

One question for you

As a Tennant was I
Entitled to a rent book
?????

You are also entitled to a fire blanket do you have that?

Depends on how you pay. Really just need receipts or acknowledgement you paid if by bank transfer. They just haven't confirmed the legislation change to say bank records are acceptable as they are proof of payment.

Why so bothered about the rent book? Just sounds like you are trying to find some proof you were wronged. Minor admin issue is all it is.

Firefork

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You are also entitled to a fire blanket do you have that?

Depends on how you pay. Really just need receipts or acknowledgement you paid if by bank transfer. They just haven't confirmed the legislation change to say bank records are acceptable as they are proof of payment.


Why so bothered about the rent book? Just sounds like you are trying to find some proof you were wronged. Minor admin issue is all it is.

Thank you most helpful

Zulu

Having been down this road, and considering you've sorted your next place, I'd encourage you - for your own well being - to move on.
I know how sh1t it is. And yes, your LL was a dick to handle it as he did, but really, it's not worth it.

Firefork

Zulu wrote: »

Having been down this road, and considering you've sorted your next place, I'd encourage you - for your own well being - to move on.
I know how sh1t it is. And yes, your LL was a dick to handle it as he did, but really, it's not worth it.

I’ve most of it sorted now
Cheers