Ukrainian Accommodation Scheme - overholding?

StrawbsM

I know this has been discussed at great length here but a post came up on the help Ukrainians in Ireland Facebook page which I found concerning.

They do not make any suggestion that they were paying any rent since moving there, only utilities so they’re part of the Ukrainian accommodation scheme, right? But they won’t leave as they’ve nowhere to go and the last screenshot above tells them to stay put and let the courts handle it.

This is the “wait and see” issue that I thought could happen.

Jet Black

Is the overholding the issue you have here op because I don't think thats the biggest issue here.

DownByTheGarden

This was flagged when people were being asked to give up houses. Its the main reason why lots of people who pledged accommodation pulled out of the pledge.

How is this going to look for future offers of accommodation if when you need the accommodation back you cant get it back.

This was always going to happen.

Looks like in this case it was probably a house that was being sold that the owner said the refugees could use while it was being sold. New owner now wants the house for either living in or possibly to rent out. Either way, refugees not moving out and people, and possibly groups encouraging them to stay put and not give it back is going to become a huge problem for any other refugees who need people to be generous.

Claw Hammer

If they refuse to move, under the Ukranian scheme, they can be locked out or an ejectment order obtained from the court very quickly. They are not tenants protected by the RTB.

DownByTheGarden

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120634469#Comment_120634469

Wait til you have rent a mob gluing themselves to the door and the papers snapping the owners face and making them out to be a slum landlord or something equally dire. This is not a good look for refugees to start down the road of trying to hold on to a property that they have been asked to leave after it being generously made available to them for a period.

StrawbsM

To me it would be the deciding issue as to whether I would allow my property be used under this scheme. As sad as it may be that the ones in the house cannot find alternative accommodation, the property owner isn’t their landlord and based on the what the government have said about the scheme, have every right to have those in the house vacate at short notice.

@Dav010 linked to the rules before

StrawbsM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120634469#Comment_120634469

You’d hope so but it would cost the owner to go legal on it. I’ve always had a niggle at the back of my mind as to whether those residing in a property could claim that they are legally entitled to remain based on some wording in tenancy law. I don’t know if there is any wording but always got the feeling that someone could bring a test case.

And as DownBy said, some dogooder with a camera could ruin an owners reputation in an instant.

herbalplants

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120634579#Comment_120634579

Absolutely, I said it before. You can be stuck with them too even so allegedly they are not tenants but sure they are war refugees with no alternative accommodation.

Dav010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120635061#Comment_120635061

Is there some ambiguity as to whether a tenancy exists? The Government website clearly states, in simple language, that no tenancy exists because no rent is being paid.

I really hope we are not going to have pages of crap where posters attribute rights to Ukrainian refugees which do not, and cannot exist under this temporary housing scheme.

spaceHopper

It sound like the owner or whoever had the keys pulled a fast one and its not their fault. They are also been messed about by the dept of social protection.

DownByTheGarden

Whether there is a tenancy or not, any perceived difficulty in gettin a property back when the owner wants it is going to have serious knock on effects to future refugees prospects of getting accommodation.

Dav010

A consideration that no doubt loomed large in the architect of the scheme’s mind when trying to make the scheme appealing to property owners. If the Government hadn’t made it abundantly clear that tenancy relationships would not exist, there would be no prospect of privately owned accommodation being made available for use by those affected by war. The fact that a tenancy does not, nor will not exist means the owner can recover their house by the same means and methods as any other license rental agreement.

Murph3000

Our government is a mess. I feel sorry for the poor people being asked to leave and I feel sorry for the poor people who want their property back.

Government will just give you polictically correct answers without taking any responsibility.

StrawbsM

New accommodation has been found for them all and they’ve moved out.

There’s a fella who works tirelessly sourcing accommodation and he put a video up. I couldn’t quite work out what he was getting at but he said there’s a UK based company who source places to stay (just like him) but they keep the 800 and nothing is given to the homeowner.

Perhaps the owners are getting ready to sell and they decide to help in the interim but I’m just guessing here.