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

Ending a Joint Lease.

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,320 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    The RTB found each tenant was liable for the full rent. What goes for one tenant goes for another.

    In a case where the departing tenant hadn’t even purported to end the tenancy properly so not aligned with the situation at hand. The point I made was not considered by the RTB. The other tenant had simply left.


  • Options
    #33
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,236 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Marcusm wrote: »
    In a case where the departing tenant hadn’t even purported to end the tenancy properly so not aligned with the situation at hand. The point I made was not considered by the RTB. The other tenant had simply left.

    It makes no difference. The finding was that each tenant was liable for the full rent. There was no defence for the remaining tenant to a demand for the full rent.
    Howe the other tenant exited was not relevant.


  • Options
    #34
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,320 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    It makes no difference. The finding was that each tenant was liable for the full rent. There was no defence for the remaining tenant to a demand for the full rent.
    Howe the other tenant exited was not relevant.

    That’s absolutely fine but those are not the facts here. The facts as stated by the OP are that he wishes to leave the tenancy and give the appropriate notice. In such circumstances, I do not believe that the departing tenant has any continuing obligation. The remaining tenant if he/she wishes to remain will continue to have a full liability.


  • Options
    #35
    antoinolachtnai
    Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Marcusm wrote: »
    That’s absolutely fine but those are not the facts here. The facts as stated by the OP are that he wishes to leave the tenancy and give the appropriate notice. In such circumstances, I do not believe that the departing tenant has any continuing obligation. The remaining tenant if he/she wishes to remain will continue to have a full liability.

    Who does the OP give notice to? And of what? The tenancy isn’t ending.


  • Options
    #36
    boomshakalaka
    Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭boomshakalaka


    Op needs to check their lease. Are they jointly and severally liable? Then they need to find a replacement or they remain on the hook for it. If it doesn't mention that then they're good to give notice


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,388 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    boomshakalaka wrote: »
    Op needs to check their lease. Are they jointly and severally liable? Then they need to find a replacement or they remain on the hook for it. If it doesn't mention that then they're good to give notice

    It does say that.

    Tbh, two other occasions in same property, I found the replacement when the other person was moving out so hoping the person staying will be happy to do that.


  • Options
    #38
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,236 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Marcusm wrote: »
    That’s absolutely fine but those are not the facts here. The facts as stated by the OP are that he wishes to leave the tenancy and give the appropriate notice. In such circumstances, I do not believe that the departing tenant has any continuing obligation. The remaining tenant if he/she wishes to remain will continue to have a full liability.

    The o/p is a joint and several tenant. He can't unlilaterally sever the tenancy. As far as the lease is concerned the tenant is one person, not two. He can't give notice on his own.


  • Options
    #39
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,388 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    The o/p is a joint and several tenant. He can't unlilaterally sever the tenancy. As far as the lease is concerned the tenant is one person, not two. He can't give notice on his own.

    I guess, if the other tenant doesn't get someone or accept who I get, then the rent won't be paid and the LL will initiate eviction procedures in any case and simply re-let.

    (i.e there wouldn't be months of rent arrears being accumulated to be chased on).


  • Options
    #40
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,236 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    noodler wrote: »
    I guess, if the other tenant doesn't get someone or accept who I get, then the rent won't be paid and the LL will initiate eviction procedures in any case and simply re-let.

    (i.e there wouldn't be months of rent arrears being accumulated to be chased on).

    You would be better to try and get agreement on another occupant with your current flatmate or else tell him that you are going and he may well be chased for the full rent.


  • Options
    #41
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,388 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    You would be better to try and get agreement on another occupant with your current flatmate or else tell him that you are going and he may well be chased for the full rent.

    Absolutely, I'm just preparing for a worst case scenario.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,320 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    The o/p is a joint and several tenant. He can't unlilaterally sever the tenancy. As far as the lease is concerned the tenant is one person, not two. He can't give notice on his own.

    Now you are proving that you don’t understand. If he was a joint and several tenant (if such concept existed) then the “several” nature would absolutely mean he could terminate! Part 4 confers additional rights, it does not create an unending tenancy which can only be terminated by the decision of all involved. It would be great to get the legal views but, given that a person cannot be forced to occupy any particular dwelling or have his/her freedom of movement unduly inhibited, I do not think that any reasonable construction of the RTA means that the Part 4 tenancy can be forced to continue without consent. Appropriate provisions to permit notice etc would absolutely be enforceable but the joint tenancy effectively must be capable of being terminated at the decision of either of the joint tenants. If the other tenant wishes to exercise rights to continue occupying the property then he/she must make sure that they can satisfy the obligations (ie pay rent) of the tenancy.


  • Options
    #43
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,388 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    You would be better to try and get agreement on another occupant with your current flatmate or else tell him that you are going and he may well be chased for the full rent.

    Absolutely, I'm just preparing for a worst case scenario.


  • Options
    #44
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,236 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Marcusm wrote: »
    Now you are proving that you don’t understand. If he was a joint and several tenant (if such concept existed) then the “several” nature would absolutely mean he could terminate! Part 4 confers additional rights, it does not create an unending tenancy which can only be terminated by the decision of all involved. It would be great to get the legal views but, given that a person cannot be forced to occupy any particular dwelling or have his/her freedom of movement unduly inhibited, I do not think that any reasonable construction of the RTA means that the Part 4 tenancy can be forced to continue without consent. Appropriate provisions to permit notice etc would absolutely be enforceable but the joint tenancy effectively must be capable of being terminated at the decision of either of the joint tenants. If the other tenant wishes to exercise rights to continue occupying the property then he/she must make sure that they can satisfy the obligations (ie pay rent) of the tenancy.

    You are now deny the concept of joint and several tenants? The RTB have decided on this point. Nobody is being forced to live anywhere. What is happening is that a person enters into a contract with joint and several liabilities, there are consequences if they break the contract. Part 4 has nothing to do with breaking tenancies. It is entirely to do with protection of tenants from eviction from termination, other than in defined circumstances.
    What you are saying is absurd. It would otherwise mean that the last tenant in a multigroup lease would be left paying the entire. A landlord lets to two or more people. After 6 months any one of them walks out and the landlord has no recourse for the rent or else recourse for the full amount against the continuing tenant. Nonsense, as the RTB have held. The remaining tenant can be pursued for the rent as well as the o/p, until there is a valid termination. The O/p was not forced to enter the lease, he chose to.


Advertisement